Carl Emery

The impact of trial stage, developer involvement and international transferability on universal social and emotional learning programme outcomes: A meta-analysis.

Abstract This study expands upon the extant prior meta-analytic literature by exploring previously theorised reasons for the failure of school-based, universal social and emotional learning (SEL) programmes to produce expected results. Eighty-nine studies reporting the effects of school-based, universal SEL programmes were examined for differential effects on the basis of: (1) stage of evaluation (efficacy or effectiveness); (2) involvement from the programme developer in the evaluation (led, involved, independent); and (3) whether the programme was implemented in its country of origin (home or away). A range of outcomes were assessed including: social-emotional competence, attitudes towards self, pro-social behaviour, conduct problems, emotional distress, academic achievement and emotional competence. Differential gains across all three factors were shown, although not always in the direction hypothesised. The findings from the current study demonstrate a revised and more complex relationship between identified factors and dictate major new directions for the field.

From Rhetoric to Reality: the problematic nature and assessment of children and young people's social; and emotional learning

There is little doubt of the educational and social merits of developing children and young peoples social and emotional capabilities. But there lacks consensus on what these capabilities are; what should be assessed or shown to have developed over time; and the most appropriate methods for doing this. Through the conceptual framework of ‘social and emotional dispositions and skills’ (SEDS), and based on research in Wales, we present the argument for an alternative assessment methodology designed to challenge dominant discourses in the field and present a ‘minoritarian’ perspective of children and young peoples social and emotional learning. The intention of this paper is to present a rationale for the co‐construction of an understanding of the concept of SEDS and engage in critical debate with researchers and practitioners from a wide range of services for children and young people.