An implicit form of protest? Social-emotional learning and its program implications in a Western Balkans country

• In Event: Contemplative inquiry, holistic learning, and compassionate dialogues across differences

Proposal

Social -emotional learning, (SEL) or social-emotional character development (SECD), finds itself more and more at the forefront of education and school systems that realize the need to provide holistic learning and support the development of all children (Durlak et al, 2017; Greenberg et al, 2003, Domitrovich et al, 2017). Indeed, we’ve seen studies go so far as to suggest that SEL positively influences public health standards by mitigating the effects of trauma and adverse childhood experiences (ACES) in school-age children (Hughes et al, 2017). Yet while there may be a general embrace for integration and embedding practices of SEL in both non-emergency and emergency contexts for children, there has been pushback in some Global North countries for such components to be used in schools, and even a stigma created against the words “social-emotional learning” (Salman, 2022). The usage of even the wording invokes sub-populations being uncomfortable with such practices in educational settings and in creating an environment where children may be too influenced on how to identify, behave, and act. It puts into question what we as societies consider as appropriate for school curriculum and learning and what should instead be taught in other learning settings, such as homes, centers, or places of worship.

However, the results of SEL across school settings, and research studies predominantly done in the Global North, demonstrate far more significant gains of SEL embedded in schools than deficits (Elias et al, 2018). Guidance, practices, and approaches continue to disseminate globally, and coupled with psychosocial support interventions, they are found in various learning programs in both school and humanitarian settings around the world (Jones & Bouffard, 2012; Durlak et al, 2015; Save the Children, 2022). If there is evidence that local, regional, and national systems alike are advocating for social-emotional learning and character development to be significantly embedded in education and other learning settings, and working towards the development of such learning components in those system and conducting capacity building with teachers and school staff, then is this because those systems are suggesting that the social-emotional needs of children are not being addressed elsewhere?

The authors of this paper presentation argue that the implementation and integration of SEL in schools and learning settings can be considered an implicit form of protest. Parents, teachers, adults, and children themselves express that they are not well, that they are not as socially aware and inclusive, self-accepting, and as critically thinking as they should be. They communicate that there are continued struggles with violence, segregation, discrimination, and trauma and that they want change to such issues. What has the capacity to reframe, change the dynamics, and make such shifts? Social-emotional learning certainly does. It’s not alone in addressing such challenges, but it certainly can provide children and adults alike with the skills, attitudes, and competencies to cope, create greater social cohesion, and positively influence social change. By bringing forth SEL, we’re protesting the unique use of a foundational or conventional learning system (Edwards, 2023). By bringing forth SEL as a vital component to holistic learning and development of children in education settings, we’re protesting implicitly to the current gaps in those settings and what we see as necessary for children’s growth.

With such protest comes the importance of collective action. SEL will succeed in integration and implementation if there is willingness and action from the majority of those at the school, community, and even national levels. There must be high involvement, in which everyone sees the benefits of SEL in children’s character building and is willing and able to take such actions to achieve outcomes. Certain countries, such as Serbia, began such protest by redeveloping their education strategies or sector plans so that SEL and collective action were noted. Serbia recognized that schools needed to be involved in children’s upbringing – they can be agents in providing social-emotional learning, which in turn can positively influence upbringing (Strategy for Education Development in Serbia 2030, 2022). Furthermore, recent social events can lead those to take collective action, and again make a push for greater SEL integration in schools. The authors will present how program interventions by two organizations to build school and teacher capacity and to implement SEL take on a collective action approach. It will be shown how program objectives and activities strive to involve everyone, from regional education organizations to school leaders to teachers to parents/caregivers to students. Moreover, the authors will share how participatory action in the SEL programming in Serbia schools can create school-led change and encourage schools to “protest” for the social-emotional needs of their students. Overall, the authors will share how SEL programming interventions in one country can implicitly address some of the protests on social issues and demonstrate collective action at the national, community, and school levels.

Authors

• Katherine Tek, Childhood Education International

• Aleksandra Kalezić Vignjević, Center for Interactive Pedagogy