Social and Emotional Learning Frameworks: How to Choose?

• In Event: Framework and Assessment Considerations for Social and Emotional Learning

Abstract

Social and emotional learning (SEL) as a field is comprised of a myriad of approaches, recommendations, and resources, including over 136 different frameworks (Berg et al., 2017). Frameworks are helpful tools for organizing thinking, planning, and action; yet this overabundance of theories, models, and taxonomies can be overwhelming, particularly for practitioners interested in adopting and implementing high-quality SEL. As part of a larger project to establish practical social-emotional competence assessments of preschool to high school students, ten criteria for describing and selecting SEL frameworks were identified to help practitioners navigate the multitude of potential frameworks. The goal of this project was to support systems, schools, and community organizations – as well as individual practitioners – working to advance their SEL efforts and improve youth’s social and emotional competencies.
A collaborative, multistep process with multiple experts familiar with SEL frameworks was used to identify criteria. The final rubric of ten criteria resulted from an iterative process which included multiple discussions and reviews from a group of leading scholars and practitioners from several organizations. The criteria were intended to help practitioners consider and prioritize what their particular context needs from a framework to guide the SEL work. Five criteria for conceptual clarity and five criteria for implementation support were identified.
Conceptual clarity refers to the degree to which a framework makes clear distinctions and connections to what is known about SEL. Specificity (1) is the extent to which a framework’s competencies are clearly and specifically defined, which makes designing strategies and locating measures easier. Balance (2) is the extent to which a framework includes a range of intrapersonal, interpersonal, and cognitive competencies as well as knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Developmental (3) is the extent to which a framework utilizes a developmental lens that illustrates that competencies are malleable, how they develop over time, and what they look like at different ages and stages of development. Culturally sensitive (4) is the extent to which a framework is sensitive to and address cultural variations in SEL processes; includes culturally-related competencies that matter for success; and does not favor any one cultural group over others. Empirically grounded (5) is the extent to which the social and emotional competencies named in the framework are based in empirical studies that demonstrate their importance for success in school, work, and life. Implementation support refers to the tools and resources that support effective communication and implementation of the framework, including resources for practitioners (1), for use with and by children and youth (2), and for measurement and data use (3). The extent to which a framework has been empirically tested (4) and intended for practice (5) are also criteria to consider.
A useful framework can provide the foundation for SEL implementation, assessment, and improvement efforts. The ten criteria identified are offered to support practitioners in understanding, prioritizing, and utilizing SEL frameworks in their work. Because few frameworks explicitly reference development, culture, and diversity, this also shows where theory and research could improve and expand.

Author

• Teresa Borowski, University of Illinois at Chicago
  Presenting Author