Running head: BRIDGING THE GAP 1

Bridging the Achievement Gap:

The Benefits of Social-Emotional Learning Implementation in Schools

A Master’s Project

Presented to

The Faculty of the Adler Graduate School

___________________________________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The degree of Masters of Arts in

Adlerian Counseling and Psychotherapy

____________________________________________

By:

Denise M. Warner

____________________________________________

Chair: Amy Foell

Reader: Doug Pelcak

____________________________________________

2016

BRIDGING THE GAP 2

Abstract

This paper aims to promote the benefits of incorporating Social-Emotional Learning (SEL)

programs in schools and how it can positively impact the achievement gap by increasing student

engagement. By exploring relevant research, the impact of SEL on the teacher-student

relationship, and how SEL looks in action, the advantages of SEL programs begins to emerge.

Numerous studies over the past decade have shown that teaching SEL skills to students improved

their attitude toward themselves and others, reduced problem behaviors, lowered levels of

emotional distress, enhanced pro-social behaviors, and increased their academic performance.

Despite the myriad positive outcomes that these studies have shown, SEL incorporation in

schools still faces numerous obstacles including teacher/staff buy-in, resistance to initial

financial investment in SEL, and the challenges inherent in ensuring SEL programs are properly

implemented. School counselors are in a unique position to promote and influence the

implementation of SEL in schools because they are trained to not only foster students’ academic

growth, but to support them socially and emotionally as well. School counselors can work

toward promoting SEL in schools by educating themselves on the research-supported benefits of

SEL as well as how to properly and effectively introduce a comprehensive SEL program into

their schools.

BRIDGING THE GAP 3

Table of Contents

Abstract2

Introduction4

Engagement9

What is SEL and Why is it Important?12

Teacher-Student Relationships20

SEL in Action22

Mindfulness in Schools24

Adlerian Perspective on SEL27

The Crucial Cs27

Goals of Misbehavior31

Social Interest32

Conclusion/Challenges33

Proper SEL Program Implementation36

Economics36

Future Skills38

Role of the School Counselor40

Concluding Thoughts43

References45

BRIDGING THE GAP 4

Bridging the Achievement Gap:

The Benefits of Social-Emotional Learning Implementation in Schools

Introduction

“I have no doubt that the survival of the human race depends at least as much

on the cultivation of social and emotional intelligence

as it does on the development of technical knowledge and skills.”

-Linda Darling Hammond

One of the most prevalent and vital issues in our education system is the discussion

around the achievement gap. Educational professionals, including school counselors, are

routinely asked how they intend to tackle this particular challenge during job interviews. The

achievement gap presents itself as the holy grail of education; if only we could find the elusive

secret to filling the gap, all of our educational, and many of our societal, woes would be healed.

According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, the achievement gap can be defined

as a discrepancy in educational performance between minority and/or low-income students and

Caucasian and Asian students (NCES website, n.d.). A variety of reasons/theories have been

proposed explaining the reasons for the existence of achievement gaps from large class sizes to

low expectations, inadequate family involvement, income level, to unsupported teachers (NEA

website, n.d.). In order to address these challenges and to “fill the gap” so to speak we have

created initiatives such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) which, while well-intentioned in its

goal of academic excellence for all students, has done more harm than good in that it has forced

schools to hyper-focus on standardized assessments at the expense of other equally if not more

vital skill acquisition (Van Veisor, 2009). Furthermore, according to Taylor and Parsons (2011),

“...standardized testing often leads to teachers to teach to the test instead of the learner’s needs,

BRIDGING THE GAP 5

interests, and abilities (Armstrong 2006) and removes responsibility and accountability from the

learner, a side effect that can disengage learners” (p. 21). It can easily be argued that the key to

any successful educational reform must include a discussion around student engagement. The

question then becomes quite simply: How do we encourage students to care enough to engage in

their own education? Or more specifically, how can we as education professionals create a

school climate that encourages student engagement, one that inspires all students to achieve their

best?

The first step is recognizing the importance of the relationship between social-emotional

learning (SEL) and success in school. Many students come to school having faced a myriad of

challenges before they even walk through the doors in the morning. From the stresses of family

instability, to poverty, to a lack of positive role models at home, many children in our schools

confront enormous barriers to having the ability to engage in the classrooms. Specifically in

terms of students living in poverty, Tough (2012) reveals that these students often face incredibly

stressful home lives in which there is no stable caregiver who has taught them how to manage

their emotions therefore getting them to engage in school is challenging. Studies have shown that

students growing up in these environments and who have not been taught social-emotional skills

are more apt to have lower executive function skills and greater difficulty handling stressful

situations (Tough, 2012). In terms of how this plays out in the classroom, Tough (2012) states

these students are, “...hampered by poor concentration, impaired social skills, an inability to sit

still and follow directions, and what teachers perceive as misbehavior” (p. 192). Meier notes that

as the behavioral and mental health challenges continue to increase in our schools, more and

more education professionals are realizing that attending to students’ social and emotional needs

are an integral and vital part of improving academic success (as cited in Jones et al., 2015).

BRIDGING THE GAP 6

Furthermore, when examining achievement, the question of exactly what we want

students to achieve arises. Is it our goal to raise future exemplary test takers? Or do we strive to

nurture future social and emotionally savvy citizens who can thrive and contribute to our world

in meaningful ways? Since the mid-1990s study after study has revealed that, while cognitive

ability as tested through standardized testing is not completely without merit, it is the social-

emotional, the “soft skills,” that has a much deeper impact on the success of students both during

their education and as they venture out into the world as contributing working members of our

society. Skills such as work ethic, teamwork, social and cultural awareness, effective

communication, empathy, and motivation are just some of these social-emotional soft skills that

recent research has shown to be even more influential in determining not only success in school

but in the workplace as well (Kyllonen, 2013; Tough, 2012).

In their study on improving student engagement, Taylor and Parsons (2011) reveal that

attempting to engage students who are chronically disengaged is often cited as one of the most

challenging issues in education today. Harris states that between 25 and 66 percent of students

are considered to be disengaged (as cited in Taylor & Parsons, 2011, p. 6). Durlak, et al. (2011)

cite a research study that sampled 148,189 sixth to twelfth graders to determine their levels of

satisfaction in terms of school environment and engagement. Between 29%-45% of students felt

they had received adequate education in social skills such as decision-making, empathy, and

conflict resolution. In regards to whether their school environments were viewed as nurturing

and encouraging, only 29% reported this to be true. More specifically, Durlak et al. (2011) point

out that by the time students reach high school, “… as many as 40%-60% of students have

become chronically disengaged” (p. 405).

BRIDGING THE GAP 7

This is especially notable among low-income students and those who have experienced

high levels of toxic stress at home and/or at school, many of whom often go on to face

behavioral and academic challenges (Tough, 2016). Tough (2016) notes that a vicious cycle of

discouragement, misbehavior, and disengagement can arise when schools take the typical route

of trying to mitigate these students by imposing greater control over their actions. This approach

is almost always ineffective because it chips away at these students’ already thin shell of

confidence and autonomy, further eroding their internal intrinsic desire to engage. He goes on to

assert: “And once students reach that point of detachment and disengagement, no collection of

material incentives or punishments is going to motivate them, at least not in a deep way or over

the long term” (Tough, 2016, p. 64).

Durlak et al, (2011) state that teaching SEL to students allows them to, “...feel valued,

experience greater intrinsic motivation to achieve, and develop a broadly applicable set of social-

emotional competencies that mediate better academic performance, health-promoting behavior,

and citizenship” (Durlak et al., 2011, p. 407). Poulou also notes that students who have a strong

social-emotional core tend to exhibit less aggressive and violent behaviors and tend to have

lower incidents of depression (as cited in Van Veisor, 2009). Furthermore, these students are less

apt to engage in unhealthy and dangerous behaviors such as drug and alcohol use and

involvement in gangs (Van Veisor, 2009).

Jones et al., (2015) points out four ways in which incorporating universal (versus

programs targeted at a specific student population) SEL programs can enhance student success.

First of all, SEL fosters stress and emotion management as well as adaptability in a wide variety

of settings. Second, the chance of a student feeling stigmatized is reduced due to the inclusive,

universal, and positive nature of the SEL interventions (Jones et al., 2015). The third point Jones

BRIDGING THE GAP 8

et al, (2015) makes is that when SEL is implemented in schools, “students are “captive

populations” which reduces recruitment costs and helps to keep attrition rates low” (p. 98).

Lastly, because all students are exposed to SEL, there is ample opportunity to practice their skills

among a large social network (Jones, et al., 2015).

In his bestselling book, How Children Succeed, Tough (2012) emphasizes the impact of

instilling social-emotional skills on the future success of students citing numerous research

studies that show soft skills such as perseverance, grit, optimism, and self-control drive success

more so than cognitive ability. Kyllonen (2013) notes a 2011 longitudinal study in which a

variety of preschool programs for disadvantaged students were examined for both cognitive and

social-emotional long-term benefits. The cognitive-focused programs results were inconclusive,

however, there was solid, clear evidence that a variety of social-emotional outcomes were

positively impacted in terms of “… educational attainment, avoiding arrests and legal trouble,

avoiding welfare, owning a home, and maintaining good health habits” (Kyllonen, 2013, p. 19).

A 2016 research study conducted by Turnaround for Children, a nonprofit organization in

New York, found that before children can obtain academic-enhancing skills such as

contentiousness, resilience, and curiosity, they need to have a strong foundation in SEL “soft”

skills such as self-awareness, social acuity, emotion and stress management, and responsible

decision-making (Tough, 2016). Furthermore, he states that because these skills are “malleable,”

they can be taught. When schools make teaching soft skills a priority by incorporating SEL into

their academic curriculum, they give students the tools they need to focus, and engage in their

learning (Tough, 2016). According to the Turnaround for Children study writer, Brooke Stafford

-Brizard, schools who neglect to give students the opportunities to acquire social-emotional skills

are faced with students who, “… can’t process the vast amount of instruction that comes their

BRIDGING THE GAP 9

way each day, and it becomes daunting if not impossible to stay on track. This is the

achievement gap” (as cited in Tough, 2016, p. 52).

This paper aims to examine how social-emotional learning (SEL) can be used to create

safe learning environments that value belonging and instill confidence in all students’ abilities

and how these traits can directly and positively influence students’ willingness to engage in their

learning thereby increasing academic achievement. The Literature Review will begin by

exploring student engagement and the complexity of defining it both from the teacher’s

perspective as well as the students’ perspective. The paper then moves into defining SEL,

including the five components that comprise the goals of social emotional programming as well

as some examples of current SEL research studies that support the benefits of SEL. There is also

a short section on how the development of strong, positive teacher-student relationships can

determine the success of SEL programs. The last portion of the Literature Review outlines a

some examples of SEL programs. The first example highlights what SEL looks like in action at a

High School in New York City and the second example explores the benefits of using

mindfulness as an SEL intervention by examining a research study based on the MindUp

curriculum. Following the Literature Review is a section devoted to discussing how SEL aligns

with Adlerian concepts and theories. The paper concludes by discussing some of the challenges

currently facing universal SEL implementation, thoughts and directions on future SEL research,

and finally how school counselors can take a leadership role in promoting and supporting SEL in

the schools.

Engagement

“Students want to experience work that is meaningful, not easy; they want to work with ideas

that matter, solve real problems, learn from each other, people in their communities, and experts

BRIDGING THE GAP 10

in the subjects they are studying, engage in dialogue in their classes, and know that they’re

learning contributes to making a difference in the world. They consistently demand to be

respected.”

(Taylor & Parsons, 2011, p. 25).

There are a plethora of studies that explore the relationship between SELs impact on

student engagement and success in school. However, before exploring the SEL component, it is

necessary to examine what student engagement and disengagement is and what it looks like.

Taylor & Parsons (2011) note that for many years, student engagement has primarily focused on

developing and promoting positive behavior, increasing academic achievement, as well as

instilling feelings of belonging all of which increase the chance that students will stay in school.

Defining student engagement, however, can be a complicated endeavor in that engagement can

manifest itself through a variety of disciplines including academic, behavioral, emotional,

intellectual, and social as well as other areas (Taylor & Parsons, 2011). For example, is a student

who declines to participate in extracurricular activities yet achieves academically considered to

be disengaged?

Taylor and Parsons (2011) further explore the notion of defining student engagement via

measurement. Up until recently, most student engagement studies have measured student

engagement through quantitative data such as standardized test scores, truancy, attendance, and

graduation rates versus “softer” skills such as student’s interest in learning, how much time they

are focused on a task, and levels of enjoyment (Taylor & Parsons, 2011). In order to acquire a

more comprehensive picture as to the nature of student engagement, recent research has begun to

explore this other side of the engagement coin including taking into account the perspectives of

not only how teachers define engagement but how students view it as well. One study revealed

BRIDGING THE GAP 11

that when asked to describe their perfect school learning environment that would encourage

engagement, students identified three components: learning from and with each other,

connecting with experts in their community, and opportunities for conversing with other students

(Taylor & Parsons, 2011). Including the students’ voice in democratic classroom environments

is a vital way to increase students’ desire to engage in their own learning. Not only are students

valuable sources of feedback and information, research has shown that classroom cultures that

incorporate and honor student opinions tend to have higher levels of student engagement and

involvement which often leads to higher achievement and fewer discipline problems (Taylor &

Parsons, 2011).

In their article, Engaging Students and Ensuring Success, Janet High and P. Gayle

Andrews (2009) cite Rhodes’ (2007) definition of student engagement as the following:

Students who are engaged exhibit a set of behaviors that support achievement including

task persistence, regular attendance, and sustained attention. Emotional factors commonly

considered to be indicative of student engagement include excitement, interest in

learning, and a sense of belonging. Lastly, the psychological/cognitive engagement

component manifests as motivation and preference for academic challenge, a positive

self-concept, and aspirations for further education. (p. 9)

High and Andrews (2009) go on to state that students who are disengaged tend to view

school as work which in turn fuels a negative, need-based attitude versus an intrinsic desire to

engage in the learning process. One way of promoting the latter attitude is by providing students

with relevant, “real-world” learning experiences that allow students to see the connection

between what they are learning and how it impacts their future, upping the personal value of

their learning (High & Andrews, 2009). However, in order to engage students on an academic

BRIDGING THE GAP 12

level, we must first engage them on a social-emotional level. SEL is a key factor in capturing and

maintaining meaningful student engagement.

What is SEL and Why is it Important?

“We believe that today’s dream, drawing on the best science and practice,

must be a dream in which all children are told that they have within them

a profound goodness and a noble purpose,

that the purpose of education is to invite students to become engaged with great ideas

and experiences that can in turn help them discover their own great ideas and purpose.

We believe that education is first, and most importantly,

about discovering one’s place in the world, then seizing it.”

Timothy P. Shriver and Jennifer Buffett,

Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning, 2015

The core beliefs and goals of SEL stem from the notion that competent people are those

that have the ability to create appropriate responses to and who are able to take advantage of

opportunities when confronted by environmental stimuli (Durlak et al., 2011). According to

Elias, researchers of SEL have taken this philosophy and formed a definition of SEL as “the

process of acquiring core competencies to recognize and manage emotions, set and achieve

positive goals, appreciate the perspectives of others, establish and maintain positive

relationships, make responsible decisions, and handle interpersonal situations constructively” (as

cited in Durlak et al., 2011, p. 406). The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional

Learning (CASEL) then used this definition to establish its five core competencies: Self-

Awareness, Self-Management, Responsible Decision-Making, Relationship Skills, and Social

Awareness.

BRIDGING THE GAP 13

The self-awareness component encompasses awareness of one’s own beliefs, feelings,

and thoughts and how it impacts behavior choices as well as the ability to identify strengths and

weaknesses. The goal of fostering self-awareness in students is to develop a greater sense of self-

confidence and self-efficacy. Self-management focuses on emotion regulation and controlling

thoughts and behaviors as well as having the ability to set goals and organize strategies to

achieve those goals. It also includes stress management. Responsible decision-making involves

teaching students how to incorporate safety, norms, and ethical principles into their decision-

making choices. This includes having the ability to be mindful of the consequences of their

actions and how their decisions affect not only themselves but others as well. The relationship

skills component builds on relationship skills by teaching students the skills necessary to form

and maintain healthy relationships with a variety of people. This includes learning to be an active

listener, communicating ones needs in a clear and appropriate manner, and self- advocating for

help when needed. Social awareness focuses on empathy, respect, and the skills needed to view

situations from the perspectives of individuals from diverse and multicultural backgrounds. This

includes comprehending cultural norms and behaving in socially and ethically acceptable ways

(CASEL, n.d.b). According to CASEL, “These are the skills, attitudes, and behaviors that

parents, educators, and employers alike value. Students with these competencies do better in

school, are more engaged, and are less likely to be involved in risky behaviors, as documented

by a growing body of research” (CASEL, n.d.a).

Durlak et al. (2011) notes that numerous research studies have shown that, “effective

mastery of social-emotional competencies is associated with greater well-being and better school

performance whereas the failure to achieve competence in these areas can lead to a variety of

personal, social, and academic difficulties” (p. 406). Therefore the essential goal of teaching

BRIDGING THE GAP 14

these SEL competencies to students is to encourage mastery of these tools in order to shift from

an extrinsic locus of control (being controlled by outside factors) to a more internal locus of

control (being controlled by internal factors). In turn this progression will lead to students who

are guided by their internal belief and value systems as well as have an increased awareness and

concern for others, making mindful decisions, and the ability to take responsibility for their

actions (Durlak, et al., 2011).

Implementing SEL programs into the educational setting typically involves a two-

pronged approach. The first strategy involves systematically teaching, modeling, practicing, and

applying SEL skills (Durlak et al., 2011). Students are taught to use SEL skills to prevent and

manage common school challenges such as bullying, substance abuse, and academic struggles. A

well-implemented, comprehensive SEL program will also include the vital element of student

“voice” in which students have the opportunity to, as Durlak et al. (2011) states, “...contribute to

their class, school, and community and experience the satisfaction, sense of belonging, and

enhanced motivation that comes from such involvement” (pp. 406-407). The second facet to

SEL programming emphasizes the whole school factors affecting students’ academic experience

such as establishing an inclusive, encouraging, safe school culture that builds on classroom

management, teaching strategies, and community connection (Durlak, et al., 2011).

Research

In 2011, Durlak et al. published what is currently viewed as the seminal research on the

benefits and effectiveness of SEL programs in K-12 education. Their school-based meta-analysis

examined 213 different universal social-emotional programs and the findings were impressive. In

order to instill more validity and utility in the study, the researchers infused the study with the

notion that any intervention must be achievable and successful under real-world conditions or as

BRIDGING THE GAP 15

Durlak et al. (2011) queries, “Can they be successfully delivered by existing school staff during

the regular day” (p. 407)? In order to ensure this, the researchers separated the data into

interventions that were facilitated by school staff such as teachers, counselors, etc., and those that

were conducted by non-school professionals such as college researchers, and consultants (Durlak

et al., 2011). Durlak et al. (2011) hypothesized that the SEL programs led by the school staff

would produce a greater impact on the SEL outcomes than those led by the outside personnel.

The results of this meta-analysis revealed that the SEL programs studied promoted a

variety of vital social-emotional skills such as improved attitude toward self and others, reduced

problem behaviors, lower levels of emotional distress, enhanced pro-social behaviors, and

increased in academic performance (Durlak et al., 2011). These effects were found to be true

regardless of grade level and setting; SEL programs in elementary, middle, and high schools in

urban, suburban, and rural schools all demonstrated positive outcomes. Furthermore, while only

a small number of studies performed follow-up assessments, these noted positive effects

continued to have a significant statistical impact 6 months beyond the intervention (Durlak et al.,

2011). Durlak et al.’s prediction that the school personnel-led SEL programs would lead to

positive outcomes also proved to be accurate, indicating that SEL interventions can be infused

into regular classroom practices and that hiring outside professionals are not required to achieve

successful program delivery (Durlak et al., 2011).

Another positive outcome of SEL research pertains to mental health prevention. The

Institute of Medicine recently released a report based on their review of SEL studies reinforcing

the need for equipping students with the tools to establish strong social-emotional skills.

According to Durlak et al. (2011) the report emphasized that the “...the promotion of

BRIDGING THE GAP 16

competence, self-esteem, mastery, and social inclusion can serve as a foundation for both

prevention and treatment of mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders” (p. 420).

In terms of academic improvements, Durlak et al.’s (2011) research revealed, in a small

subset of studies, SEL program implementation produced an 11-percentile increase in

achievement. Empirical research has shown that this academic improvement can be attributed to

a variety of persuasive reasons. First of all SEL helps develop a student’s self-awareness which

leads to stronger self-confidence and a greater desire to work hard and persist at challenging

tasks (Durlak et al., 2011). Durlak et al. (2011) states, “Students who set high academic goals,

have self-discipline, motivate themselves, manage their stress, and organize their approach to

work learn more and get better grades” (p. 407).

Secondly, recent research indicates that teaching SEL, specifically skills that strengthen

cognitive-affect control, may have a positive effect on executive function control thereby

increasing their planning and problem-solving skills leading to responsible decision-making

(Greenberg, 2006; Durlak et al., 2011). Research has shown that these are the key characteristics

of students who are able to make higher achievements academically. Lastly, Durlak et al.’s

research emphasizes the importance of both the teacher-student relationship and school culture

on student engagement and school success. They note how SEL interventions can foster student

academic performance by creating a learning environment in which students are held to high

standards and supported in achieving those standards, where teacher-student relationships are

warm and caring, incorporating innovative teaching approaches that strengthen classroom

management and reinforces cooperation, and lastly a culture that is safe and encourages positive

behavior (Durlak et al., 2011).

BRIDGING THE GAP 17

While the Durlak and colleagues 2011 study is often the most cited piece of evidence-

based research surrounding SEL and its benefits, Gabrieli, Ansel, and Krachman (2015)

collaborated on a piece of research that highlights the compelling positive outcomes of a handful

of well-known SEL studies from around the world. In their paper, Ready to Be Counted: The

Research Case for Education Policy Action on Non-Cognitive Skills (2015), Gabrieli et al., do

not use the term SEL per se but instead coined a term that encapsulates the plethora of subsets

that comprise non-cognitive skills, including social-emotional learning: Mindsets, Essential

Skills, & Habits otherwise known as MESH (Garbieli et al., 2015). One of the key points that

Gabrieli, et al. point out repeatedly throughout their article pertains to the uniqueness of many of

the studies, which are longitudinal and therefore show the lasting impact of SEL on students in

their later years. For example, one of the key studies that the authors reference in their paper is

known as the Dunedin Study which began in the small town of Dunedin, New Zealand in 1973.

The project started out as a single, one-time study of 1,000 children to examine a medical issue

but ended up as a longitudinal study revealing profound results in the realm of non-cognitive

skill development. The researchers connected with the participants 13 times over the course of

the study asking them various questions about physical health, finances, work, relationships,

criminal activity, and mental and emotional conditions (Gabrieli et al., 2015).

The authors also cite the increasingly significant amount of research that is being done

around the concept of growth mindsets. Lisa Blackwell, Carol Dweck, and colleagues performed

two studies in which they measured the trajectory of math grades between students who

believed their intelligence was malleable (growth mindset) versus those students who did not

possess such beliefs. The math grades of students in the former categories increased in both

studies (as cited in Gabrieli et al., 2015).. Gabrieli et al. (2015) note that these studies show

BRIDGING THE GAP 18

students with growth mindsets, “...fare better because they are able to face challenges more

effectively than students who believe their intelligence is fixed at a certain level” (p. 10).

The well-known Perry Prechool Study is also mentioned in the Gabrieli paper as an

example of the positive effects of MESH in students over the long term. This longitudinal study

began in 1962 and divided randomly selected low-income students into either a control group or

the High/Scope early education program. The results showed that while the students fared better

cognitively for a short time, these gains did not last. However, after further analysis of the

results, it was revealed that the children in the program performed better in a variety of life skills

including academic (literacy tests in particular) and career-wise and that these effects lasted

beyond school into adulthood (Gabrieli et al., 2015). The conductor of the study, Heckman,

found that these benefits were largely due to MESH skills such as curiosity, self-control, and

social awareness (as cited in Gabrieli et al., 2015).

Gabrieli et al. (2015) organized their findings from these studies around three domains:

academics, career, and well-being. Within the academics domain, the authors noted three trends

that consistently appeared in all of the SEL studies reviewed: Students who possessed strong

MESH skills were more likely to obtain higher academic achievement during K-12 school,

graduate high school, and to complete college. Furthermore, the studies showed that

implementing MESH as early as preschool not only benefits students in present terms but has

lasting positive long-term effects as well (Gabrieli et al., 2015).

In terms of how MESH affects future career opportunities, Gabrieli et al. (2015) found

that employers look for and value employees who possess strong MESH skills therefore, people

who have obtained these skills have an increased chance of being hired as well as maintaining

their employment. Furthermore, the studies included in the paper revealed that employees with

BRIDGING THE GAP 19

highly developed non-cognitive skills earned higher wages that resulted in greater financial

stability (Gabrieli et al., 2015). Lastly, Gabrieli et al. (2015) found three positive outcomes in the

research related to the well-being of students in future terms as they become adults. They noted

that the research showed adults with MESH skills had fewer incidences of teen pregnancies,

crime and incarceration. Furthermore, studies show that adults with strong non-cognitive skills

are overall healthier with lowered rates of mortality, smoking, obesity, mental health disorders,

and substance abuse (Gabrieli et al., 2015).

All of these outcomes are compelling in and of themselves, however, Gabrieli et al.

(2015) found that, after reviewing all of the studies in their paper, the results pointed to one key

element that seemed to predict success in students and adults: self- control. In fact, the authors

state, “Childhood self-control was consistently as predictive or even more predictive of these

important outcomes than an individual’s intelligence or the socioeconomic status of the family in

which the individual was raised” (p. 2). The authors point to two studies conducted by Angela

Duckworth and Martin Seligman in which they found that eighth-grade students who possessed

strong self-control skills performed better than their peers in a variety of measures including

higher attendance, grades, and standardized test scores. Of equal interest, those students who

exhibited high levels of self-control were able to increase their academic performance over time

in contrast to IQ levels which did not improve over time (as cited in Gabrieli et al., 2015).

BRIDGING THE GAP 20

Teacher-Student Relationships

“The real core of education is the relationship between the teacher and the student,

and the extent to which that relationship nurtures the longing of the child to matter in the world,

and the longing of the teacher to nurture and fulfill that desire.”

Timothy P. Shriver and Jennifer Buffet,

Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning, 2015

Significant research on student engagement and successful SEL programming indicates

that one of the most powerful ways to increase student investment is through strong teacher-

student relationships. Taylor and Parsons (2011) emphasize that, “Open, caring, respectful

relationships between learners and teachers are essential to develop and support social and

psychological engagement in learning” (p. 9). This is especially true in regards to shaping

students’ social-emotional skills, particularly during the challenging middle and high school

years. According to Taylor and Parsons (2011), “Students themselves consistently say that what

most helped them thrive in spite of challenges was the quality of relationships they developed

with adults in their schools” (p. 10).

As stated earlier in the section on engagement, the importance of providing students with

lessons that are relevant to their lives as well as challenging cannot be understated. High and

Andrews (2009) state the following: “Teachers who desire genuine engagement should also take

the time to explain the link between the lessons and futures of their students” (p. 60).

Furthermore, teachers who are skilled in SEL know the critical value of taking the time to get

know their students and their interests and are then able to incorporate this knowledge into their

daily lessons (High & Andrews, 2009). One way teachers can get know their students is by

providing them with opportunities to be a part of the creation of their own education. According

BRIDGING THE GAP 21

to High and Andrews (2009), creating learning environments that support and value student

voice reduces discipline problems and leads to greater engagement leading to higher academic

achievement (High & Andrews, 2009). One SEL technique that is often used to create

democratic classrooms such as this is by implementing classroom meetings, or “circles” at the

beginning of each day (Cervone & Cushman, 2015). This not only helps students grow in their

sense of safety and confidence when voicing their opinions, it also provides an opportunity for

teachers to gauge students’ satisfaction levels and how they can make adjustments to their lesson

plans (High & Andrews, 2009).

Additionally, research has shown that students are more apt to engage in their learning

when they are given opportunities to interact socially. In order to develop proactive strategies to

increase student engagement Dunleavy and Milton established the following positive, pro-social,

school-climate building factors: An ethic of caring and supporting relationships, respect, fairness,

trust and a strong disciplinary climate, teachers sense of shared responsibility and efficacy

related to learning, and a school-wide culture of high expectations for academic success (as cited

in Taylor & Parsons, 2011, p. 8). Furthermore, teachers that promote relationships in an

environment that supports positive discipline over negative or no tolerance policies are more apt

to have higher levels of student engagement. According to Willms, Friesen, and Milton,

“...students who describe their classroom disciplinary climate as positive are one and a half times

more likely to report high levels if interest, motivation and enjoyment in learning” (as cited in

Taylor & Parsons, 2011, p. 11). Black echoes this notion by asserting that providing

underachieving students with “warm” classroom environments that are respectful and supportive

increases their willingness to participate in challenging classwork (as cited in High & Andrews,

2009).

BRIDGING THE GAP 22

Whether it is teachers, counselors, or support staff, the impact of establishing deep

student- staff connections on student engagement cannot be understated. If we want students to

participate in the experience of their own academic learning, they must first have the social-

emotional skills necessary to become psychologically invested (High & Andrews, 2009).

Teachers and other school staff are the often the primary source for the development of these

skills. Taylor and Parsons (2011) state, “When students have opportunities to connect with adults

who approach these relationships with a spirit of caring, empathy, generosity, respect, reciprocity

and a genuine desire to know students personally, they can make a unique contribution to young

peoples’ emerging adaptive capacity, self-sufficiency, resiliency, confidence, and knowledge of

themselves as learners” (p. 10).

SEL in Action

There are numerous examples of schools that have implemented comprehensive SEL

programs many of which were included in the Durlak et al., study above. While this research is

important for emphasizing the data-driven positive impacts of SEL, understanding what SEL

looks like in action requires a different kind of exploration. In their book, Belonging and

Becoming, authors Barbara Cervone and Kathleen Cushman highlight four different struggling

high schools that infused their academic agendas with SEL and the impressive strides that

resulted. These schools serve as powerful examples of how committed and mindfully created

SEL programs can profoundly change the lives of the students they serve.

The East Side Community School located in New York City buttressed its desire to

deepen the academic expectations of its students, “habits of mind,” as they call it, by infusing

their curriculum with SEL and creating a community culture rich in caring, mutual respect, and

belonging. Prior to introducing SEL into the school, East Side struggled with many of the same

BRIDGING THE GAP 23

issues other poor, inner city schools did: lack of engagement, behavioral outbursts, and poor

academic achievement. In 2001, when Mark Federman became the new principal at East Side he

brought with him a vision of turning the discouraged school around by way of SEL. He did this

by creating an SEL program that focused on fostering teacher collaboration, forming tight-knit

advisory groups, cultivating respectful attitudes and cultural sensitivity, showing responsibility to

the community, and expecting academic excellence (Cervone & Cushman, 2015).

Cervone and Cushman (2015) give the example of how the use of a specific SEL-based

curriculum, Facing History and Ourselves, influenced the cultural and community views of the

students at East Side. The program introduces students to incidents of injustice that have

occurred throughout history which, as Cervone and Cushman (2015) point out, “...focuses on the

very questions of belonging, identity, and agency that research suggests most affect the academic

engagement and the social and emotional resiliency of adolescent learners” (p. 25). Teachers at

East Side used these learning opportunities to give students the chance to share their own

experiences of prejudice and injustice allowing students to connect and feel a powerful sense of

belonging with each other as well as their community and the world at large (Cervone &

Cushman, 2015).

The results of Federman’s SEL programs at East Side showed ample progress in multiple

areas. First of all, in terms of graduation rates, in 2014 East Side attained an 81 percent

graduation rate which was 15 to 20 percent higher than the average in New York City. East Side

also earned an increase in college-ready status, with 56 percent of graduates being deemed ready

versus the city’s average of 33 percent. Finally, East Side is part of a Consortium of high

schools in New York that use portfolio presentations in lieu of taking Regents exams. Multiple

aggregated studies on these Consortium schools, which included East Side, revealed numerous

BRIDGING THE GAP 24

positive outcomes when compared with non-consortium New York high schools including

reduced dropout rate (50% lower than the rest of the city), suspensions (5% compared to 11%),

and teacher turnover (15% compared to 58%) (Cervone & Cushman, 2015).

Furthermore, determined to foster a culture of reading and boost literacy, East Side

implemented a rigorous SEL-infused reading initiative that resulted in successfully increasing

reading assessments. In order to combat the “reading is chore” attitude, the staff at East Side

created a program that included three approaches. First, they set a goal to ensure all students had

access to books that they were both capable of reading and interested in reading. Second, they set

aside times during the school day where students could focus on their reading uninterrupted.

Lastly, the staff educated the students on how to become savvy readers by modeling how to fully

absorb their reading and how to discuss it with others. The outcome of this literacy effort

showed impressive results: according to standardized reading assessments, East Side students

reading levels had jumped ahead to, “… two to three times that of their peers nationwide”

(Cervone & Cushman, 2015, p. 31).

Mindfulness in Schools

One SEL program that has gained a fair amount of attention in recent years is

mindfulness. Although still in its infancy research-wise, the studies that have been conducted to

date show promising results. Mindfulness can be described as paying attention to the present

moment without judgment (Tadlock-Marlo, 2011). Current research on mindfulness indicates

that daily mindfulness practice can reduce the symptoms of a variety of mental health disorders

such as depression and anxiety and increase attention, improve social skills, and boost necessary

coping skills (Tadlock-Marlo, 2011). Furthermore, mindfulness programs are comparatively

cheap when viewed next to other programs, are portable (mindfulness resides in the person), and

BRIDGING THE GAP 25

do not to require lengthy amounts of time- all of which make mindfulness an advantageous fit for

use in education (Schonert-Reichl, et al., 2015; Tadlock- Marlo, 2011).

Schonert-Reichl et al’s research article, Enhancing Cognitive and Social-Emotional

Development Through a Simple-to-Administer School Program involved a comprehensive study

to examine whether the implementation of an SEL program, the MindUP curriculum specifically

(MindUP is a creation of the Hawn Foundation), would have a positive effect on students'

academic and social/emotional functioning. The researchers recruited four classes of fourth and

fifth graders (99 students total), and randomly divided them into two groups: one received the

MindUP training and the other received generalized social responsibility training. With the

MindUp group, the core MindUP practice, which included mindfulness breathing and listening

activities, was administered once a day for 3 minutes with weekly lessons (12 in total) lasting

around 40-50 minutes each. The social responsibility group received training on problem

solving, sharing responsibility, respectful behavior, and valuing diversity. The researchers used a

variety of data-collecting measures and scales including Executive Functioning (EF) task

assessments, childhood self-reports, demographic information, empathy and perspective-taking,

emotion control, depressive symptoms, mindfulness, teacher and peer nominations, and math

achievement measures (Schonert-Reichl, et al., 2015). The overall results of the study revealed,

as the researchers hypothesized, that the students in the MindUP group showed greater

improvements in cognitive skills as well as social-emotional skills than did those students who

were in the social responsibility group (Schonert-Reichl et al., 2015).

Broderick and Frank (2013) also mentions an insightful study in which researchers

studied the effects of the Learning to Breathe program, a mindfulness curriculum for adolescents

that aims to reduce stress and anxiety and increase resiliency and strength. The Learning to

BRIDGING THE GAP 26

Breathe research study was conducted with high school students once a week for 15-25 minutes

over a 16-week time period. The results showed statistically reduced levels of perceived stress

and enhanced emotional regulation in the students. Broderick and Frank (2013) further notes that

because of the intense transformations that occur in youth at this stage of development, and the

heightened state of emotions and stress levels, adolescence is a prime time to introduce

mindfulness practice (Frank et al., 2013).

Another key point that Broderick and Frank (2013) mentions is that some research has

shown training teachers mindfulness techniques for personal use can have an indirect effect on

the students they teach. The researchers cite a small-scale study that was conducted with three

teachers wherein they practiced mindfulness themselves for eight weeks and then were given

instruction as to how to implement the teachings into the classroom. During the study, the

teachers were found to be less emotionally reactive, judgmental, calmer, and kinder to

themselves and others which led to fewer negative interactions with their students (Broderick

and Frank, 2013).

Tadlock-Marlo (2011) points out that because one becomes profoundly aware of physical

sensations while practicing mindfulness, it can lead to greater awareness of internal and

emotional reactions. This experience can be beneficial to students because it allows them to

separate their personal identities from their emotional reactions to a situation so that they can

mindfully respond instead of mindlessly reacting. The end result is that students are able increase

compassion towards themselves and limit their self-judgment (Tadlock- Marlo, 2011).

BRIDGING THE GAP 27

Adlerian Perspective on SEL

“An educator’s most important task, one might say his holy duty, is to see to it that no child is

discouraged at school, and that a child who enters school already discouraged regains his self-

confidence through his school and his teacher. This goes hand-in-hand with the vocation of the

educator, for education is possible only with children who look hopefully and joyfully upon the

future.”

- Alfred Adler

Social-emotional learning approaches resonate with Adlerian philosophies on many

levels. From social interest, to encouragement, to the courage to be imperfect and goals of

misbehavior, the voices of Adler and Dreikurs can be found in almost every aspect of SEL

interventions. However, one of the most prominent Adlerian thread that runs strongly and

consistently through SEL programs is the concept surrounding the Crucial Cs, particularly the

first C, which has to do with feeling connected. The Crucial Cs stand for Connected, Capable,

Count, and Courage (John, 2011). This theory was developed by noted Adlerian scholars, Rudolf

Dreikurs and Bettner and Lew, under the premise that a person’s well-being is largely dependent

on these four “needs” being met.

The Crucial Cs

It is this first C, Connected, otherwise known as belonging, that surfaces so frequently

throughout the research on SEL that one cannot help but be struck by the importance of this

deceivingly simple concept. In fact, one might even say that much of the challenges currently

present in our schools can be boiled down to the simple fact that many students lack a sense of

belonging, whether at home or at school or both. John (2011), notes that because we are born

into communities of people, humans are wired and driven to seek our place within these

BRIDGING THE GAP 28

communities, whether they be our families, or other groups of people with whom we identify.

Similarily, noted psychologist Abraham Maslow theorized that, because learning manifests

through interactions with others, the need for people to secure a place in their own group is a

fundamental human need (Cervone & Cushman, 2015). According to Cervone and Cushman

(2015), because connecting is such a vital part of our existence, instilling our school

communities with belonging significantly impacts their motivation to do better. They state that,

“Considerable research supports the connection between students’ sense of belonging in a

classroom or school and their academic performance” (Cervone & Cushman, 2015, p. 57).

When humans perceive a lack of belonging, they are driven to express this void through

unhealthy behavior. In terms of how this plays out in the schools, students who, for example,

may have little connection and belonging at home, may come to school unable to focus, and may

engage in attention-seeking behaviors in a desperate attempt at finding acceptance within the

school community (John, 2011). One of the ways SEL programs combats this is by emphasizing

the importance of creating inclusive cultures in schools, environments in which all students

regardless of race, culture, and socio-economic status are welcomed into the fold. Hawkins et al.

(2004) reinforce this by stating that comprehensive SEL programming, “...provides students with

opportunities to contribute to their class, school, and community and experience the satisfaction,

sense of belonging, and enhanced motivation that comes from such involvement” (as cited in

Durlak et al., 2011, pp. 406-407). In one of the four high schools highlighted in Cervone and

Cushman’s Belonging and Becoming (2015), Fenger High School students attributed the culture

of openness and acceptance that developed as a result of SEL programs to their increased sense

of belonging which manifested in a deeper drive to achieve in school (Cervone & Cushman,

2015).

BRIDGING THE GAP 29

The second Crucial C, Capable, refers to one’s confidence in skills and their ability to

make independent decisions. All of the SEL competencies outlined by CASEL aim to increase

students’ levels of confidence particularly self-management and responsible decision-making. At

Quest High School in Humble, Texas students stated that the SEL interventions at their school

taught them how regulate emotions opening the door for the growth of maturity. With increased

maturity came feelings of being respected as adults, encouragement to begin making responsible

decisions about their future, and confidence in speaking up and advocating for themselves

(Cervone & Cushman, 2015). Tough (2016) echoes this by noting the profound impact that

persevering through challenges has on children stating that it produces two major intrinsic

motivators, competence and autonomy, both of which have been shown to increase students’

engagement and academic achievement (Tough, 2016; Weissberg, et al., 2015).

The third Crucial C, Count, can also be viewed as the feeling of significance, and is a

crucial outcome that contributes to the success of SEL programs. SEL competencies

communicate to students that who they are and what they have to contribute is important,

necessary, and meaningful (Johns, 2011). In the high schools in Belonging and Becoming,

student voice is repeatedly mentioned by students as one of the most powerful means by which

they were inspired to engage in their own learning. One student at Oakland International High

School where teachers create an classroom environment in which all students’ views are

welcomed and received with respect, stated, “In all classes, when students think of a good idea,

the teachers always support you. My voice counts” (Cervone & Cushman, 2015, p. 177). It is

interesting to note that throughout much of the traditional discussion around education and the

various attempts to improve it, very little attention has been given to the students’ perspectives. It

seems strange that a discussion around ways to enhance our current education system would not

BRIDGING THE GAP 30

incorporate the views of those whom the system directly serves (Andrews, 2009). Taylor and

Parsons (2011) muse that in order to pinpoint which interventions best encourage engagement,

we must take the time to understand the viewpoints and opinions of the students. They state,

“Students want more autonomy to engage in and design their own learning. They want to learn

and utilize their learning preferences and styles and want support to do so” (p. 19). Furthermore,

according to research, democratic classrooms that value student voice show increased

involvement and student achievement and fewer disciplinary challenges (Black, 2005; Andrews,

2009). Finally, as the students at East Side High School experienced, having the opportunity to

be heard instilled a sense of agency allowing them to act, not as bystanders but as upstanders in

their lives and the lives of others. One student described this by stating, “Everything that we

learn here and at East Side eventually comes to help us out in the future of ourselves and in the

future generations that look up to us” (Cervone & Cushing, 2015, p. 41).

The last Crucial C, Courage, intertwines with the concept of Safety. One of the keystones

of Adlerian theories relates to the notion of having the courage to fail, and that in essence these

moments of failure create our deepest opportunities for learning (Ansbacher & Ansbacher,

1956)). Unfortunately the philosophy underpinning current main stream education hyper-focuses

on competition and the race to perfection, which does very little to encourage students that, while

striving for one’s best is a valid and healthy expectation, pursuing perfection is not (Johns,

2011). In fact, the messages schools send to students about failure greatly impacts their

motivation to persevere when challenges arise academically. According to Farrington (2015), the

moments of failure that students experience can be a crucial opportunity to instill either

encouragement or discouragement. Creating learning environments that emphasize that failure is

okay and that capitalize on the invaluable learning opportunities that can be gleaned from these

BRIDGING THE GAP 31

moments is key to encouraging students to take risks and challenge themselves ( as cited in

Cervone & Cushman, 2015).

In order for students to have the courage to take risks in their learning, a safe

environment must first be established. Students at Fenger High School in Chicago, Illinois

emphasized that the element of safety was one of the key factors of the success of their SEL-

infused school. In reference to the contribution of Fenger staff to creating this safety amidst a

climate of trust, one student remarked, “The staff, they always have your back, wondering how

you’re doing, asking if you need to talk. You build trust. And when there’s trust, there’s safety”

(Cervone & Cushman, 2015, p. 128).

Goals of Misbehavior

Another Adlerian theme that ties into SEL in the schools relates to student behavior,

specifically how behavior affects engagement. Adlerian theory proposes that when any of the

Crucial Cs are not being satisfied, or if they are felt to be unsatisfied, humans begin to exhibit

unhealthy behaviors that can be viewed through the concept of goals of misbehavior (John,

2011). The goals of misbehavior include Attention, Power, Revenge, and Discouragement

(Ballou, class notes, 2014). Johns (2011) succinctly explains the intersection of the Crucial Cs

and the goals of misbehavior by stating that “….when we feel we cannot connect, we are likely

to engage in attention seeking; when we do not feel capable, we are likely to make bids for

power; when we do not feel we count, we may seek revenge and hurt others the way we’ve been

hurt; when we lose courage, we assume disability and seek to avoid life’s demands” (p. 5). It is

easy to see how this manifests itself in the classroom with students and how getting caught in the

cycle of misbehavior can prevent students from engaging in their learning and thus prevent them

from academic success.

BRIDGING THE GAP 32

Social Interest

One of Adler’s most influential theories relates to the concept of social interest which can

be defined as a person’s interest in and willingness to cooperate and work with others in order to

benefit the larger group as a whole (Adler University, n.d.). Adler believed that this social

interest could serve as barometer of a person’s mental health; the higher the levels of social

interest, the higher the levels of mental well-being, and vice versa (Ballou, class notes, 2014). In

school settings, social interest translates into SEL programming and competences particularly

through the Relationship Skills and Social Awareness components. In fact, Cervone and

Cushman (2015) noted a pattern of six key elements of SEL that emerged throughout the four

high schools they highlighted, with one of these elements being a Curriculum of Connection and

Engagement. Included under this heading was the realization that all of four of the schools

incorporated some type of service learning requirements. For example, at Quest High School,

every Friday students are permitted to perform volunteer service work in their communities in

lieu of going to class. Quest students remarked on, “…. the sense of purpose they gained from

giving back” (Cervone & Cushman, 2015, p. 11). The sixth common element Cervone and

Cushman (2015) discovered in the four high schools, Developing Student Agency, also included

aspects of social interest in terms of how the four schools encouraged students to, “… grow into

something bigger” (p. 12). The SEL approaches used in these schools served to inspire students

to share their stories of struggle and triumph in order to make an impact on their communities by

becoming mentors to other students who in turn will be inspired towards greater achievement as

well, creating a positive cycle of well-being for all (Cervone & Cushman, 2015).

Adlerian theory resonates deeply with SEL in a myriad of other ways as well. In fact,

reading Adler’s writings on children in schools, one can see how he has often been hailed as

BRIDGING THE GAP 33

being ahead of his time. His theories on the importance of encouragement and belonging, on

goals of misbehavior and social interest are all precursors to much of what is at the heart of SEL.

When schools create cultures that embody these principles, students will, seeing themselves as

worthy, be more encouraged to engage in their education, therefore opening the door for them to

become mentally healthy contributing members of their families, communities, and society.

Conclusion/Challenges

“To the extent that we ignore SEL, we increase the likelihood that students will further disengage

from learning, and that teachers will become increasingly frustrated by the ways in which the

system makes it difficult for them to teach.”

Timothy P. Shriver and Jennifer Buffet,

Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning, 2015

Trying to convince school administrators and stakeholders of the value of SEL programs

and its positive impact on academics, which many believe to be the ultimate mission of our

school systems, is one of the biggest dilemma’s facing SEL. The ample research provided in this

paper should put much of that concern to rest. Study after study has shown that when provided

comprehensively and in an encouraging environment that provides safety, significance and

belonging, teaching students SEL skills increases students’ engagement which leads to greater

academic achievement. Another issue that frequently arises in discussions around whether to

invest in SEL centers around the debate about whether schools should be responsible for taking

on the role of teaching social-emotional skills, that in fact it should be the responsibility of the

parents and/or guardians to provide these tools (Van Veisor, 2009). However, as the examples in

Cervone and Cushman (2015) so poignantly reveal, many children do not, for a variety of

reasons, have access to SEL at home. For students who don’t have the advantage of seeing their

BRIDGING THE GAP 34

parents and/or guardians model social-emotional skills at home, schools remain the main

alternative setting where children naturally learn to navigate the complexity of social

relationships and where they have the opportunity to learn the skills necessary to become useful

members of their communities (Jones, et. al., 2015). Jones et. al. (2015) point out that because of

this role schools play in our communities, they are “the primary setting in which many initial

concerns arise, and also a context in which they can be effectively re-mediated” (p. 97).

Furthermore, when children enter school full time, they spend a significant portion of their days

in the care of teachers and other school staff more so than parents and/or guardians therefore

making the effect of school-based interventions and programs even more impactful (Tough,

2016).

The academic benefits of teaching SEL to these at-risk students alone boosts the push for

SEL implementation, however, shouldn’t we, as a society, also view SEL as an opportunity to

provide these students an equal chance at success because it simply is the right thing to do?

Discussions and finger-pointing around whose responsibility it is to instill social-emotional

competencies in children is polarizing and unproductive. Teaching students their own value, the

value of others, how to manage emotions and behavior, make mindful decisions, and

communicate effectively benefits not only the individual but society as a whole. Investing in

SEL in our schools provides a preventative approach to many of society’s ills from creating a

more robust, productive workforce to lower incidences of mental health issues to reduced

incarceration rates (Van Veisor, 2009).

Another challenge to consider when promoting and creating support for SEL

programming pertains to the recruitment of teacher ‘buy in.” Teachers are constantly inundated

with requests and demands to introduce new curriculum in their classrooms in an effort to boost

BRIDGING THE GAP 35

academic achievement, the results of which are often tied to teacher performance ratings.

Therefore, teachers often express concern when confronted with any new intervention or

program that may reduce student’s lesson time (Van Veisor, 2009). When promoting SEL with

teachers, Van Veisor (2009) suggests approaching teachers with sensitivity and with positivity.

She notes that, “...many effective teachers may already integrate social and emotional learning

experiences into their classrooms (p. 8).” In fact, according to some research, integrating social-

emotional experiences into core academic curriculum is an ideal approach when struggling with

how to find time to devote to SEL programs (Daunic, et al., 2013). Increased scores in math and

reading, student motivation, attention, and socially sophisticated behavior, as well as reduced

incidents of aggressive behavior have been demonstrated in research on integrated programs

(Daunic et al., 2013). In addition, taking the time to point out the positive strategies that teachers

are currently using and highlighting their effectiveness can help ease the stress of having to learn

a whole new approach. Taking into account teachers unique strengths and interests as well as

inviting teachers to be a part of the conversation and development of any SEL programming is

also essential to successful implementation (Van Veisor, 2009). Lastly, fostering a school

environment in which teachers feel valued and supported as part of a community increases their

willingness to engage and provide support to their students (High & Andrews, 2009).

Some stakeholders also wonder whether investing in SEL programs will actually have a

worthwhile impact on students, especially high-risk students. Certainly SEL is not a panacea for

all of the myriad complex issues confronting our schools currently. It is, however, a compelling

starting place ripe with further untapped potential. As many of the stories and studies in this

paper have attested to, SEL in all of its forms and when properly implemented, can have a

significant positive influence on students’ educational experience that extends post-graduation.

BRIDGING THE GAP 36

Proper SEL Program Implementation

Durlak et al. (2011) strongly emphasize that one of the key findings that surfaces

throughout much of the research on SEL pertains to the importance of proper and adequate

program implementation. Research studies of successful SEL interventions reveal that many of

these programs share similar approaches in their application. The acronym SAFE can be used to

describe these effective approaches. According to CASEL, SAFE stands for the following:

Sequenced: a planned set of activities to be executed step by step.

Active: requiring active learning activities such as role plays and behavioral rehearsals.

Focused: devoting sufficient time for developing social and emotional skills.

Explicit: targeting specific social and emotional skills.

The studies examined by Durlak et al. (2011) in which staff adhered to the SAFE guidelines

experienced significant benefits compared to programs that didn’t incorporate SAFE practices

(Durlak, et al., 2011). Van Veisor (2009) also identified three factors that influence the efficacy

of SEL programs: Infusing the educational experience with both formal and informal teaching of

SEL skills, establishing a safe learning environment that encourages SEL development, and the

inclusion of stakeholders (parents, teachers, and community leaders) to be part of the SEL

implementation dialogue (Van Veisor, 2009).

Economics

“The Alliance for Excellent Education estimates that cutting the number of dropouts in

half for a single high school class nationwide could increase the gross domestic product by as

much as $9.6 billion by the time the students reach the middle of their careers.”

Gabrieli et al. (2015)

BRIDGING THE GAP 37

One of the biggest barriers to widespread implementation of SEL programs comes down

to dollars. It is a well-known fact that our education systems have struggled monetarily for many

years, partly due to the economy and partly due to where education falls on our nation’s priority

list. Regardless of the reasons, before endorsing any new intervention or program, schools want

to know what kind of financial investment will be required. In terms of the financial costs of SEL

programming, much of the research regarding the economic benefits is viewed through initial

investment versus long-term benefits (Jones et al., 2015).

One way of looking at the costs of SEL programming is by examining what happens to

many students when we don’t provide SEL in schools, or as Cervone and Cushman (2015) refer

to as the, “exorbitant costs of the consequences of neglect and school failure” (p. 191). For

example, according to some research the amount of money that is required to hold one juvenile

at the Cook County Juvenile Detention Center in Chicago sits at around $200,000 per year

(Cervone & Cushman, 2015). By contrast, one of the schools showcased in Cervone and

Cushman’s Belonging and Becoming, Fenger High School, estimated the costs of their SEL

programming at around $3,000 per student per year. In fact, recent research from Columbia

University that examined the economic benefits of a handful of comprehensive SEL programs,

revealed that, “for every dollar invested, there was a return of more than eleven dollars”

(Cervone & Cushman, 2015, p. 191).

The key point in the discussion around the economic positives of SEL in schools is that

the initial program financial investment should be seen as proactive and preventative. In the

same way that the healthcare field is beginning to realize the enormous financial benefits of

preventative health of our bodies, supporters of SEL need to promote the significant, research-

based financial advantages to teaching SEL in our schools. There have been a number of studies

BRIDGING THE GAP 38

that attest to the link between non-cognitive factors (factors that are measured not through test

scores but through outcomes and of which SEL is a subset) and a host of later adulthood

challenges in terms of lower wages, increased physical and mental health problems (Jones et al.,

2015). Jones et al., (2015) astutely note, “Hundreds of billions of dollars in public money are

required each year to address societal problems associated with crime, substance abuse, and poor

physical and mental health in general” (p. 111). As this paper attests to, many of the challenges

that schools, and later society, faces such as early substance abuse, high delinquency rates, and

failure to graduate SEL has the power the impact thereby reducing the financial burden on

society as a whole (Jones, et. al., 2015).

Future Skills

In terms of college and career development, SEL can have a direct positive impact as

well. Van Veisor (2009) points out that because the ultimate logistical/immediate goal in

education is for students to graduate with a high school diploma in order to increase their

chances of obtaining a job, it makes sense to promote SEL strategies in schools. According to

O’Neil, many of the factors that prevent at-risk students from dropping out are socially-

emotionally-based according to recent research on resiliency that revealed high-risk students

who experienced SEL provided by just a few caring school staff are more apt to stay in school

than those students who are not exposed to SEL (as cited in Van Veisor, 2009). Furthermore,

robust SEL skills such as being able to assess one’s own areas of strengths and weaknesses (Self-

Awareness component) are necessary in order for students to make sound college and career-

based decisions (Responsible Decision-Making component) (Van Veisor, 2009). Van Veisor

(2009) states, “Students who have attended schools with SEL programming can employ

BRIDGING THE GAP 39

decision-making strategies and what they know about themselves- along with their knowledge of

the world of work- to choose successful and satisfying careers” (p. 5).

The benefits of SEL extend beyond college and career prep into the important realm of

obtaining and maintaining employment. For many years the prevailing notion in both education

and professional work settings has been that the key to success for students and future workers is

through cognitive abilities only (Kyllonen, 2013). Therefore, numerous standardized tests have

been administered in our schools over the years to measure student achievement. The belief

being that the higher the scores achieved would equal future success in college as well as the

workplace. However, as many of these standardized tests are coming under scrutiny for their

fairness and validity, research has begun to reveal that cognitive abilities are not the only

indicator of a student’s future success. Recent studies have shown that soft-skill factors

significantly impacted a person’s outcome not only in the area of career success but can also

predict future divorce, drug use, leadership success, mortality, creativity, and job satisfaction

(Kyllonen, 2013).

While most of these studies have shown conscientiousness to be the strongest soft skills

to affect both academic and future workplace success, other studies have shown that non-

cognitive skills such as goal setting, social support and involvement, self-efficacy, self-concept,

as well as emotional regulation to be equally if not more influential than cognitive factors

(Kyllonen, 2013). According to Kyllonen (2013), a research study performed by Millenial

Branding in 2012 revealed that non-cognitive skills such as possessing a positive attitude, strong

communication and teamwork skills, and adaptability to change to be the most sought-after traits

employers seek in future employees. Recruiting workers who are both emotionally and socially

competent, who know how to collaborate with a team, and can problem-solve are proving to be

BRIDGING THE GAP 40

the magic ingredients to successful companies (Van Veisor, 2009). These magic “ingredients”

are SEL-based skills.

Kyllonen (2013) cites another study that examined the relationship between the cognitive

abilities of high school graduates and students who dropped out of school but later went on to

receive their GEDs. The study showed that the both graduates and GED earners possessed equal

cognitive skills and abilities. However, the latter group showed greater struggles in the

workforce such as higher unemployment, increased legal challenges, and lower wages. This was

due to the belief that, according to the researchers, the GED-earners possessed weaker non-

cognitive skills such as resilience, self-control, and optimism (Kyllonen, 2013). Kyllonen further

emphasizes this by pointing out the research performed by economists Bowles, Gintis, and

Osborne which demonstrated that, “… cognitive skills accounted for only 20 percent of the

educational-attainment effects on labor-market outcomes” (as cited in Kyllonen, 2013, p. 18).

This research solidifies the notion that while cognitive skills are important, it is these non-

cognitive or “soft” SEL skills that ultimately have the most impact on a students’ future

workplace success (Kyllonen, 2013).

Role of the School Counselor

Of all the roles in our education systems, school counselors are in a unique position to

promote and influence the implementation of SEL in schools. School counselors are trained to

not only foster students’ academic growth, but to support them socially and emotionally as well

(ASCA). School counselors are keenly aware that students who develop a strong core of social-

emotional skills go on to perform better in school in all areas as the above research has shown.

Convincing school counselors about the benefits of SEL is, for the most part, preaching to the

choir. However, as stated above, one of the key challenges facing implementation of SEL in

BRIDGING THE GAP 41

schools is convincing other school staff and administration that incorporating SEL programming

will benefit their schools can be extremely challenging because of the ongoing trend of many

schools’ myopic focus on academic achievement through standardized testing (Van Veisor,

2009).

Many school counselors have experienced firsthand how this hyper-focus on academics

has impacted their roles. For example, many school counselors have noted in recent years that

the social-emotional dimension of their job has diminished in favor of greater emphasis on

academic support often manifested as inappropriate administrative duties such as coordinating

school-wide testing and developing master schedules (Van Veisor, 2009). McCombs states, “In

cases where school counselors appropriately provide classroom counseling for all students, social

and emotional learning (SEL) is often viewed as auxiliary and lacks infusion into the school’s

overall curriculum and climate” (as cited in Van Veisor, 2009, p. 2).

In her article, School Counselors as Social-Emotional Learning Consultants: Where Do

We Begin?, Van Veisor (2009) attempts to combat this challenge to social- emotional learning

currently facing school counselors by proposing that they “...renew their commitment to social

and emotional development, strengthen their prevention work, and reposition themselves as

social and emotional learning consultants” (p. 10). Using this strategic role, school counselors

can work toward stakeholder “buy in” and one of the key ways of doing this, Van Veisor (2009)

points out, is by emphasizing the positive relationship between SEL and academic achievement

as well as career exploration (Van Veisor, 2009).

Recent research reveals that effective learning involves not only academic instruction but

the process of socialization as well. According to the American Psychological Association,

“Learning is influenced by social interactions, interpersonal relations, and communication with

BRIDGING THE GAP 42

others” (as cited in Van Veisor, 2009, p. 4). It is well known that emotions play a part in our

learning processes in the simple sense that our emotions can either help or hinder our learning.

McCombs notes that neuroscientists are beginning to better understand how the brain and

emotions work, that they work “….synergistically, with emotion driving attention, learning,

memory and other mental activities” (as cited in Van Veisor, 2009, p. 24). As stated earlier, there

is significant, solid research showing that the academic success of students at all grade levels is

strongly influenced by the presence of social emotional skills or lack thereof. The 11 point gain

noted in the Durlak et al., (2011) study is a clear indicator that supporting and implementing SEL

in schools is vital to improving academic achievement in students (Van Veisor, 2009).

School counselors can work to create a supportive collaborative of education personnel

around the mission of infusing SEL in schools. As stated earlier, garnering the support of the

teachers is paramount to the success of SEL programs. Collaboration is an essential component

of SEL and an equally important aspect of establishing a strong scaffolding for SEL to flourish.

This means not only convincing teachers of the benefits of SEL but support staff, school mental

health personnel, parents, community leaders, and most importantly, the students themselves

(Van Veisor, 2009). Van Veisor (2009) stresses the importance of inviting the students into

conversations about school programs and interventions pointing out that allowing students to

have a “voice” in the creation of their own education shows respect for their ideas and opinions.

This respect translates into students who are more willing to engage and commit to their own

learning. She goes on to say that once committed, “...students will actively seek to increase their

own social and emotional competencies as well as to contribute to creating an environment

conducive to ongoing SEL for others” (Van Veisor, 2009, p. 8).

BRIDGING THE GAP 43

School counselors can work toward promoting SEL in schools by educating themselves

on the research-supported benefits of SEL as well as how to properly and effectively introduce a

comprehensive SEL program into their schools. Van Veisor (2009) emphasizes that this new role

will demand school counselors to challenge themselves as leaders by promoting SEL prevention

programs and providing advocacy and consultation for all students.

Concluding Thoughts

As this paper has convincingly shown, the outcomes of SEL are many and deeply

impactful to student success on multiple levels, and the great potential that remains untapped

cannot be denied. Implementing SAFE-infused SEL programs teaches students the skills needed

to thrive academically, socially, and career-wise. Furthermore, these skills have been shown to

have profound, long-lasting effects on students beyond the school setting and into adulthood.

Creating caring, reflective future citizens who are mentally, emotionally, and physically healthy

contributing members of our society makes sense socially, as well as economically. Much like

proactive healthcare, SEL serves as a holistic proactive, preventative approach to the betterment

of society.

When examining the achievement gap it is easy to get caught up in the complicated and

arduous task of trying to “fill” the gap. However, perhaps the gap isn’t meant to be filled.

Perhaps it is meant to be traversed. Instead of staring into the abyss of the “gap,” trying to fill it

with standardized tests, perhaps we might view the gap as an opportunity to build bridges across

the gap. SEL is a powerful tool for building those bridges. Bridges that foster empathetic

learning communities of belonging, bridges that encourage students to embrace both their

successes and their failures, and bridges that connect students to a sense of purpose beyond their

immediate awareness. As students traverse these SEL bridges, they will most likely, as the

BRIDGING THE GAP 44

research in this paper has aimed to prove, develop an intrinsic motivation to engage. If we can

engage students, we have begun the process of closing the achievement gap.

BRIDGING THE GAP 45

References

Adler University. (n.d.). About Alfred Adler. Retrieved from

www.adler.edu/page/about/history/about-alfred-adler.

Ansbacher, H. L., & Ansbacher, R. R (1956). The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler. New

York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.

Blair, C. & Raver, C. C (2015). The neuroscience of SEL. In J. A. Durlack, C. E. Domitrovich,

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

Research and practice (pp. 65-89). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Borba, Michelle (2016). Unselfie: why empathetic kids succeed in our all-about-me world. New

York, NY: Touchstone.

Broderick, P.C., & Frank J.L. (2014). Learning to BREATHE: an intervention to foster

mindfulness in adolescence. New Direction Youth Development. (142) 31-44.

CASEL. (n.d.a). What is SEL? Retrieved from: http://www.casel.org/what-is-sel

CASEL. (n.d.b). Core competencies. Retrieved from: http://www.casel.org/core-competencies

Cassetta, G. & Sawyer, B. (2015). The social-emotional learning approach children deserve.

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Cervone, B. & Cushman, K. (2015). Belonging and becoming: the power of social and

emotional learning in high schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Conklin, T. (2014). Social & emotional learning: essential lessons for student success. New

York, NY: Scholastic.

Connor, J. P (2015). Making SEL work for all children. In J. A. Durlack, C. E. Domitrovich, R.

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

Research and practice (pp. 589-592). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

BRIDGING THE GAP 46

Daunic, A., Corbett, N., Smith, S., Barnes, T., Santiago-Poventud, L., Chalfant, P., Pitts, D., &

Gleaton, J. (2013). Brief report: Integrating social-emotional learning with literacy

instruction: an intervention for children at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders.

Behavioral Disorders, 39(1), 43-51.

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., Schellinger, K. B (2011). The

impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: a meta-analysis of school-

based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.

Fleischer, L. (2010). Developing emotional literacy: transition planning for youth at risk.

Reclaiming Children and Youth, 19(1), 50-53.

Gabrieli, C., Ansel, D., & Krachman S.B. (2015). Ready to be counted: the research case for

education policy action on non-cognitive skills. Boston, MA: Transforming Education.

Goleman, D. (2015). The future of SEL. In J. A. Durlack, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg &

T. P. Gullotta (Eds.) Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice

(pp. 593-596). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Hecht, M. L., & Shin, Y. (2015). Culture and social competencies. In J. A. Durlack, C. E.

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

learning: Research and practice (pp. 50-64). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

High, J. & Andrews, P. G. (2009). Engaging students and ensuring success. Middle School

Journal, 41(2), 58-63.

John, K. (April, 2011). Belonging and significance. ASIIP Conference Presentation, Bath, UK,

April 29-30, 2011. Retrieved from:

http://www.adleriansociety.co.uk/phdi/p3.nsf/imgpages/0939_KarenJohn-ASIIPConf-

April2011.pdf/$file/KarenJohn-ASIIPConf-April2011.pdf

BRIDGING THE GAP 47

Jones, D., Greenberg, M. T., & Crowley, M. (2015). The economic case for SEL. In J. A.

Durlack, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.) Handbook of social

and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 97-113). New York, NY: Guilford

Press.

Kylonnen, P. C. (November, 2013). Soft skills for the workplace. Change: The Magazine of

Higher Learning, 45(6), 16-23.

Redding, S., & Walberg, H. J. (2015). Indicators of effective SEL practice. In J. A. Durlack, C.

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

emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 377-394). New York, NY: Guilford

Press.

Schonert-Reichl, K.A., Oberle, E., Stewart Lawlor, M., Abbott, D., Thomson, K., Oberlander,

T.F., Diamond, A. (January, 2015). Enhancing cognitive and social-emotional

development through a simple-to-administer school program. Developmental Psychology,

51 (1), 52-66.

Stoiber, K. C. (2011). Translating knowledge of social-emotional learning and evidence-based

practice into responsive school innovations. Journal of Educational and Psychological

Consultation. 21, 46-55.

Tadlock-Marlo, R. (2011). Making minds matter: infusing mindfulness into school counseling.

Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, (6) 3.

Taylor, L., & Parsons, J. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current Issues in Education.

14(1). Retrieved from https://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/viewFile/745/162

Tough, P. (2016). Helping children succeed: what works and why. Boston, MA: Houghton

Mifflin Harcourt.

BRIDGING THE GAP 48

Tough, P. (2012). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character.

Boston, MA: Mariner Books.

Van Veisor, P. (October, 2009). School counselors as social-emotional learning consultants:

where do we begin? Professional School Counseling, 13(1), 50-58.

Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Domitrovich, C. E., Gullotta, T. P. (2015). Social and emotional

learning: Past, present, and future. In J. A. Durlack, 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.