CITATION: Taylor, R.D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J.A., & Wiessberg, R.P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88(4), 1156–1171. LINKGOAL: The goal of the following research was to determine whether children who were exposed to SEL interventions at school were likely to show positive effects in the long-term.HYPOTHESES: Three hypotheses were tested: there would still be significant outcomes in students who experienced SEL interventions 6 months or more post-intervention, these results would be present in an intersectional sense (SES, race, American v. non-American), and SEL effects on development will predict long term behavior.PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-two classroom-based interventions including 97,406 students were analyzed by the authors. Interventions were conducted in a variety of grade levels ranging from kindergarten to high school, although the largest group in the sample was middle schoolers.RESULTS: Social and emotional assets derived positive results on participants' SEL skills as well as reduced likelihood of conduct problems . Furthermore, there was no effect on the impact of SEL interventions for whether the intervention groups were predominantly white or individuals of color, or even diverse. The same results were concluded with socioeconomic status and nationality of students.
CITATION: Durlak, J.A., Wiessberg, 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. LINKGOAL: The goal of the following research was to analyze the effectiveness of social and emotional learning on numerous categories: academic achievement, emotional skills and regulation, views of oneself, views of other people, social skills, etc. Additionally, the authors focused on a general student body instead of a population consisting of students with noted "adjustment problems."HYPOTHESES: (1) Social and Emotional Learning programs in a school setting develop significant and positive mean effects on a range of skill, attitude, behavior, and academia. (2) Programs run by teachers/school staff would be much more effective than if they were led by non-school professionals, but the most effective would be a combination of both. (3) Programs larger in scope then within the walls of a classroom will be more effective. (4) Programs where instructors using all four of the recommended practices [utilizing a sequential process with steps, active types of learning, focusing enough time on skill development, and explicit learning goals] would be more effective than those who do not. (5) Any issues that occur during implementation of the program will inhibit on it's overall effectiveness. PARTICIPANTS: The researchers analyzed 213 studies pertaining to social and emotional learning programs. This pool consisted of 270,034 students, where more than half of them were in grades kindergarten to fifth. Three-quarters of the studies viewed where published between the years 1990 to 2007. RESULTS: A number of results are derived from this analysis. Students who were exposed to SEL programming saw fewer instances of conduct problems, higher levels of academic performance, and demonstration of attitudes, behaviors, and skills presented through SEL programming were seen. Additionally, SEL programs run by teachers were deemed the most effective, above both those run by non-school personnel and a combination of both teachers and non-school personnel. Programs led by a teacher showed significant and positive results in all six areas of study [academic performance, levels of emotional distress, conduct problems, positive social behaviors, SEL skills, and attitudes]. The programs that encompassed all four of the practices were more effective in all areas of study than those that did not. Programming that did not include these practices only showed significant effects in half of the areas. Lastly, programming with reported implementation issues were less effective than those with no reports. Programs with implementation problems were shown to be effective in two categories of study.
.png){kind=small}