Cautions of SEL
“Emotions in the classroom… are not only a private manner but also a political space in which students and teachers interact with implications in larger political and cultural struggles… The politics of emotion… challenges the cultural and historical emotion norms with respect to what emotions are, how they are expressed, who gets to express them and under what circumstances.”
(Zembylas, 2007, as cited in Hoffman, 2009)
Taking into account all the components of the Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) framework, schools have implemented these practices into curriculum and school structure. Despite the frequent praise and positivity towards SEL interventions, several educational experts have also questioned if the universal SEL framework truly is applicable in cross-cultural contexts.
Case Study #4: SEAL in British Primary Schools
1
1.
In a qualitative analysis of SEL implementation in four British primary schools, the main focus of the study was to evaluate how primary school teachers understood and used SEL models. In Britain, the curriculum-based SEL framework is known as Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL). The purpose was also to take into consideration the different demographics among the four case study schools, such as schools with higher percentages of students eligible for free school meals, schools with more students who were immigrants, or schools with varying social and economic disadvantages. Researchers specifically questioned the theoretical interpretation and enactment of SEL in primary classrooms.
Implementation of SEL in the United States
2
In a cultural analysis of the SEL framework implemented in the United States, researchers discussed the dominant themes and issues in the program practices. Although SEL programs have been shown to improve several outcomes including teacher well-being and student academic performance, there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of implementing SEL for disadvantaged students. With the potential of implicit cultural bias, advocates of SEL must ask the question of if the SEL curriculum truly supports cultural diversity or if the SEL curriculum instead promotes a single model of emotional competency that benefits the dominant culture. It is clear that the roots of SEL are founded in the need to encourage citizenship and self-regulation skills for students through providing positive school environments and intentional interventions; however, the emphasis of achieving these goals are seen through key skills that may not be accepted among all cultures, which potentially indicates a universalist bias.
“Not all cultures interpret emotional experience in the same way, nor do they assign the same kinds of regulatory or expressive responses (such as talk) commonly shared by the White, American middle class.” (Ballenger, 1992, as cited in Hoffman, 2009)
A major aspect of demonstrating social and emotional competence (SEC) is through verbal communication, which can be observed as an American, middle-classed, White-preferenced cultural norm. Across different cultures, there are different interpretations of basic concepts, such as friendship or respect. When using SEL interventions in the classroom, it is crucial for teachers to be aware of these cultural differences in the context of their students and their funds of knowledge.
“When emotions are treated as cognitive information-processing skill sets, behaviors become rational choices, and caring becomes an object lesson in good behavior taught by teachers to students, it behooves us to ask if there is not some disconnect between the ideals of SEL and its practices.” (Hoffman, 2009)
So how can schools and teachers implement the original intentions of SEL in a manner that is culturally relevant and context-based?
Footnotes
Wood, P. (2020). Emotional intelligence and social and emotional learning: (Mis)interpretation of theory and its influence on practice. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 34(1), pp. 153-166.
​
Hoffman, D. M. (2009). Reflecting on social emotional learning: A critical perspective on trends in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), pp. 533-556.
1
2