CASEL Research Updates Roger P. Weissberg Linda Dusenbury Jessy Newman October 11, 2011 CASEL Collaborating Districts Initiative Cross-District Meeting, Anchorage, AK Originally titled “The CASEL Review of Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) Programming”

Overview of Today’s Presentation Background on SEL standards Process and criteria for the SEL Program Review Program design Professional development Evidence base Current status Next steps Advanced organizer

Four Components for Promoting Students’ Social and Emotional Learning Clear and developmentally appropriate preK-12 educational standards and benchmarks Evidence-based SEL curricula and instruction to achieve those goals Professional development for educators to support high-quality programming Assessment that allows teachers to monitor and promote student progress.

Preschool State Learning Standards Ohio does not have SEL stand

Alaska Standards for Social and Emotional Development (Birth-5 years) Social Development Interactions with adults Interactions with peers Adaptive social behavior Appreciating diversity Emotional Development Self-concept Self-efficacy Self-control Emotional expression Talk about Alaska at the state level because we are in Anchorage

K-12 State Learning Standards IL is the only state with free-standing comprehensive standards for social and emotional learning

Illinois Social & Emotional Learning Standards SEL Goal 31 Develop self-awareness and self-management skills to achieve school and life success. SEL Goal 32 Use social-awareness and interpersonal skills to establish and maintain positive relationships. SEL Goal 33 Demonstrate decision-making skills and responsible behaviors in personal, school, and community contexts. Self Other Decision-making 2005 7

Anchorage SEL Standards

Collaborating Districts Initiative: SEL Standards Anchorage has implemented PreK–12 SEL and cultural responsiveness standards and has developed a Six-Year SEL Instructional and Evaluation Plan. Austin has a completed SEL scope and sequence for elementary school grade levels that will be implemented in the coming school year. Cleveland has started to develop a PreK–12 SEL scope and sequence and has SEL goals reflected in the school improvement process.  

Safe & Sound: An Educational Leader’s Guide to Evidence-based SEL Programs 80 multiyear SEL classroom-based programs 22 CASEL Select SEL Programs Reviewed program design, professional development, and evidence of effectiveness Over 150,000 downloads

Since 2003, the field of social and emotional learning has developed and matured 2004 Publication of Building Academic Success on Social and Emotional Learning. What Does the Research Say? (Zins, Weissberg, Wang, & Walberg) 2005 Illinois establishes K-12 student learning standards in social and emotional learning 2006 Publication of Sustainable Schoolwide Social and Emotional Learning: Implementation Guide and Toolkit (Devaney, O’Brien, Resnik, Keister, & Weissberg) 2010 CASEL commits to advancing a national implementation of evidence-based preschool to high school social and emotional learning programming 2011 Publication of The Impact of Enhancing Students’ Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta-Analysis of School-Based Universal Interventions (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger) Introduction of the Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning Act (H.R. 2437) A lot has happened since 2003. New programs developed. New evaluation studies were conducted. A lot of pivotal events occurred, as well, which needed to be incorporated into the kind of review we had done with Safe and Sound. Here’s a little chronology of some of the more significant events. But the point I want to make as I go through them is that because of developments in the field it was time to update Safe and Sound.

Goals for the SEL Program Review Establish a common framework for evaluating evidence-based SEL Communicate clear messages to program providers, researchers, and educators about quality programming and implementation Review SEL programs and offer guidance for identifying, selecting, implementing, integrating, and sustaining appropriate strategies

Search Processes for Identifying Effective SEL Programs Various search methods for identifying programs Publishing “call for evaluations” Consulting major national reviews (NREPP, WWC, OJJPD) Contacting researchers from CASEL’s meta-analysis Contacting developers or marketers Contacted 170 Pre-K – 12 programs 100 programs submitted evaluations Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Program Design: Approaches that Foster Social, Emotional, and Academic Learning Explicit instruction in social and emotional competencies that can be broadly applied Domain-specific problem-prevention or promotion programming Integration of SEL with academic content Engaging pedagogies and supportive learning environments

Program Design: Social and Emotional Skill Emphases Self-awareness Self-management Social awareness Relationship skills Responsible decision-making

Program Design: Opportunities for Practice and Generalization Information only? Practice within the lesson only? Practice beyond the lesson? Generalization beyond the lesson Classroom-wide School-wide School-family partnerships School-community partnerships

Evidence of Effectiveness Uses an experimental-control group design Has significant positive student outcomes in one or more of the following categories: Positive social behavior Conduct problems Emotional distress Academic performance

The Importance of Evaluation: Available Assessment Tools Implementation Tools General implementation guidelines or procedures Teacher self-monitoring tools Classroom observation tools Student Outcomes Measurement Tools Summative Formative

Professional Development & Training Does the program provide quality training and support for teachers and administrators? Initial training On-site coaching In what formats? Onsite Distance learning Are train-the-trainer approaches available? What is the average cost of training and materials?

Current Status of the Review Evaluation and program design reviews are almost complete for 28 programs Grade Level % of programs Prekindergarten 32% Elementary (K-5) 82% Middle (6-8) 57% High (9-12) 25% Because programs often cover more than one grade level, the sum of the numbers presented here is greater than the total number of programs reviewed.

Currently Being Used in Collaborating and Affiliated Districts 4Rs (Youngstown) Caring School Community (DuPage) PATHS (Cleveland) Resolving Conflict Creatively Program (Anchorage) Responsive Classroom (DuPage) Ripple Effects (Cleveland) RULER Program (Cleveland, adopted not yet implemented) Second Step (Austin)

Program Characteristics Program Name Available Grades Lessons per Year 4R’s PreK – 8 27 Caring School Community K – 6 30-35 class meetings PATHS PreK, K – 6 119 Resolving Conflict Creatively Program K – 8 16 Responsive Classroom n/a Ripple Effects 2 – 11 390+ (flexible) RULER 10-15 “feeling words” Second Step 13-25

Coverage of Social and Emotional Competencies Program Name Self -Awareness Self -Management Social Awareness Relationship Skills Responsible Decision -Making 4R’s  Caring School Community PATHS RCCP Responsive Classroom Ripple Effects RULER Second Step All programs cover all five competencies

Implementation Monitoring Tools Student Outcomes Measures Evaluation Tools Program Name Implementation Monitoring Tools Student Outcomes Measures 4R’s  Caring School Community PATHS Resolving Conflict Creatively Program Responsive Classroom Ripple Effects RULER Second Step All programs provide tools to monitor implementation and assess and promote student progress

Next Steps Continue reviewing additional programs Identify new programs that should be in the review Disseminate findings Continue to refine and expand the review to meet the needs of program providers, researchers, and educators going forward