Inclusive Education for the 21st Century

Teaching and learning build on the components of social, emotional and academic wellbeing (Durlak et al. 2011). Students’ social and emotional capabilities can support and enable their learning; however, they can also hinder students’ academic progress. Given that emotions and relationships directly impact learning and engagement, it is important that educators address these areas for the overall benefit of students (Durlak et al. 2011), thereby encouraging a ‘whole-child’ view of student progress. Social and emotional strategies have shown positive impacts on children’s social-emotional, behavioural and academic outcomes, including the classroom environment (McCormick et al. 2015). This chapter will provide best-practice ways to create a learning community that is inclusive of all students, a community where students are valued and feel safe and supported. In particular, the chapter will explore why and how teachers should implement positive social and emotional learning practices that promote student wellbeing and mental health in the classroom and schoolwide.

According to the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), social and emotional learning (SEL) is the process of acquiring and effectively applying the knowledge, attitudes and skills necessary to learn how to address the complex situations that students face in terms of their academic and social relationships, and their mental wellbeing (Durlak et al. 2011; Zins et al. 2007). SEL provides structures to help students develop emotional and social capabilities, such as understanding and responding to emotions, setting and achieving goals, showing empathy for others, developing and sustaining positive relationships, and contributing to reliable decision-making (ACARA 2013; Taylor et al. 2017). SEL helps individuals establish a sense of self-worth and self-awareness, and contributes to the development of their personal identity. It can also build and deepen a positive school culture and climate.

SEL, Student Wellbeing and Positive Mental Health

In the 21st century, a key challenge for educators involves meeting the diverse and increasingly complex psychosocial and emotional profiles of students in early-years, primary-school and secondary-school settings. When teaching children with diverse learning profiles, educators may come across children with or without disability; children who might be exposed to risk factors associated with trauma backgrounds; children living with a parental mental illness; as well as children who are developmentally vulnerable due to the difficulties associated with poverty and/or social disadvantage. School settings are traditionally seen as a secure base for all children (Whitley et al. 2013). Knowledge, understanding and a repertoire of skills that are sensitive to the social and emotional profiles of all children are central to teaching diverse learners. Social and emotional learning has consistently been identified as an important component of learning for all children—regardless of background or disability—in terms of improving outcomes at school and later in life (Corcoran & Slavin 2016).

Curriculum frameworks

Often social and emotional learning is referred to as the ‘missing link’ in education, frequently taught in isolation from academic work (Elias 2009). However, in recent years there has been a notable shift in education policy worldwide to articulate the central role of schools in supporting emotional and social competencies of children and adolescents. This is evident in well-documented policy and practice frameworks. For example, social and personal skills are emphasised in the Australian Curriculum General Capabilities (ACARA 2013). In the Australian Curriculum, students develop their social and emotional capabilities as they learn about themselves and those around them. They manage their relationships, school and home life, as well as their learning. Social and emotional learning is a core foundation for student learning, engagement and active citizenship (ACARA 2013). The Personal and Social Capability section of the Australian Curriculum General Capabilities states:

Students with well-developed social and emotional skills find it easier to manage themselves, relate to others, develop resilience and a sense of self-worth, resolve conflict, engage in teamwork and feel positive about themselves and the world around them. (ACARA 2013: n.p.)

Policy frameworks

The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (MCEETYA 2008) states that social and emotional learning encourages individuals to be more confident and able students who ‘have a sense of self-worth, self-awareness and personal identity that enables them to manage their emotional, mental, spiritual and physical wellbeing’, with a sense of hope and ‘optimism about their lives and the future’ (MCEETYA 2008: 9). While on a societal level, it supports students to ‘form and maintain healthy relationships’ and prepares them ‘for their potential life roles as family, community and workforce members’ (MCEETYA 2008: 9).

Impact of SEL on students’ outcomes

The Grattan Report (Goss et al. 2017) highlighted that many Australian students are consistently disengaged, and it estimated that approximately 40 per cent of all students in Australian classrooms are unproductive in a given year. Furthermore, disengaged adolescents are more likely to participate in multiple high-risk behaviours, such as substance abuse, violence, self-harm, suicide ideation and sexual risk-taking, including underage and/or unprotected sex (Hale et al. 2014). Children with limited opportunities to develop meaningful and trusting relationships with their peers and teachers are more likely to be exposed to a range of personal, social and academic difficulties at school and later in life.

Reviews and meta-analyses examining the impact of school-based SEL programs have found that well-designed and well-implemented SEL programs are associated with positive social, emotional, behavioural and academic outcomes for children and adolescents (Corcoran & Slavin 2016; Durlak et al. 2011; Jones & Bouffard 2012). In a meta-analysis examining links between SEL programs and student engagement across primary- and secondary-school settings, for example, Roorda and colleagues (2017) found strong associations between effective SEL programs and student engagement. Other research has demonstrated that mastery of social and emotional competencies is associated with student wellbeing and improved academic outcomes (Greenberg et al. 2017). In a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research that explored the effectiveness of school-based SEL interventions on academic outcomes in pre-K–12 classrooms, Corcoran and colleagues (2018) reported that SEL evidence-based interventions produced a positive medium-sized effect for reading, mathematics and science.

SEL literature suggests that self-awareness, social awareness, self-management and organisation, problem-solving, and building and maintaining relationships are critical skills for mastery of social and emotional competencies (Durlak et al. 2011; Jones & Bouffard 2012). As such, effective school-based SEL programs are developed with the view that academic skills are intrinsically linked to children’s ability to manage and regulate emotions, and to communicate and problem-solve challenges and interpersonal conflicts. However, the scope and focus of SEL programs can vary considerably within school contexts (Corcoran & Slavin 2016). Most SEL programs tend to focus on emotional awareness and emotional regulation, alongside cognitive skills that support executive functioning, develop prosocial skills and address aggressive behaviour problems. Some programs might target self-regulated learning with the use of social-skill instruction to address behaviour, discipline, safety and academic outcomes. Others focus on educational interventions, such as bullying prevention (Tucker & Maunder 2015), character education, conflict resolution and social-skills training (Durlak et al. 2011; Greenberg et al. 2017).

Given the differences in terminology and framing, it can be complex for school leaders and classroom teachers to navigate the identification and implementation of SEL programs to facilitate social and emotional learning opportunities across a continuum of need for diverse learners. To address some of the implementation challenges for schools, research has highlighted the need for effective SEL programs to be better integrated into education systems and practice. Integrated SEL programs provide an evidence base for improving student SEL outcomes more than stand-alone programs designed as intensive courses that are offered for blocks of time and implemented by external facilitators (Corcoran & Slavin 2016). Payton and colleagues’ (2008) study demonstrated that SEL programs in primary and secondary settings need a multi-component framework that effectively integrates and targets SEL at a schoolwide level and within individual classrooms (Durlak et al. 2011; Jones & Bouffard 2012).

Reasons for focusing on SEL

Fostering and documenting a student’s skills in the core social and emotional learning components can contribute to positive outcomes for a student’s academic achievement, mental health and school engagement (Payton et al. 2008). In one study, for example, there were improvements in attitudes about self, others and school—as well as gains on academic assessments—when social and emotional skills were actively taught (Frydenberg & Muller 2017). There also can be a reduced risk of student academic failure and a decrease in behavioural challenges and emotional distress at school (Taylor et al. 2017). Finally, the development of SEL in the early school years can have long-term impacts into adulthood (Jones et al. 2015). For example, it can lead to a higher likelihood of an individual attaining a university degree or adult employment, and can reduce the chance of substance abuse or having issues with the law (Jones et al. 2015). Not only does teaching SEL have a positive impact on student learning (Durlak et al. 2011), but it also has a positive impact on teacher satisfaction and SEL. Research suggests that the use of SEL strategies has a positive influence on teachers’ general teaching practices and their wider social conduct (Larsen & Samdal 2012). In a study by Larsen and Samdal (2012), for example, most educators became fairer and more student-focused in their teaching practices, more socially capable and more aware of their students’ profiles and potential challenges as a result of SEL strategies.

Schoolwide and Classroom Approaches

Schools can play a key role in providing students with the opportunity to gain greater social and emotional awareness through positive learning practices that promote student wellbeing and positive mental health in the classroom. However, not all SEL programs are evidence-based. Evidence-based programs are based on rigorous study of the effects or outcomes of specific interventions that report reliable and consistently positive changes (Durlak et al. 2011; Frydenberg & Muller 2017; Payton et al. 2008; Taylor et al. 2017). Key components of SEL programs and practices are largely informed by psychology (Zins et al. 2007) and neuroscience (Shonkoff et al. 2009). In terms of efficacy, research findings vary depending on the design and delivery of the programs. For example, SEL programs could be delivered by teachers or by non-school personnel in a format that supplements academic curricula, or they could be stand-alone programs with unclear links to the academic curricula. SEL program delivery can also vary in terms of frequency. Some, for example, might be delivered on a weekly basis, while others might be delivered as a block of time where SEL is taught over four to six sessions.

Programs also vary in design. Some SEL programs focus on one set of skills, such as recognising and expressing emotions, while others are broader and might include executive function or cognitive regulation. Programs focused on prevention tend to emphasise competencies related to building relationships, managing interpersonal conflict and building resilience. Research has shown that these SEL skills are important in programs that aim to reduce the incidence of bullying in schools and improve the likelihood of positive student outcomes and wellbeing (Greenberg et al. 2003; Marzano et al. 2005). In a meta-analysis examining 231 school-based SEL interventions, Durlak and colleagues (2011) found that SEL programs were more effective in improving student wellbeing and academic success when they were better integrated across school and classroom contexts. However, overall there tends to be a lack of research on the effectiveness of some specific SEL programs, potentially impacting our understanding of whether SEL programs are efficacious or not.

School-based social and emotional programs

The growing interest in SEL programs in schools is driven by research that highlights the importance of recognising and understanding the different and diverse profiles of all learners (Yang et al 2018). In the contemporary classroom, Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model provides a useful framework for understanding the many interrelated biological and environmental factors that can have an impact on students’ personal and academic success (Bronfenbrenner & Morris 2006). From this perspective, children might be struggling at school and may not be meeting their academic potential because certain life events and/or family circumstances are impacting their home environment. We know that family circumstances—such as parental disability, chronic illness, mental-health concerns, domestic violence and social disadvantage (for example, unemployment, poverty or homelessness)—expose children to multiple risk factors that can adversely influence their wellbeing and learning, both at school and later in life (Greenberg et al. 2017; Zins et al. 2007).

Jones and Bouffard (2012) argue that schools should take a new approach to implementing SEL programs. In addition to mapping the key components of SEL programs, they propose a multicomponent framework that addresses the contextual factors that influence social and emotional development and competency in children and adolescents. The SEL framework presented by Jones and Bouffard (2012) highlights the importance of integrating the teaching and reinforcement of SEL skills into daily interactions and practices with students, teachers, school leaders and parents. A key feature of the framework is that it is underpinned by an understanding that children’s SEL skills develop in a complex system of contexts, interactions and relationships. The model outlines three domains of SEL skills: emotional processes, social/interpersonal skills and cognitive regulation. This includes short- and long-term outcomes of SEL, such as academic achievement (e.g. grades, standardised tests of academic skills), behavioural adjustment (e.g. taking others’ perspectives, getting along well with other children, solving conflicts, and exhibiting less aggression and behavioural problems) and emotional health and wellbeing (e.g. lower levels of depression and social isolation). Within a school and classroom context, the model includes school culture and climate, as well as structural features of schools, such as schedule and staffing patterns.

Given the systemic nature of classrooms and schools, evidence suggests that effective SEL approaches should be targeted unilaterally across school contexts (primary and secondary), with the aim of consistently supporting ongoing opportunities for development at different stages of schooling. SEL approaches are strengthened when schools supplement programs with a focus on the daily interactions and practices of teachers across school and individual classroom contexts.

Schoolwide approaches

From a broad systemic perspective, research suggests that the most meaningful way SEL efforts can effectively influence a range of positive student outcomes is to address issues that stem from school culture (Hemmelgarn et al. 2006) and school climate (Thapa et al. 2012). At an organisational level, culture and climate describe the consistent and regular patterns that characterise how members of the school staff (leaders, teachers and non-teaching personnel) think, feel, interact and behave (Durlak et al. 2011; Jones & Bouffard 2012). Culture is shaped by the school’s values and expectations (Yang et al. 2018), whereas climate is mainly associated with teaching practices, attitudes to diversity, and the interactions and relationships between school leaders, teachers, students and parents (Thapa et al. 2012). Specifically, school climate is influenced by the combined impact of these factors on student learning and wellbeing.

As such, a schoolwide approach to SEL can influence changes to culture and climate by magnifying and spreading the positive influence of students and adults with strong SEL skills. However, in order for teachers to help students build social and emotional skills and competencies, it is vital for teachers to have a repertoire of strong SEL skills themselves. Building on Chapter 10, it is therefore critical that school administrators and leaders recognise this dynamic and support SEL initiatives across the whole school community by ensuring that all staff have access to professional-development training and SEL resources.

The Five Key Competencies of SEL

Evidence-based SEL programs are designed and implemented so that the teaching and reinforcement of these skills are integrated into daily interactions and practices with students in the classroom. Five key competencies are taught explicitly and implicitly, practised and reinforced through SEL programming (CASEL 2015) in primary- and secondary-school settings. The five competencies are emotional self-awareness, social awareness, responsible decision-making, self-regulation and relationships skills. Teachers can help students develop social and emotional skills by explicitly teaching these key competencies through formal lessons and intentional teaching.

1. Emotional self-awareness

The aim of teaching emotional self-awareness in children and adolescents is to help them identify and recognise their own feelings; build a feelings vocabulary to help improve emotional literacy; express feelings and find ways to assess the intensity of feelings; understand the relationship between thoughts, feelings and reactions; identify patterns in their own emotional life and reactions; and learn to recognise similar patterns in others. Teachers can also help their students to recognise strengths and weaknesses in themselves and others. While this helps students to build important insights and to develop a sense of self-efficacy and self-confidence, self-awareness is equally about developing realistic expectations of oneself. Collectively, these skills are foundational for building emotional intelligence in children and adolescents, as well as adults.

2. Social awareness

Teachers can teach skills that support the development of social awareness in students. For example, teachers can help students learn to read and interpret social cues; respect and appreciate differences in how people feel and think about things; understand and develop empathy by taking another’s perspective; understand how someone else is feeling in a particular situation, and respond with care and sensitivity; and understand social and behavioural norms in their community (for example, what is and is not acceptable behaviour).

3. Responsible decision-making

Teaching critical-thinking skills, evaluation and reflection is a central component of academic curricula. When children and adolescents are given opportunities to practise problem-solving and responsible decision-making alongside social and emotional learning, they become better equipped to know if a thought or feeling is ‘ruling’ a decision. Applying these insights to issues that involve risk-taking behaviour (such as substance abuse and unprotected sex) is particularly important in adolescence. For children and adolescents, an important part of responsible decision-making is taking personal and ethical responsibility, recognising the consequences of one’s own decisions and actions, accepting feelings (good or bad) and moods resulting from decisions and actions, and following through on commitments (e.g. to study).

4. Self-regulation

The integration of emotional self-regulation skills has become a priority in school-based SEL programs. Research has shown that unmanaged emotional reactions to stress not only lead to behavioural problems in young people but can also create physiological conditions that inhibit learning and development (Bothe et al. 2014; Morrish et al. 2018). Teachers can help children and adolescents by teaching strategies to control impulses and delay gratification; handle stress through exercise, mindfulness and relaxation methods; manage feelings by monitoring ‘self-talk’ to catch negative messages, such as internal put-downs; realise what is behind a feeling (for example, the hurt that underlies anger); practise positive ‘self-talk’, using positive internal dialogue as a way to cope with challenges or to reinforce one’s own prosocial behaviour; use steps for problem-solving and decision-making that involve impulse control, goal-setting, identifying alternative actions and anticipating consequences; and build resilience through persistence and self-motivation.

5. Relationship skills

Positive interpersonal relationships are related to a range of wellbeing indicators and can provide valuable resources to ‘buffer’ individuals from difficult circumstances (Appelqvist-Schmidlechner et al. 2016). Teachers can teach children how to deal with disagreements and help them develop the skills they need to nurture effective interpersonal relationships. Teachers can also facilitate opportunities to develop, build and maintain relationships by teaching children to talk about their feelings effectively; become a good listener and question-asker; distinguish between what someone does or says, and one’s own reactions or judgements about it; send ‘I’ messages instead of assigning blame; use effective non-verbal behaviours, such as communicating through eye contact, facial expressiveness, tone of voice, gestures and so on; and use effective verbal behaviours, such as making clear requests, responding effectively to criticism, resisting negative influences, asking for help when needed, helping others and participating in positive peer groups.

Strategies to develop SEL competencies

The five key SEL competencies of emotional self-awareness, social awareness, responsible decision-making, self-regulation and relationship skills are foundational in children’s primary years (Woolf 2013). These competencies can be reinforced and strengthened throughout their primary and secondary years by implicit teaching approaches that recognise when opportunities and needs arise, and by using everyday strategies to help students learn. These strategies include:

• building relationships: teachers can encourage social norms and expectations related to establishing and maintaining relationships with peers and adults (see Chapter 12);

• teachable moments: identifying and utilising teachable moments, that is, the explicit application and extension of SEL lesson content to other contexts;

• teacher modelling: teachers can help influence and modify how students relate to each other and adults through modelling social and emotional skills through positive interactions with students, colleagues and parents on a day-to-day basis; and

• setting the tone: teachers can set an example of how to manage emotions, stress and conflict through working collaboratively and cooperating with others to problem-solve and negotiate mutually fair resolutions.

It is important to note that students’ emotions in the classroom (e.g. boredom, disengagement) should not be confused with their emotion skills (i.e. social and emotional skills), and, in turn, emotion skills themselves should not be confused with teaching approaches designed to enhance these skills (e.g. social and emotional learning programs). For example, disengagement is an emotional response/reaction, but it is not necessarily reflective of students’ emotional skills (to which SEL refers). Collaborative-learning strategies are evidence-based inclusive teaching practices that actively and explicitly promote and encourage the development of SEL skills, applying the above SEL strategies. However, these learning strategies may not be of benefit to all students. If a teacher is cultivating positive student–teacher relationships (see Chapter 12), then they are likely to be aware of the strategies that would or would not work for their students. For example, with a student who may not engage well with group work, teachers should adjust the task or reconsider this approach.

Collaborative-learning strategies

Collaborative-learning strategies involve and encourage peer-to-peer interaction, rather than focus on teacher-centric communication. Collaborative-learning strategies offer students the opportunity to develop SEL skills while learning new knowledge. Effective SEL strategies provide students with a chance to learn and apply their personal and social skills, and to practise for future social situations. Collaborative-learning tasks necessitate a high level of organisation from the teacher, as they need to facilitate and monitor students’ interactions both with each other and with the academic task at hand. The teacher is an important part of the effectiveness of delivery. The most successful SEL programs are the ones that offer teachers professional development in how to plan and provide SEL in academic activities (Natvig et al. 2003).

Examples of collaborative-learning strategies include student-to-student activities such as role-play and simulation, critical-thinking tasks, skills-development exercises and themed games, paired sharing, small-group work, problem-solving discussions, scenario-based discussions, storytelling, experiential activities and class-wide discussion. Many SEL skills are developed while using collaborative-learning strategies. These include teaching students how to regulate negative emotions, take turns and share, and support responses and interactions with each other (Hromek & Roffey 2009). Teachers and students who are less familiar with using collaborative-learning strategies may need to spend time establishing classroom behavioural expectations, agreements and/or norms for interaction and collaboration; explicit teaching about the use of social and personal skills in paired and group work may also be necessary.

Evidence-based Recommendations

From the aforementioned research and practice, there are four key recommendations for teachers, leaders and policymakers to promote SEL and positive mental health in the classroom and schoolwide.

1. Challenging the academic/non-academic divide in education

Effectively educating all students requires academic and social, emotional and psychological engagement from students, staff, leadership and families. SEL skills are fundamentally interconnected and equally dependent, and they should not be implemented separately from one another. Social competencies are key to a student’s chance to learn and productively engage with the school community. SEL skills should be taught explicitly and be reflected and reinforced in school practices and in curriculum planning. To reduce the academic/non-academic divide, educators may consider assessment processes that reinforce the progress of SEL skills, support students to apply the skills they have developed and show the ways in which education is collaborative and interactive.

2. Developing social, emotional and wellbeing school policies

Policies that support social, emotional and psychological wellbeing are important, as they establish processes and procedures that set a standard of expectation for the school community. All areas of school life are vital to a successful student’s learning experience. Incorporating SEL and mental-health policy alongside educational domains offers a school and its members direction, and ensures that every member of the school community is responsible for creating a positive, safe and inclusive learning environment that is preventive in nature.

3. Establishing practices that maintain relationships and provide mental wellbeing

Some of the most frequently used methods to address student discipline can segregate students from their peers and teachers. For example, suspending or excluding students from their school provides little to no chance for students to grow from or repair their actions (Graham 2018). It also does not offer emotional help. Moreover, students who are at risk—for example, children with disability, and those who are exposed to risk factors associated with their backgrounds—may be disproportionately affected by punitive or zero-tolerance practices. This potentially pushes them into the ‘school to prison pipeline’ (Christle et al. 2005), which in turn does not address the challenging or stressful experiences that may result in behavioural concerns for these students.

4. Supporting educators to become skilled in social and emotional competencies

The use of SEL practices and collaborative-teaching strategies in curriculum development is not the norm for some teachers, schools and communities. Therefore, to deliver SEL curriculum confidently and effectively, teachers need to have adequate time to prepare their curriculum and lessons. They also need continuing professional development to help grow their SEL skills to cultivate classrooms and schools that support the emotional and social needs of students, alongside their academic needs. All educators need to understand the policy rationale and positive benefits of SEL approaches for the teacher, student and school (Payton et al. 2008). Pre-service teachers should have access to increased expertise and knowledge development of SEL skills through their teacher-education programs and professional-experience placements. Confident and effective delivery of SEL programs requires leadership that supports teachers to engage students actively and experientially in the SEL process during and outside of school—encouraging the infusion of SEL in curriculum development.

Conclusion

Research shows that meeting students’ social and emotional needs has a positive impact on their academic achievement, future outcomes and mental health. SEL should not be an add-on to the academic goal of education or taught in isolation from learning; rather, it should be used throughout the curriculum and considered in planning. The social and emotional aspect of learning is interdependent with academic achievement. What matters is whether schools take advantage of these opportunities to educate the ‘whole child’ and provide students with the tools they need to flourish in school, and as citizens of the world. SEL provides an efficient means to address academic, social, emotional and mental-wellbeing needs, while also preparing students to be personally and socially reliable, self-aware and responsive to themselves, their teachers, the school and their community. Every interaction presents an opportunity for students, teachers and leaders to model adaptive behaviours, build SEL skills and foster healthy relationships.

References

Appelqvist-Schmidlechner, K., Liski, A., Pankakoski, M., Solantaus, T., Ojala, T., Kampman, M. & Santalahti, P., 2016, ‘Together at school intervention programme. A pilot study on the feasibility and perceived benefits of a programme focusing on improving socio-emotional skills among schoolchildren in Finland’, International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 127–43

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), 2013, General Capabilities, <www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/generalcapabilities/overview/>

Bothe, D.A., Grignon, J.B. & Olness, K.N., 2014, ‘The effects of a stress management intervention in elementary school children’, Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 62–7

Bronfenbrenner, U. & Morris, P.A., 2006, ‘The bioecological model of human development’, in R.M. Lerner & W. Damon (eds), Handbook of Child Psychology: Theoretical models of human development, 6th edn, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 793–828

Christle, C.A., Jolivette, K. & Nelson, C.M., 2005, ‘Breaking the school to prison pipeline: Identifying school risk and protective factors for youth delinquency’, Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 69–88

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), 2015, CASEL Guide: Effective social and emotional learning programs, <http://secondaryguide.casel.org/>

Corcoran, R.P., Cheung, A.C.K., Kim, E. & Xie, C., 2018, ‘Effective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research’, Educational Research Review, vol. 25, pp. 56–72

Corcoran, R.P. & Slavin, R.E., 2016, Effective Programs for Social and Emotional Learning (SEL): A systematic review, Campbell Library Database of Systematic Reviews, <https://campbellcollaboration.org/media/k2/attachments/Corcoran_SEL_Title.pdf>

Durlak, J.A., Weissberg, R.P., Dymnicki, A.B., Taylor, R.D. & Schellinger, K.B., 2011, ‘The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions’, Child Development, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 405–32

Elias, M.J., 2009, ‘Social-emotional and character development and academics as a dual focus of education policy’, Educational Policy, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 831–46

Frydenberg, E. & Muller D., 2017, ‘SEL approaches that have worked: A case study of the role of formative evaluation’, in E. Frydenberg, A.J. Martin & R.J. Collie (eds), Social and Emotional Learning in Australia and the Asia-Pacific, Singapore: Springer, pp. 371–89

Goss, P., Sonnemann, J. & Griffths, K., 2017, Engaging Students: Creating classrooms that improve learning, <https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Engaging-students-creating-classrooms-that-improve-learning.pdf>

Graham, L.J., 2018, ‘Questioning the impacts of legislative change on the use of exclusionary discipline in the context of broader system reforms: A Queensland case-study’, International Journal of Inclusive Education, pp. 1–21

Greenberg, M.T., Domitrovich, C.E., Weissberg, R.P. & Durlak, J.A., 2017, ‘Social and emotional learning as a public health approach to education’, The Future of Children, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 13–32

Greenberg, M.T., Weissberg, R.P., O’Brien, M.U., Zins, J.E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H. & Elias, M.J., 2003, ‘Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning’, American Psychologist, vol. 58, no. 6–7, pp. 466–74

Hale, D.R., Fitzgerald-Yau, N. & Viner, R.M., 2014, ‘A systematic review of effective interventions for reducing multiple health risk behaviors in adolescence’, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 104, no. 5, pp. e19–e41 Hemmelgarn, A.L., Glisson, C. & James, L.R., 2006, ‘Organizational culture and climate: Implications for services and interventions research’, Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 73–89

Hromek, R. & Roffey, S., 2009, ‘Promoting social and emotional learning with games: “It’s fun and we learn things”’, Simulation & Gaming, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 626–44

Jones, D.E., Greenberg, M. & Crowley, M., 2015, ‘Early social-emotional functioning and public health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and future wellness’, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 105, no. 11, pp. 2283–90

Jones, S.M. & Bouffard, S.M., 2012, ‘Social and emotional learning in schools: From programs to strategies’, Social Policy Report, vol. 26, no. 4 (1075-7031), <https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED540203.pdf>

Larsen, T. & Samdal, O., 2012, ‘The importance of teachers’ feelings of self efficacy in developing their pupils’ social and emotional learning: A Norwegian study of teachers’ reactions to the Second Step program’, School Psychology International, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 631–45

Marzano, R.J., Gaddy, B.B., Foseid, M.C., Foseid, M.P. & Marzano, J.S., 2005, A Handbook for Classroom Management that Works, Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

McCormick, M.P., Cappella, E., O’Connor, E.E. & McClowry, S.G., 2015, ‘Social-emotional learning and academic achievement: Using causal methods to explore classroom-level mechanisms’, AERA Open, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1–26

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), 2008, Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians, <www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf>

Morrish, L., Rickard, N., Chin, T.C. & Vella-Brodrick, D.A., 2018, ‘Emotion regulation in adolescent well-being and positive education’, Journal of Happiness Studies, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 1543–64

Natvig, G.K., Albrektsen, G. & Qvarnstrøm, U., 2003, ‘Methods of teaching and class participation in relation to perceived social support and stress: Modifiable factors for improving health and wellbeing among students’, Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 261–74

Payton, J., Weissberg, R.P., Durlak, J.A., Dymnicki, A.B., Taylor, R.D., Schellinger, K.B. & Pachan, M., 2008, The Positive Impact of Social and Emotional Learning for Kindergarten to Eighth-Grade Students: Findings from three scientific reviews, Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL)

Roorda, D.L., Jak, S., Zee, M., Oort, F.J. & Koomen, H.M.Y., 2017, ‘Affective teacher–student relationships and students’ engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic update and test of the mediating role of engagement’, School Psychology Review, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 239–61

Shonkoff, J.P., Boyce, W.T. & McEwen, B.S., 2009, ‘Neuroscience, molecular biology, and the childhood roots of health disparities: Building a new framework for health promotion and disease prevention’, JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 301, no. 21, pp. 2252–9

Taylor, R.D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J.A. & Weissberg, R.P., 2017, ‘Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects’, Child Development, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 1156–71

Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. & Guffey, S., 2012, School Climate Research Summary: August 2012, School Climate Brief, Number 3, New York, NY: National School Climate Center

Tucker, E. & Maunder, R., 2015, ‘Helping children to get along: Teachers’ strategies for dealing with bullying in primary schools’, Educational Studies, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 466–70

Whitley, J., Smith, J.D. & Vaillancourt, T., 2013, ‘Promoting mental health literacy among educators: Critical in school-based prevention and intervention’, Canadian Journal of School Psychology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 56–70

Woolf, A.M., 2013, ‘Social and emotional aspects of learning: Teaching and learning or playing and becoming?’, Pastoral Care in Education, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 28–42

Yang, C., Bear, G.G. & May, H., 2018, ‘Multilevel associations between school-wide social–emotional learning approach and student engagement across elementary, middle, and high schools’, School Psychology Review, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 45–61

Zins, J.E., Bloodworth, M.R., Weissberg, R.P. & Walberg, H.J., 2007, ‘The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success’, Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, vol. 17, no. 2–3, pp. 191–210