Education Week - July 19, 2017 - 24

LETTERS to
the EDITOR

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 23

behavior, also saw a reduction.
A large-scale meta-analysis of more
than 200 school-based SEL programs
showed positive outcomes in all six areas
reviewed-enhanced social-emotional skills
and attitudes, positive social behavior,
improved academic performance, and lower
levels of conduct problems and emotional
distress.
Several subsequent meta-analyses have
found similar, positive results for socialemotional-learning programs. These new
research syntheses have been conducted
by independent research groups across the
United States and Europe. They examined
hundreds of experimental-control-group
studies involving tens of thousands of
students. All of them included a control
group, and many involved randomizedcontrolled trials.
Bottom line: This SEL research spans
several decades, involves many socialemotional-learning programs around the
world, goes far beyond the "qualitative and
anecdotal" research Finn criticizes, and
considers a broad array of positive and
negative indicators of well-being. Across
hundreds of thousands of children, a
consistent finding is that well-implemented
SEL interventions promote competence
and positive functioning, improve academic
performance, and reduce problem behaviors
in the short and long term.
Roger P. Weissberg
Chief Knowledge Officer, CASEL
Professor of Psychology and Education
University of Illinois at Chicago
Chicago, Ill.

An 'Ill-Informed' Conclusion
To the Editor:
Chester E. Finn Jr.'s scathing essay
comparing social-emotional learning to the
self-esteem movement dismisses socialemotional learning as "faux psychology."
Given the history of education fads, I
understand his critical perspective on
social-emotional learning's popularity,
though I find his conclusions ill-informed.
The No Child Left Behind Act dismissed
the idea of the holistic learner, forcing
educators to focus on students' testable
cognitive skills. Ultimately, NCLB was
an experiment far more costly than any
self-esteem movement. In an effort to
mend the system, educators are ushering
in a new era of engaged, personalized, and
emotionally meaningful learning. We should
view the recognition of the whole child as a
welcome development and support it with
accountability and evidence-based practices.
Finn argues that social-emotional
learning and character are not identical;
on that, he is correct. Character brings
in a strong moral dimension, something
social-emotional learning does not typically
include. While character may have a
place in education, we must be wary
of indoctrinating students rather than

allowing for exploration and choice. SEL
focuses on skills associated with 21st-century
learning and employment. Many of those are
not moral in nature, but some have character
elements, such as empathy, self-management,
and perseverance.
The evidence for social-emotional learning
does exist. While CASEL has done great
work, today's paradigm shift is beyond one
organization. It is a culmination of research
from a range of topics, including neuroscience,
trauma, resiliency, and life skills. Together,
these well-researched fields represent a
strong foundation for social-emotional
learning. For this reason, I call it socialemotional development; it involves not only
learning, but also growth and well-being.
Understanding this groundwork, it is hard
to imagine that social-emotional development
will be a fad similar to the past self-esteem
movement. Being provocative can promote
thinking, but being polemical is not going to
help us seize this moment of innovation.
Gil G. Noam
Founder and Director
The PEAR Institute: Partnerships in Education and Resilience
McLean Hospital
Belmont, Mass.

Focus on Character
To the Editor:
Bravo to the esteemed Chester E. Finn
Jr. for revealing that present socialemotional-learning programs are rooted in
the self-esteem movement and don't build
character. This is understandable, because
the movement is basically seeking to make
a competitive and objective educational
system more student-sensitive-an
admirable effort, but not one that develops
character.
Picture the caterpillar struggling in the
cocoon to develop wings strong enough to
fly as a butterfly. Similarly, children need
to struggle to develop character and gain
the ability and confidence to tackle life
on their own. Social-emotional learning
is an integral part of that character. But
the focus should be on character, not the
present system.
Joseph Gauld

Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio

Founder
The Hyde Schools
Bath, Maine

U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.

SEL Develops Workforce Skills
To the Editor:
U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos
has a history of ignoring evidenced-based
programs that we know help our children
learn, while supporting programs that
have zero evidence of their effectiveness
and only serve to funnel money away from
students. She spent millions peddling
vouchers and supporting for-profit colleges
and brain-performance psychotherapy
without any proof that they help educate
our kids. Recently, her pseudoscience has
spread to other members of her party.
Last month in the pages of Education
Week, former U.S. Department of
Education official Chester E. Finn Jr.
decided to go beyond supporting lackluster
programs and attacked social-emotional-

COMMENTARY POLICY
Education Week takes no editorial positions, but publishes opinion essays and letters from outside
contributors in its Commentary section. For information about submitting an essay or letter for
review, visit

www.edweek.org/go/guidelines.

24 | EDUCATION WEEK | July 19, 2017 | www.edweek.org/go/commentary

learning initiatives that have been linked
to positive outcomes inside and outside the
classroom.
A meta-analysis of over 200 studies
with almost 300,000 students showed
that students who participated in socialemotional-learning programs had an 11
percent gain in academic achievement.
More importantly, a bipartisan working
group found that social-emotional-learning
competencies are needed for students to be
successful once they enter the workforce.
This is one of the reasons why I have
gotten bipartisan support for the Chronic
Absenteeism Act and the Teacher Health
and Wellness Act, both of which advocate
for increased social-emotional learning in
American classrooms. SEL does not just
make sense for students, it also makes
sense for our pocketbooks. Studies show
that it has been proven to yield a return of
$11 for every $1 spent.
Social-emotional learning is a new
framework for tried and true ideas. We
know the best teachers are not "great"
because they get all their students to pass
a test. They are great because they inspire
and teach their students to become more
socially and self-aware. This awareness
of the opportunities that exist across the
world and within themselves is an integral
part of SEL.
Finn falsely described social-emotional
learning as being equivalent to self-esteem.
SEL is about focusing on the whole child
and teaching our students how to make
responsible decisions. It's about looking at
character in addition to content so that the
next generation develops skills that can
transfer across disciplines.
Teachers value social-emotional learning
because it allows them to teach students
the positive social skills needed to build
partnerships. Employers value socialemotional learning because it allows them
to hire dynamic problem-solvers and
effective communicators needed in today's
fast-paced economy.
There is no doubt that we should be
careful not to oversell education research,
but we certainly don't want to deprive
our students of resources that could help
students realize their full potential.

Author Lacks 'Understanding'
To the Editor:
I'm not sure Chester E. Finn Jr.
understands exactly what social-emotional
learning is, based on his Commentary. To
tie it only to self-esteem or to say it "does
not seem intended to build character in
any traditional sense" shows a lack of
understanding of the many dimensions of
social-emotional learning and its proven
ties to academic achievement. Schoolwide
positive-behavior interventions and supports,
or PBIS, have tons of data from schools
all over the world showing that when
you improve student behavior, academic
achievement also improves.
Finn seems to think teaching ethics
and morality are the cornerstones of
emotional competence, which ignores critical
community-building characteristics, such
as respect and responsibility. I would hope
Education Week would publish something
more accurate concerning social-emotional
learning.
Deb Childs
Schoolwide Positive Behavior Support Consultant
Education Plus
St. Charles, Mo.

Emotional Health Opens Doors
To the Editor:
If we lived in a perfect world, all children's
basic needs would be met in safe and
secure homes, with outstanding examples
of responsible decisionmaking, behavior
management, and self-awareness as the
norm. High-quality after-school programs
would be an affordable option in all
neighborhoods, and could ensure kids get
the social and emotional skills they need to
develop into hardworking, courageous, and
patriotic citizens. But we don't. For many
children and families, that world is a hoax.
In the real world, more than half of all
public school students in the United States
come from low-income neighborhoods.
The educators my organization serves
work with these students every day. These
are students whose top stressors include
homelessness, incarcerated family members,
and domestic violence. To equate social and
emotional learning solely with self-esteem is
shortsighted.
Our research shows that when students
from low-income communities engaged even
peripherally in SEL activities, they were more
engaged and confident academically. Lack of
social and emotional skills is an impediment
to learning, and SEL-specific resources can
help. Without those skills, the barriers to
learning loom large. And the very real world
that affects more than half of all kids in public
schools is not a hoax.
Kyle Zimmer
President and CEO
First Book
Washington, D.C.

What the Brain Science Says
To the Editor:
Chester E. Finn Jr. questions the research
connecting social, emotional, and academic
learning without acknowledging the recent
revolution in the science of learning and brain
development.
It's now irrefutable that people learn better
when they are interested, invested, and
engaged. Science also validates that feeling
safe, welcomed, and valued is key to brain and
cognitive development.
This scientific consensus has tremendous
implications for schools. Learning and
youth development depend on the interplay
of knowledge, skills, self-regulation, selfawareness, and the belief that academic work
is both doable and meaningful. If schools target
just one piece, they will make little headway.
Students are most likely to learn and retain
difficult academic content when the social,
emotional, and academic conditions work
together. Students are people first, after all.
It's true that some students excel
academically when educators only pay
attention to academics, but that's because their
social needs and motivational systems are
already aligned with academic success. Most
children go through school with decreasing
interest and investment, leaving K-12
schooling with mediocre knowledge, skills, and
qualifications.
We know that attending to students'
social and emotional development pays
significant dividends. Solid research supports
the connection between students' social
development and academic gains. And eight
in 10 employers say that, while social and
emotional skills are the most important
ingredients to success, they're the hardest to
find in prospective employees.
Science-and kids-tell us that the best way
to make a difference in the lives of students is
by building on how children naturally learn, by
capitalizing on the innate connection between
cognition, social belonging, and emotion. This

http://www.edweek.org/go/guidelines http://www.edweek.org/go/commentary

Education Week - July 19, 2017

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - July 19, 2017