Okay, so I have to admit I had a real ‘aha’ moment today at the Learning and the Brain Conference. To some it may seem like a ‘duh’ moment instead ( I won’t fault you at all for thinking that!) but to me this represented a real shift in my thinking about SEL skills and how we teach them to kids. Here goes:
I was listening to Linda Lantieri, Director of The Inner Resilience Program and part of CASEL, speak about what it looks like, in real and practical ways, to put social and emotional skill acquisition into schools. She started talking about directly teaching SEL skills. I had my initial reaction to this which I always have which goes something like this, “Okay, okay, yes sometimes there’s no other way to teach it but come on, really? Is that how we really want to do it? Wouldn’t we rather strive to have SEL modeled all throughout our school or workplace? Make it something we don’t talk about, something we just alwasys do?”
And then it hit me. Wow! Of course there are very good reasons to teach the skills overtly. The first and foremost one is that it gets us all to TALK about them! What they are, why they are iimportant. Then, as if that wasn’t enough, it gives us a chance to PRACTICE them. This, too, is key! How can we expect anyone, I don’t care if you’re an adult or a child, to use these skills in the real world when the going gets tough and things get dicey if we haven’t practiced them in better, more ideal conditions? If we haven’t said the words out loud, gauged others’ reactions, practiced reading body language and gained confidence in ourselves and our abilities?
I know. See? Duh. But to me I had always envisioned that we were striving towards creating environments where these lessons weren’t necessary. Perhaps that’s still my dream but this seems like quite the practical way to get closer to that, especially when combined with that modeling, integrated approach I like so much. Using both approaches at the same time suddenly seems like a great idea to me. Hmmmm…
Alex Russell
Alex is a Program Manager for Six Seconds focused on effectively increasing emotional intelligence by using a data-driven, evidence-based process for structuring transformation. In addition to her consulting and coaching, Alex conducts research on organizational & school climate and the links between EQ and success.See 34 more posts by Alex Russell
Hey Alex -
It’s so important! The explicit teaching of skills provides a focus and keeps them present – AND it allows us to structure a developmental process of learning. Just as we do with math and language, good SEE (social-emotional education) follows a looping structure where the key competencies are taught in increasing depth appropriate to child development.
Paradoxically, most educators miss the “other side of your Aha.” Typically SEL programs have direct instruction, but miss the more subtle elements you’ve appreciated in this post.
I’d suggest that where most programs fall short is that they:
I’d also suggest that without measurement of the specific competencies, the programs lose focus — you get what you measure. Just as with every other important subject, a measure creates clarity for the educators about how they’re doing to reach key milestones… and feedback to students about their current status. Assessment can, and often is, misused – but when used well it’s valuable.
Thanks for sharing your Aha!
=:-)
-J
Thanks for the insights, Josh! I completely agree. Part of my aversion to the literal ‘toolkit’ and direct teaching methods is attributable to the fact that often when people choose this approach they often forget about the other, more integrated approach. Without a doubt, I think both are necessary. I also think that the ability to affect curriculum with your SEL practices is key, whether it’s choosing to be increasingly child-driven or writing your own lessons from your current curriculum. This helps us see that most material can be taught in a variety of ways, some more effective than others. And, reinforces that sometimes the process really is the content.
One other point I see as very key which you also mentioned is that this is not just about students. It’s about teachers, other staff, parents, siblings, and about climate and environment as well. These skills don’t just apply from 7am until 5pm. Building in time to reflect, both on school practices and personal growth, means this process never ends. Again, back to your mention of the looping structure of good SEE.
Thanks again!
Alex
My experience with the teaching of SEL is that it needs to ahve many layers. the school needs to have a cultural approach to Emotional Intelligence permeated in the school daily life. The staff and principal in particular needs to have a symblic approach i.e walking the talk and creating symbolic moments and artefacts that show that Emotional Intelligence permeates the the school culture and a curriuclum that is planned and owned by staff that directly teaches EQ based on the direct needs of students.
Hi Kaye,
I love the ideas of symbolism and artifacts. I think your point, too, about the curriculum being planned and owned by the staff is crucial. One other thing I hear you saying, too, is that it will look different in every school and that it will look different with every student population – or, as you said, “…based on the needs of the students.” Thanks for sharing!
Alex