ABSTRACT
Imperfect SEL implementation has become the unfortunate industry standard in education. With the myriad of high-stakes testing issues currently thrown at teachers, why should they make time to learn SEL? SEL seems simple enough; why can’t schools just adopt quick and easy programs where teachers read scripted material to their class and no one questions their efficacy or effectiveness? Sure, schools can do that. And, by doing so, they can expect the same result that varying character education and SEL programs have gotten over the past few decades. After the initial sparkly charge, the implementation fades, leaving just the few go-getters scattered across the building. Why? Mainly, because it was “just another fad, just like a, b, or c that they all saw x number of years ago.” To prevent this unfortunate and predictable phenomenon, SEL needs to be embedded into the school culture, with practices that span grade bands and content. Before we begin to assemble that first SEL bulletin board, we must take a look at the SEL competency of the delivery vehicle, the teacher. As we know, if the delivery vehicle is faulty, the material is lost in translation. Often when I am touring a new school, a principal will say this teacher has “got it” or that teacher “doesn’t.” In teacher-speak, we all know what this statement means, and we have been complicit is letting it go at just that. The problem is that without codifying the practices that create a positive, safe, and
emotionally respectful classroom, we leave ourselves unable to teach those who haven’t quite “gotten it” yet. Our professional responsibility is to move away from sweeping and lofty expectations like “teaching respect” toward building teachers’ SEL competency so they can develop common, explicit SEL language and practices for their classrooms. SEL instruction must dig deeper than simply looking at the number of students reached or the number of minutes taught. Instead, we must look at the competency of those who are the delivery vehicle for the SEL program itself. What is the climate and culture of the classroom in which the SEL program is housed? Is that classroom an emotionally and physically safe environment for SEL to take place, and can all learners, even our most vulnerable, thrive? Teacher competency is a vital part of the successful implementation of a school-wide SEL program. If classroom teachers are expected to implement Social-Emotional Learning programs and state SEL standards with efficacy, proficiency cannot be assumed. Given that most teacher education programs lack sufficient pre-service training in SEL, teachers must receive high-quality SEL professional development, consistent support, and a safe space to reflect and to take risks. Teachers know whether or not they are able to effectively teach trigonometry. They are either certified to teach math or they are not. In addition to looking at the competency of the educator, students’ math assessments can be evaluated to determine that they either have or have not mastered the concept. The process is not as simple for teaching and assessing SEL. Many of our nation’s teachers were certified before SEL was included in the state standards and so it was not included in their teacher education programs. When addressing educators’ SEL competency at a new school site, I often hear the question, “Are you saying that some teachers don’t know how to effectively resolve a conflict? Or that they don’t have Social Awareness?” And, as we have all seen by visiting a gossipy faculty lounge at lunchtime, sometimes that answer is obvious. Teachers cannot effectively teach SEL without modeling the strategies. And they cannot effectively model what they are not competent in. Yet, at least half of the SEL instruction I see when I visit schools across the country is teachers pulling a card from a box or a lesson from a binder and “teaching their SEL minutes for the day.” The teacher’s self-reflective piece is completely absent and the impact of the program is diminished. Understandably, the administrator, social worker, or teacher that purchased these kits wants to assume practitioner competency because the alternative is an awkward conversation at best and, at worst, the
practitioner dismissing SEL as “one more thing they don’t have time for,” or “the flavor of the month,” and refusing to address the content at all. Desperate to include SEL, schools often settle for the half-taught lesson in lieu of the content being abandoned all together. The best practice here is to address the question of teacher competency prior to a district’s program adoption and to either find a champion internally or to select a program provider who insists upon professional development as the cornerstone of an impactful and sustainable SEL program. Implementing an intentional and reflective professional development program is key. A “one-shot” train-the-trainer PD session is not enough, as there is only time to cover particular SEL strategies, not to evaluate the practitioner’s overall mastery of the concepts. One can learn “Chopsticks” on the piano, but that does not mean one can model proper technique or, knows how to effectively teach “Chopsticks” to someone else. Intentional professional development gives teachers the space to view themselves through the SEL lens. Are they Self-Aware? Are they able to Self-Regulate? What triggers them while teaching and keeps them from being present and compassionate educators? Unfortunately, Self-Awareness is often not part of the culture of expectations for teachers. There is a perfect storm that subverts teacher SEL competency: a high-stakes testing culture that doesn’t make space for vulnerability paired with an emotion-adverse system that glorifies “busy.” Busy instead of Reflective has become the mantra of schools. Our teachers often feel they are “running on fumes” and do not have time for “one more thing,” even if implementing that one more thing – Social-Emotional Learning – would help them and their students be more engaged and thus achieve more (the very thing that is stressing teachers out in the first place). If teachers have not experienced the value of self-care or self-soothing, they won’t find time for it in their classrooms. They won’t see the connection between SEL and being Ready to Learn because they have not experienced it for themselves.. Teachers cannot model or teach Self-Awareness or Self-Regulation in a school culture that doesn’t honor these concepts as values. As John Hattie astutely observes in his book, Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 MetaAnalyses Relating to Achievement (2009):
School leaders and teachers need to create school, staffroom, and classroom environments where error is welcomed as a learning opportunity, where discarding incorrect knowledge and understandings is welcomed, and where participants can feel safe to learn, re-learn, and explore knowledge and understanding.
