i
Running Head: Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Middle School Teachers’ Perceptions of Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student
Behavior

Doctoral Capstone Project
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Education (EdD)

Stefan Muller
Penn West University of Pennsylvania
July 2024

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

ii

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

iii

Acknowledgement
This journey did not come without its share of trials and tribulations, but I certainly
would not have been able to complete this endeavor without the encouragement, support and
love from so many others. I am deeply grateful to the following individuals whose inspiration
have been invaluable throughout this journey:
First and foremost, I extend my deepest appreciation to my wife, Haylee, for her endless
patience, steadfast support, and unwavering belief in me. Her love has been my rock, and her
understanding has sustained me through the challenges of this venture.
To my children, Chase, Viva, Saige, and Marigot, your presence and love have constantly
reminded me of what truly matters in life. Your joy and laughter have brought light to even the
darkest moments of my doctoral pursuit. Thank you for inspiring me to persevere and for being
my greatest motivation.
I am indebted to my committee chair, Dr. Keruskin, for his guidance, continuous
feedback, and constant encouragement throughout this research project. His insights and
expertise have been instrumental in shaping this dissertation.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my external committee member, Dr.
Diègue, for her friendship, support, and valuable contributions to my academic and personal
growth. Her dedication to my success has been truly inspiring.
I want to acknowledge TMB for the persistent push towards growth and excellence.
Your mentorship and belief in my abilities have been instrumental in shaping my academic path.
I would be remiss if I didn’t thank my Penndale Team for supporting this journey by
completing surveys and facilitating SEL lessons throughout the school year. There are certainly
more useful ways to utilize the fleeting moments that we have, but you selflessly made time to
help a colleague.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

iv

To all of you – including those who have been a part of my professional journey at
Upper Moreland, Downingtown, North Penn, and Knapp – I offer my deepest thanks. Your
support has been the cornerstone of my growth as an educator, and I am profoundly grateful for
each of you.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

v

Table of Contents
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ v
List of Tables .................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... ix
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER I. Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1
Background ..................................................................................................................... 2
Capstone Focus ............................................................................................................... 3
Research Questions ........................................................................................................ 4
Expected Outcomes ........................................................................................................ 4
Fiscal Implications ........................................................................................................... 4
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER II. Review of Literature ........................................................................................ 6
The Purpose of Social Emotional Learning and Character Education ............................. 6
History of Social Emotional Learning in Schools ........................................................... 12
The Evolution of Social Emotional Learning within Educational Frameworks ............. 14
Case Studies on SEL....................................................................................................... 19
The Emergence of Specific Social Emotional Learning Programs and Approaches ...... 21
Challenges and Limitations of Social Emotional Learning ............................................ 26
Critiques of Social Emotional Learning ......................................................................... 30

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

vi

Future Direction and Implications of Social Emotional Learning ................................. 33
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 37
CHAPTER III. Methodology ................................................................................................ 39
Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 39
Setting and Participants ................................................................................................ 42
Intervention and Research Plan .................................................................................... 46
Research Design, Methods, and Data Collection .......................................................... 48
Validity .......................................................................................................................... 54
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 56
CHAPTER IV. Data Analysis and Results ............................................................................ 57
Teacher Self-Assessment and Questionnaires.............................................................. 57
Data Analysis of Questionnaire..................................................................................... 60
Data Analysis of Student Behavioral Data .................................................................... 69
Results ........................................................................................................................... 70
Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 73
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 75
CHAPTER V. Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................. 76
Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 76
Research Question One ............................................................................................ 76
Research Question Two ............................................................................................ 80

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

vii

Research Question Three.......................................................................................... 81
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 83
Recommendations for Future Research ....................................................................... 86
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 88
References ........................................................................................................................ 90
Appendices........................................................................................................................ 95
Appendix A. IRB Approval ............................................................................................. 96
Appendix B. IRB Proposal .............................................................................................. 97
Appendix C. Participation Consent Form ...................................................................... 98
Appendix D. Teacher Self-Assessment Questionnaire.................................................. 99
Appendix E. NPSD District Research Approval Letter ................................................. 104

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

viii

List of Tables

Table 1. Data Collection Plan and Timeline……………………………………………………………………………….53
Table 2. Teacher Questionnaire Pre-Survey: Average Score of Each Domain…………………………….64
Table 3. Teacher Questionnaire Post-Survey: Average Score of Each Domain…………………………..65
Table 4. Teacher Questionnaire Surveys: The Change in Average Score of Each Domain………….72

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

ix

List of Figures
Figure 1. Interactive CASEL Wheel…………………………………………………………………………………………….8
Figure 2. Positive Action Effects on School-Level Indicators…………………………………………………….16
Figure 3. Positive Action Effects on Standardized Test Scores………………………………………………….17
Figure 4. Tiered System of Social Support………………………………………………………………………………..22
Figure 5. Program Selection Process………………………………………………………………………………………..26
Figure 6. The Prosocial School Leader………………………………………………………………………………………29
Figure 7. Pre-survey Participants’ Years of Experience……………………………………………………………..44
Figure 8. Post-survey Participants’ Years of Experience……………………………………………………………45
Figure 9. Sample question from the Teacher Self-Assessment and Questionnaire…………………..50
Figure 10. Post-survey Question: Teachers’ Perception on Importance of Implementing SEL
During the Instructional Day……………………………………………………………………………………………………61
Figure 11. Pre-survey Question: Teachers’ Willingness to Incorporate SEL in the Classroom…..62
Figure 12. Post-survey Question: Teachers’ Belief in Effectiveness of SEL……………………………….63
Figure 13. Teacher Self-Reflection Questionnaire Survey Data: Student-Centered Discipline….66
Figure 14. Teacher Self-Reflection Questionnaire Survey Data: Warmth and Support…………….68
Figure 15. Penndale State Reported Discipline by Year, by Semester………………………………………69
Figure 16. Change in Staff Perception of SEL………………………………………………………………..…………73

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

x

Abstract
With an ever-increasing mental health concerns and social-emotional needs of adolescents, it is
more important than ever for schools to go beyond academics, and therefore, it is imperative to
provide a universal social-emotional curriculum for students. Despite limited resources and the
logistical challenges of scheduling additional content during the academic day, school districts
must prioritize social-emotional learning in the same manner as core content as ELA and
mathematics. Using a mixed-methods approach, this research study honed in on middle school
teachers’ perception of SEL and its impact on student behavior. Qualitative data was collected
from self-reflection pre- and post-surveys so that the researcher could better comprehend the
depth of teacher’s understanding of SEL and its purpose. Quantitative data was gathered from
the surveys to show to identify how effective staff felt an SEL curriculum is for students and to
what degree they would be willing to implement an SEL curriculum during the instructional day.
Additionally, student behavioral data, in the form of state reportable offenses, was collected
before and after the implementation of the School-Connect SEL curriculum and then analyzed
and compared to see if there was a causal relationship. Although there was no clear correlation
between the SEL curriculum and a decrease in student behavior, there was, however, a positive
change in teacher perception of SEL. At the inception of the SEL, general optimism existed as
staff expressed a willingness to facilitate SEL lessons and saw value in the curriculum. The postsurvey results saw that optimism evolve into enthusiasm to continue with the School-Connect
SEL platform, as staff perceived SEL to be effective and were far more willing to facilitate the
social-emotional learning lessons with their students. However, the research did not come
without limitations, and therefore, further studies are recommended to better understand the
impact of SEL on student behavior, and ultimately, student achievement.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

1

CHAPTER I. Introduction
Introduction
This study examines the purpose and potential impact that social emotional learning
(SEL) has on student behavior and identifies the perceptions that teachers have of an SEL
framework within the middle school level. Middle school students face many inherent challenges
beyond transitioning from elementary school which include physical changes due to varying
hormonal levels, finding a sense of belonging, navigating the social pressures from peers, and
preparing for a transition to high school, to name a few.
Due to the waning mental health of our students and the increased need for therapeutic
services both in and out of our schools, it is more critical than ever to provide proactive,
intentional opportunities for students to develop their social and emotional skills during the
instructional day. No longer can we simply encourage students to seek outside services and
support; rather, we need to be intentional about embedding SEL curriculum as a proactive, Tier 1
support into the school day for students. It is important to understand the perception of
teachers before and after SEL implementation to discover what factors are conducive to a
successful, systemic framework for social emotional learning for our students.
Schools no longer are tasked with educating students of reading, writing and arithmetic
skills. Rather, educational communities have been charged with shaping the whole child by
teaching social and emotional skills such as self-awareness, positive decision-making, and
appropriately handling social interactions with peers and adults. Instead of expecting students
already possess the necessary skills to be successful learners and productive members of society,
schools have a unique opportunity to proactively model dialogue concerning one’s feelings and
emotions that might otherwise be suppressed by students.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

2

The incorporation of a social emotional curriculum in schools is vital for the wellrounded development of students, leading to improved academic outcomes, better mental
health, and the cultivation of skills that will serve them well throughout school-based
experiences. The skills learned through SEL are not just valuable in school but are also applicable
throughout life. These skills can improve relationships, job performance, and overall well-being.
Background
The North Penn School District, located in Lansdale, Pennsylvania, is one of the largest
school districts in the state, serving over 12,700 students and covering about 42 square miles.
Situated 25 miles north of Philadelphia, the suburban district employs over 1,300 employees.
The North Penn School District is a diverse school district with more than 80 languages spoken
by its families, a non-white population eclipsing 50%, and just over 30% of its students enrolled
in the free and reduced lunch program. The district has 13 elementary schools, three middle
schools, and one high school that graduates about 1,000 students each school year.
The grade level structure of North Penn is unique and noteworthy given the focus of the
Capstone being at the middle school level. The elementary schools in the district span grades
kindergarten through 6th grade, whereas the middle schools house students in 7th through 9th
grades. The North Penn School District stands out as the last remaining school district in
Montgomery and Bucks counties to retain their 9th grade students within its middle school walls.
Currently the researcher is the principal of Penndale Middle School, the largest of the
three middle schools within the North Penn School District with a student enrollment of 1,250
students. As an administrator for ten years, the researcher’s experiences have spanned across
all three levels, having served as a high school assistant principal, an elementary school
principal, and now in their current role as the principal of a middle school. The researcher has
seen SEL work well at the elementary level and believes that, now more than ever, students

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

3

need to continue having open dialogue about self-management, responsible decision-making,
and social awareness.
Capstone Focus
The purpose of the action research is to understand the perceptions that middle school
teachers have, as well as their understanding, of Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) prior to fully
implementing an SEL curriculum in the classroom setting, implement SEL, and then see if it
changed perception and/or had an impact on student behavior. During the research study, a
mixed-methods approach will be used to extrapolate quantitative and qualitative data to see if
there is a correlation between SEL and state reportable discipline data.
Perceptual data will be obtained from teachers using a survey prior to SEL
implementation and then following SEL implementation. This qualitative feedback will provide
the researcher with information related to teachers’ perceptions of SEL and their belief, or not,
in its impact on student behavior and decision-making. Additionally, student behavioral data will
provide a before and after snapshot of the SEL curriculum in the classroom and whether student
discipline data increased, decreased, or remained stagnant after implementation. The
disciplinary data will be that which are ‘state reportable’ offenses, most notably behaviors that
lead to suspension, and thus, must be reported to the Pennsylvania Department of Education
(PDE). More specifically, the discipline data from the 2022-23 school year and the first semester
of the 2023-24 school year will be compared with data from the second semester of the 2023-24
school year after implementation of the SEL curriculum.
The districtwide SEL Core Team spent countless hours sifting through several different
SEL programs. After researching various SEL curricula and site visits to other schools
implementing an SEL program, the selected SEL platform was School-Connect. This program is
rooted in the CASEL framework and offers lessons designed for students at the secondary level.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

4

Although teachers will utilize a scope and sequence curated by the Core Team, the plethora of
resources within the School-Connect program will allow for some teacher autonomy beyond the
primary lesson.
Research Questions
The following research questions will be used in this study:
1. How do teachers perceive the effectiveness of SEL and its impact on student behavior?
2. Does the implementation of a specific, research-based SEL curriculum have a positive
impact on student behavior?
3. How does the implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum influence staff
perceptions on student behavior in their classroom?
Expected Outcomes
The expected outcome of this research study is to understand the perception of middle
school teachers regarding the efficacy of SEL, and how that perception changed after seeing an
SEL curriculum being implemented. Also, student behavior data will let the researcher determine
if SEL impacted student behaviors. If the data shows a decline in state reportable behavioral
referrals and/or increased teacher belief in SEL, the North Penn School District is far more likely
to endorse the School-Connect program and the SEL efforts of the middle schools within the
district.
Fiscal Implications
There is a financial commitment associated with the School-Connect platform; however,
the price is significantly lower than some other comparable products that were researched. The
total cost for the annual school license is $3000 which included all lessons, ancillary resources,
and staff training. All costs were covered through the respective site-based building budget, and

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

5

if the program is successful, there would be no additional costs beyond the annual license and
time spent on creating internal professional development.
Summary
Chapter I introduces the importance of social emotional learning for the betterment of
students and their mental health and lays out a potential path for a positive correlation between
the implementation of an SEL program and decreased negative student behaviors. In Chapter II,
peer reviewed journals will set the stage for the Capstone research study by providing the
history of character education in the public school system. The literature review also includes
numerous studies that show the need for continued research in social emotional learning.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

6

CHAPTER II. Review of Literature
Review of Literature
The Purpose of Social Emotional Learning and Character Education
Social emotional learning is of paramount importance for students in schools because it
equips them with essential life skills beyond academic knowledge. SEL lessons, especially when
facilitated by educators, foster emotional intelligence, empathy, self-awareness, and effective
communication, enabling students to navigate complex social interactions and build meaningful
relationships. It enhances their ability to manage stress, make responsible decisions, and set and
achieve goals, contributing to their overall well-being and mental health. Moreover, SEL can
help in promoting a positive and inclusive school environment, potentially reducing student
disciplinary infractions, incidences of bullying, and fostering a sense of belonging. By cultivating
these skills, students are better prepared for success in both their academic pursuits and future
endeavors, supporting their growth as emotionally resilient and empathetic individuals capable
of thriving in an interconnected world.
There is a heightened demand for preventative programs and protective elements in
schools, especially for schools in low-income communities, where students often face stressors
linked to socioeconomic challenges and potential childhood trauma. These include the presence
of caring adult role models to ensure success in academic and social aspects of life. Many
schools recognize the need to help students deal with trauma by prioritizing their social,
emotional growth and character development (MacDonnell et al., 2021, p. 2). In fact, according
to the CDC, one in six children under the age of eight years old have been diagnosed with a
mental health disorder, and schools are in a unique position to address student needs because
of their accessibility to adolescents (Perryman et al., 2020, p. 113). These proactive initiatives

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

7

come in various forms, with the most widely researched and supported approach being an
explicitly taught social-emotional learning (SEL) curriculum within the classroom.
Most social-emotional learning curricula are founded on the Collaborative for Academic,
Social, and Emotional Learning’s (CASEL) five basic competencies of self-awareness, selfmanagement, responsible decision-making, social awareness, and relationship skills. According
to the CASEL website:
Social and emotional learning (SEL) is an integral part of education and human
development. SEL is the process through which all young people and adults acquire and
apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage
emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others,
establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring
decisions. (CASEL, 2023, para. 1)
The Interactive CASEL Wheel shows the five basic competencies - self-awareness, selfmanagement, responsible decision-making, social awareness, and relationship skills – and their
interconnectivity to the classroom, schools, families, and the community. An SEL curriculum
alone does not guarantee student success. Rather, an ideal scenario exists when home, school,
and community partnerships exist, working together to promote healthy educational
communities. Below, Figure 1 shows the interconnectivity of the five SEL core competencies and
the classroom, the school, the family, and the community.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

8

Figure 1
Interactive CASEL Wheel

Note. This figure shows the five SEL competencies and the nexus between classrooms, schools,
families, and the community (CASEL, 2023, https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/).
An essential component to a positive school environment revolves around the
interactions between students and their teachers. Research shows the profound influence of
positive student-teacher relationships on various aspects of students' lives, including their
behavior, attitudes, and attendance. When students experience a sense of connection to their
school and develop positive relationships with both their peers and staff, it enhances their
motivation and engagement in academic pursuits. Furthermore, students who perceive
themselves as having strong, close relationships with their teachers tend to exhibit a heightened
sense of intentional goal setting and emphasizes the far-reaching impact of these connections in
the educational environment (MacDonnell et al., 2021, pp. 3-4).

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

9

The CASEL wheel, as shown in Figure 1, outlines the competencies as a continuum. The
continuum is represented by orange, yellow, and green coloring. The entry point for social
emotional lessons begins with the basics of self-awareness and self-management, and CASEL
argues that it is necessary for students to first be aware of themselves and who they are before
developing higher-level social emotional skills such as responsible decision-making (yellow),
relationship skills, and social awareness (green). Over time, through consistent reinforcement
and feedback, adolescents begin to identify how their choices impact outcomes for the peers
and adults in which they interact (CASEL, 2023).
When SEL curricula are explicitly taught in educational environments, student gains are
typically reported in academic achievement due to improved behaviors. Conversely, what is
more glaring, is that the absence of SEL programs in schools contributes to a negative trend in
outcomes for students, including more behavioral referrals, lower academic achievement, and
even higher dropout rates. The research points to SEL as not only a proactive student measure,
but also a protective safety net for students, especially those from lower socioeconomic settings
(Eklund et al., 2018, p. 317).
Although SEL and character education programs have existed in schools for decades, the
pandemic has fast tracked the conversation regarding students’ mental health needs which is
now front and center in education circles. Adolescents found themselves engaging far less with
their peers due to social restrictions. The COVID-19 pandemic’s inherent effects led to feelings
of isolation, limiting the necessary social interactions among children as they develop their
social and emotional competence.
Emotional competence refers to two broad skills: the ability to understand, express, and
regulate one’s own emotions, and the ability to understand others’ emotions. Social
competence refers to the ability to interact pro-socially and effectively with others.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

10

Prosocial behaviors benefit others and promote harmonious relationships, in contrast to
antisocial behaviors that harm others and disrupt social groups. (Bergin et al., 2023, p.
48)
Beyond academic achievement and reduction in behaviors, explicitly teaching the five
core CASEL competencies has benefits for students beyond the classroom. Developing
interpersonal skills has a benefit as young students become teenagers and then later adults in
such realms as college, and most importantly in their career endeavors. Employers in nearly all
career fields are consistently seeking out individuals who demonstrate the ability to resolve
conflict, manage their emotions appropriately, and display empathy for others. When these
skills are modeled by adults and explicitly taught to students in the academic setting during
adolescence, more productive citizens enter the work force. More socially and emotionally
competent adults leads to a stronger work force, and thus, leads to positive economic outcomes
for society (Bergin et al., 2023).
Beyond the student gains that an SEL framework might bring, there are benefits for the
adults in the educational environment who are delivering the SEL lessons as well. As educators
engage in SEL lessons, and more importantly, conversations with students that build deeper
relationships among teacher and student, research shows that more positive outcomes occur
for the adults, indirectly. These emboldened relationships typically lead to more prosocial
interactions amongst the students as they make better choices, manage their emotions more
effectively, and further engage academically in the classroom. In turn, this circle of positivity
increases teachers’ feelings of value and self-worth and can lead to less teacher burnout
(Schonert-Reichl, 2019, p. 225).
Many advocates of social-emotional learning argue that SEL programs in schools are a
matter of public health more than augmenting an individual community’s values. This notion is

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

11

supported by several arguments, most notably being that schools house a captive audience of
impressionable adolescents systemically for much of their formative years. In many cases, these
adolescents spend more awake hours in the school system than they do in their own homes,
providing plenty of time to introduce students to positive decision making and emotional
regulation. Most importantly, schools have the unique opportunity to present SEL interventions
at the universal level, providing all students with the same core concepts to support positive
decisions that promote and sustain the welfare and public health of all individuals (Greenberg et
al., 2017, p. 14).
In many cases, societal interventions that address measures of public health are often
extremely expensive and are inherently reactive in nature. SEL programs in schools, when
universally applied, proactively benefit all and are relatively inexpensive. Consider issues with
addiction and the war on drugs in America. For decades this has been a losing battle with a high
price tag. Most interventions that target drug addiction and alcoholism are reactive to the needs
of the addict, and rarely proactive as a preventative measure. When SEL programs are applied to
school curricula, a substantial portion of society’s most impressionable members are inundated
with coping strategies and healthy outlets for their stressors (Greenberg et al., 2017, p. 18).
In the medical world, this is known as the ‘prevention paradox,’ which argues that it is
more important to focus on the larger population to prevent issues, rather than simply focusing
on a smaller, at-risk population. Using this example, a better public health strategy to mitigate
lung cancer is an advertisement campaign that targets all members of society to quit smoking or
to never start, rather than focusing efforts simply on smokers who are admitted as patients with
adverse health concerns due to smoking. This same paradigm should be applied to our schools
within our American education system to prevent young people from exploring risky behaviors
(Greenberg et al., 2017, pp. 20-21).

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

12

In tandem with the promotion of mental well-being, the acquisition of emotional
wellness skills empowers students to not only acknowledge but also comprehend and regulate
their emotions. The cultivation of emotional intelligence assumes a pivotal position in fostering
positive connections with others, as it aids in conflict resolution and developing empathy.
Through the development of these essential skills, students can enhance their ability to
communicate, establish resilient support systems, and foster a positive social environment.
Moreover, these competencies provide students with invaluable tools for effectively managing
stress, anxiety, and various mental health challenges, thereby helping students navigate the
intricate landscape of academic and personal life with greater resilience and efficacy (Whalen &
Moore, 2023).
History of Social Emotional Learning in Schools
Character education is not new to education circles, and in fact, the term was coined in
the early part of the 20th century and debated by many on how character education should, or
should not be, introduced in American schools. In the 1920’s, some believed that students
should recite mantras in various forms – pledges, school codes, and slogans – while others felt
that schools should focus on building character throughout daily, relevant occurrences during
the school day. In its infancy, however, there was little discussion surrounding character
education as a standalone curriculum weaved into the instructional aspect of schooling (Milson,
2000, p. 89).
American philosopher and educator, John Dewey, strongly argued that character
education and the teaching of ‘morals’ should be indirectly taught through various social
situations and group tasks while learning in school. His push for teaching morals in schools
caught on in society, however, the definition of morality varied among many different groups in
society. Although more than two-hundred character education programs existed in American

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

13

schools, these programs were nothing more than theories on how to improve one’s morals,
character, and/or values. With a common belief in teaching these value systems in schools,
Columbia University spent five years researching and studying the many character education
programs in schools nationwide in what became known as the “Character Education Inquiry”.
The report from Columbia University concluded that character education programs were
ineffective, and as a result American society began to distance itself from specifically addressing
character education in schools.
Decades later, in the 1960’s and 1970’s, after little to no movement in the character
education realm, there was a societal push for other approaches in education. As the United
States was experiencing much political turmoil, society was questioning its preconceived
definition of morality and began shifting its focus towards individualism. In turn, the American
educational system was experiencing a shift of its own to other values-based programs, most
notably the following three: values clarification method, the cognitive-development theory, and
the ethical reasoning approach.
The values clarification approach focused on helping students identify and understand
their own values. Through reflective activities and discussions, students learned to articulate
their beliefs and make informed decisions aligned with their moral viewpoints. This approach
emphasized self-discovery and personal responsibility. Cognitive-development theory held that
moral reasoning evolves with cognitive development through adolescence, suggesting that as
students mature intellectually, their ability to engage in more sophisticated moral reasoning
would increase. Educators using this approach wanted to foster cognitive growth by presenting
ethical dilemmas that challenged students to think critically and develop higher-order moral
reasoning skills. Conversely, the ethical reasoning approach emphasized teaching students a
systematic and principled method of ethical decision-making. Drawing from ethical theories,

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

14

students learned to analyze situations, consider alternative perspectives, and make ethically
sound choices. This approach sought to give students a framework for evaluating moral issues
consistently and thoughtfully (Balch, 1993).
Although the tenets of social-emotional learning have been around forever, the term
itself was not officially coined until 1994 by the Collaborative to Advance Social and Emotional
Learning (CASEL). To promote healthy choices and positive decision-making, CASEL instituted its
five core competencies of self-awareness, self-management, responsible decision-making,
relationship skills, and social awareness. Rather than focus on defining morals, ethics, or values
for students, the organization sought to highlight understanding of self, regulating one’s
emotions in a positive manner, and acting in ways that were universally regarded as positive
towards others. This shift in character education gained notoriety in the American public school
system and the United States Congress began urging for federal funding to support its expansion
to state boards of education (Edutopia, 2011).
The Evolution of Social Emotional Learning within Educational Frameworks
There has been an increasing urgency for the creation and implementation of
comprehensive character education and social emotional learning programs in recent years due
to the mental health needs of students. Oftentimes, negative behaviors – such as substance
abuse and sexual activity – work in tandem and are associated with lower academic
achievement and externalizing behaviors in the educational environment. Proactive programs
that highlight positive decision-making and appropriate social interactions can demonstrate
significant improvements in student behavior and attendance, and thus, academic achievement
as well as students’ mental health (Snyder et al., 2009, p. 28).
According to the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), it
is important that, when adopting an SEL program, schools strategize their plan before just

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

15

jumping into any curriculum. Certainly, mode of delivery, staffing and funding are all important,
but schools must also consider the strengths and needs of the school. Teacher and staff buy-in
are critical components of successful implementation, and thus, their involvement in selecting
the SEL program is a necessary first step. CASEL also emphasizes universal implementation of
any SEL curriculum, ensuring that all students are equitably introduced to the core
competencies. Additionally, it is suggested that any selected programs target the needs within
the school and can reinforce the competencies beyond school, including in the home and the
community (CASEL, 2023).
One such initiative, the Positive Action program, is comprised of approximately 140
lessons that are facilitated by a teacher in a general education classroom, in 15-20 minute
increments. Like the five CASEL competencies referenced earlier, the Positive Action program
targeted the topics of “self-concept, physical and intellectual actions, social-emotional actions
for managing oneself responsibly, getting along with others, being honest with yourself and
others, and continuous self-improvement" (Snyder et al., 2009, p. 31).
Incorporated within the lessons are discussions and activities that engage students and
teachers in identifying core values for the classroom based on universal principles surrounding
kindness and respect. The focused topics interact more like themes throughout the school as all
participants – students, teachers, counselors, and administrators – use common language
throughout the building. Additionally, through parent manuals, newsletters, and parent
engagement nights, families are made aware of the tenets of the social-emotional framework so
that they, too, can reinforce these universal principles from home. This level of engagement
embodies the spirit of home and school partnering together to support healthy decision-making
among students. As seen in Figure 2, over a five-year span (2002-2007), schools that

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

16

implemented the Positive Action program saw significant decreases in suspensions,
absenteeism, and retention.
Figure 2
Positive Action Effects on School-Level Indicators

Note. The figure shows the correlation between the Positive Action SEL program and student
attendance, suspensions, and grade retention (Snyder et al., 2009,
https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740903353436).
Beyond an improvement in student attendance, behavioral data and grade retention,
there was also a correlation between the Positive Action SEL curriculum and student academic
achievement. Due to improved attendance and students displaying more appropriate behaviors,
state standardized test scores improved for schools that implemented the Positive Action SEL
program when compared to the control group of schools (Snyder et al., 2009). Figure 3 shows

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

17

the positive correlation between this SEL program and student achievement on state
assessments.
Figure 3
Positive Action Effects on Standardized Test Scores

Note. The figure displays the correlation between the Positive Action SEL program and increased
state test scores (Snyder et al., 2009, https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740903353436).
Another SEL program that was extensively reviewed was Open Circle, which is a
universal program with Tier 2 supplemental lessons at the elementary level. Although the study
surrounding Open Circle initially targeted students’ development of SEL skills, most notably the
CASEL competencies, its impact on student achievement was compelling. Specifically, Open
Circle was credited with improvements in such student outcomes as improved attendance,
decreased behavioral infractions, and academic achievement. What was most interesting was

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

18

that teacher perceptions of school climate and culture saw a significant surge from before and
after implementation.
After analyzing the impact of Open Circle and narrowing down the factors that lead to
this improvement, the researchers noted the importance of the extensive staff training, the ongoing administrative support, and the complimentary nature of the Open Circle SEL program
with the pre-existing PBIS framework embedded in the selected schools. Staff received intense
training on the SEL curriculum, which also included job embedded coaching sessions with all
teachers. Also, the building level leaders ensured continued coaching and support as they
monitored fidelity checks during observations throughout the year. Lastly, rather than asking
buildings to choose PBIS or SEL, Open Circle emphasized the importance of both initiatives
coinciding together, reinforcing both frameworks with common language and expectations
(McDaniel et al., 2022).
Another SEL program, Speaking to the Potential, Ability, and Resilience Inside Every Kid
(SPARK) Pre-Teen Mentoring Curriculum, specifically targeted middle school students and their
ability to communicate effectively with peers, regulate their emotions, and make appropriate
decisions. Different than many other researched SEL programs, SPARK includes highly trained
facilitators to deliver the content to selected classrooms rather than teachers and/or counselors
inherently within the school. In SPARK, time intensive lessons were utilized in the classroom
setting and focused on a pre-determined curriculum. The curriculum, delivered by outside
contracted facilitators, consisted of 12 lessons in one-hour increments, once a week over a
three-month period.
When compared with the control group, students who participated in SPARK saw
moderate to significant improvement in their communication, decision-making, problem-solving
skills, and emotional regulation. As a limitation, however, the researchers noted that it is

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

19

important to explore whether training school staff to deliver the SPARK curriculum is a viable
and effective alternative, as relying on external facilitators might pose challenges to its
implementation in certain schools. Like the Open Circle SEL program, the SPARK researchers
acknowledged that it would benefit schools to consider integrating SEL programs with existing
positive behavioral support systems to maximize SEL program efficacy (Green et al., 2021).
Case Studies on SEL
Although there are numerous case studies on SEL and its impact on student
achievement, much of the research is strictly from a universal perspective. When examining an
SEL program's impact on students, it is important to gauge its impact on marginalized groups.
Students with disabilities, for example, are far more likely to be victims of bullying and less likely
to have a keen sense of belonging in school (Rose et al., 2011). Because there is a correlation
between school belongingness and positive peer interactions, one such three-year case study
specifically targeted the impact that SEL lessons had on middle school students with disabilities.
The study included 123 middle school students with various disabilities across 36 different
schools who received explicit SEL lessons via Second Step, as well as a control group of students
with disabilities who did not receive any specific SEL lessons. The Second Step curriculum utilizes
lessons that span the basic CASEL competencies of self-awareness, self-management,
responsible decision-making, social awareness, and relationship skills.
The study concluded that not only did the participating students see a dramatic rise in
their classroom academic grades, but it also found that students with disabilities reported a
greater willingness to intervene in occurrences of bullying, when compared with participants
who did not participate in an SEL program. The researchers argued that the consistent lessons
helped to create a sense of agency among the participating students, who typically would not
have the social influence to stand up for those being victimized. However, the study did not see

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

20

a significant increase in prosocial behaviors among the group that received SEL lessons versus
the control group that did not receive SEL lessons but concluded that further research regarding
SEL and students with disabilities is necessary since little research exists (Espelage et al., 2016).
Along a similar vein, a research study that examined the RethinkEd SEL curriculum
strictly within the special education classroom environment, both students and staff expressed
positive gains regarding the CASEL core competencies. Staff at the New Horizon School – a
school that specifically supports students with Autism, ADHD, and dyslexia - noted an increase in
their own capacity to nurture social and emotional well-being in students and to establish
stronger connections with both students and families. They acknowledged considerable
progress in their students’ ability to comprehend and manage their emotions, resolve conflicts,
forge peer relationships, and articulate their needs more effectively. Similarly, students
completed a self-awareness assessment at the conclusion of the study and rated themselves
higher in four of the five CASEL competencies, when compared with the pre-assessment prior to
the study. These positive developments have provided strong encouragement for the
implementation of a wellness program tailored to special education students (Whalen & Moore,
2023).
In a separate study, researchers studied the impact that an SEL program has on
elementary students who were at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Specifically, the
study targeted well over 1000 at-risk students, not yet identified as needing special education
services, across 52 schools in a dozen school districts. These Tier 2 students participated with
their norm-referenced peers in universal literacy instruction that had common SEL language to
help students process scenarios in a developmentally appropriate manner. During academic
instruction, the literary stories revolved around the CASEL core competencies, intertwining
situations requiring self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

21

management, and responsible decision-making. In addition, a control group existed in the study
consisting of students not receiving any SEL programming as part of their academic day.
The study analyzed the students not identified as at-risk with those identified as at-risk
for emotional and behavioral disorders. Unlike traditional SEL programs, the SELF curriculum
offered Tier 2 interventions for at-risk students complimentary to the universal core program to
target those students at-risk and in need of greater support. As part of the study, all 300+
teachers participated in an extensive, multi-day professional development on the Social
Emotional Learning Foundation (SELF) curriculum. They examined everything from the
foundations of SEL to the implementation of the curriculum with fidelity. Reading some of the
literary stories and making connections to both the CASEL competencies and Common Core
reading standards, the teachers were deepening their understanding of the underpinnings of
the program and its intended outcomes.
At the conclusion of the three-year study, the researchers found a striking positive
effect that the SEL curriculum had on both groups that were receiving the SELF curriculum
versus the control group of students who were receiving no SEL programming, with an effect
size range between .20 and .65 when considered with academic achievement. The identified atrisk students saw even greater positive outcomes that could be correlated to the universal SELF
curriculum and the Tier 2 supports (Daunic et al., 2021).
The Emergence of Specific Social Emotional Learning Programs and Approaches
As SEL programs have evolved, it has become increasingly important to differentiate
these programs from mental health services. Although both work well when layered together,
they serve different purposes, working under the same umbrella of student wellness. SEL
programs aim to enhance the skills and competencies of all students, while mental health
services primarily target students with social, emotional, or behavioral issues to alleviate

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

22

symptoms and bolster their strengths. These two approaches can complement each other
within a tiered system of support services. Tier 1 programming consists of universal SEL content
delivered in classrooms, benefiting all students. Tier 2 supports provide targeted interventions,
including mental health services, typically delivered in small groups by counselors or special
education teachers. Tier 3 interventions offer highly individualized and intensive support,
reserved for a small percentage of students who need the highest level of care, with services
delivered by a multidisciplinary team. While mental health interventions are more common in
higher tiers, effective Tier 1 SEL programs can contribute to a positive and inclusive
environment, benefiting students in Tier 2 and Tier 3 (Bergin et al., 2023). Essentially, what is
good for one is good for all.
Figure 4
Tiered System of Social Support

Note. The figure shows the three tiers of social support for students, with Tier 1 being support
intended for all students, Tier 2 being more intensive support intended for a small subset of
students, and Tier 3 being the most intensive support for an even smaller subset of students
(Bergin et al., 2023).

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

23

As noted in Figure 4, a strong universal foundation is important before the integration of
further targeted services, no matter the program or intervention. Whether it is a math or ELA
framework, or in this case, an SEL program, a solid base is critical before Tier 2 or Tier 3
interventions can be most effective. When schools first ensure that all students are receiving the
core tenets of SEL, and then weave their targeted interventions around their core programming,
this is known as ‘vertical integration’ and is proven to be most effective in mitigating student
behavioral issues (Greenberg et al., 2017, p. 22).
One approach to implementing SEL is to have school counselors lead the charge,
delivering lessons to students regularly – often weekly – rather than having teachers integrate
lessons themselves. While this approach places more of the strain on school counselors,
potentially requiring more staff, it allows teachers to integrate the lessons throughout their daily
lessons, class meetings, and restorative conversations with students when behavioral issues
occur in the classroom. In this model, the school counselor(s) are the inherent ‘experts’ on
emotional regulation and managing conflict and can deliver SEL content with minimal on-going
training. Additionally, when implemented with fidelity, this model often leads to higher teacher
satisfaction and less stress (Perryman et al., 2020, p. 114).
Conversely, to leverage teachers - the most direct link to students - as the providers of
SEL in their classroom, one such program, the Jesse Lewis Choose Love Movement (JLCLM)
provides a la carte lessons for teachers to choose based on the needs of their students and
classroom environment. Training and lessons are online and free of charge making it easy for
staff members to use their professional judgment to guide their students in managing their
feelings and establishing positive peer relationships. In turn, the role of the counselor is to
support teachers in the implementation from the periphery, and to provide small group lessons

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

24

to Tier 2 students who need additional support and restorative conversation around the SEL
competencies (Perryman et al., 2020, p. 115).
Another consideration for educational systems as they contemplate a systemic SEL
program, no matter who is delivering SEL content, is training all staff on trauma and learning.
Over time, chronic stress can change the brain and harm physical health and cognitive abilities.
This stress is especially difficult on school-aged children, affecting their bodies, social life,
emotions, and academics. Students who have experienced adverse childhood events (ACEs) are
far more likely to become paranoid of their surroundings, assuming everyone and everything
might hurt them. This can make students feel unsure about themselves and more likely to have
anxiety and depression, hampering their coping skills and interconnectedness with peers and
adults. Additionally, students who have experienced such trauma might act withdrawn and
become more likely to demonstrate negative behaviors in the school setting. Oftentimes, when
students struggle with focusing and work completion, educators might interpret these behaviors
as laziness, when in turn, it is a product of their childhood experiences (Terrasi & de Galarce,
2017). As a result, it is critical that staff are aware of trauma’s effect on student behavior so that
the potential function of a child’s behavior is not dismissed.
The CASEL framework encompasses five essential social and emotional competencies
that can seamlessly integrate into academic instruction. Notably, social and emotional skills
often intertwine with academic standards, and there is a growing body of resources explicitly
dedicated to teaching these skills across various educational settings. As a result, students can
cultivate enhanced social and emotional abilities, which, in turn, bolster their learning
experiences by reducing disruptions and increasing engagement. In a recent study examining
how educators incorporate SEL skills into their academic lessons across different subjects,
researchers discovered that teachers adeptly infuse SEL elements, particularly during literacy-

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

25

based activities. This integration transpires through activities such as reading and composing
stories and poems, fostering students' awareness of and empathy for the emotions of others
(Taylor & Lein, 2023, pp. 39-40).
The methodology of SEL implementation is crucial to the program's effectiveness. The
same SEL program implemented at two different schools may see two different outcomes for its
students due to each school’s ability to roll out the SEL program consistently and with fidelity.
When preparing for effective SEL implementation, the Harvard Graduate School of Education
argues that, using the acronym SAFE, there are four critical elements to a successful
administration of SEL; sequenced activities, active learning opportunities, focused time allotted
for skill development, and explicit skill targets for students. In addition to the SAFE elements, the
educational experts explain that SEL programs are optimized when other factors are present
alongside implementation, including proactive behavioral frameworks (such as PBIS), on-going
development of teachers and staff, strong family engagement, practicing skills across content
areas, and identifying short and long-term measurements of SEL success (Jones et al., 2018).
As with any new initiative, implementing social-emotional learning (SEL) involves a
systematic approach. First, data collection is crucial to gather information like climate data, staff
surveys, and qualitative insights from focus groups to inform decision-making. Second, engaging
with teachers, families, school leaders, and stakeholders is vital to understand their vision for
SEL and the specific needs they wish to address, avoiding top-down decision-making. Third,
using both data and stakeholder input, identify and prioritize specific needs and goals for SEL,
which could encompass content focus, instructional requirements, or content alignment across
settings. Lastly, after considering the information collected in the previous steps, utilize schoolbased resources, such as MTSS documents to solidify needs and measurable goals, enabling the
building core group to select an appropriate SEL program or strategy aligned with the identified

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

26

priorities. Figure 5 displays a visual representation of the paradigm for the selection process of a
school-based SEL curriculum (Jones et al., 2018).
Figure 5
Program Selection Process

Note. The figure provides a process for selecting a universal SEL program that involves data, key
stakeholders, goal identification, and resource development (Jones et al., 2018,
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Preparing-for-Effective-SELImplementation.pdf).
Challenges and Limitations of Social Emotional Learning
When considering the challenges and limitations to implementing an SEL program, one
must first look at the educational institutions (colleges and universities) that are training and
certifying prospective teachers. With the direct push for positive behavior support programs
such as PBIS and SEL from educational researchers, practitioners, and federal and state
governments, one would surmise that colleges and universities would put course emphasis in
educational undergraduate programs. However, data from more than 1,000 certified education

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

27

graduates suggests that teacher preparatory programs are not consistent with character
education coursework (Revell & Arthur, 2007). Collectively, experienced teachers often express
insecurity teaching SEL skills and what these programs would require of them, both in time and
expertise. Despite this lack of preparation, CASEL suggests a plethora of online resources and
professional learning communities that exist to collaborate and share both experiences and
resources (Todd et al., 2022).
In a recent study that looked at the barriers of SEL implementation, the researcher
found that there is little consistency in teacher training programs as well as assessment
processes that holistically support social-emotional learning skill development (Baghian et al.,
2023). Although the research shows that SEL has positive benefits for students, initial teacher
training is important to its success, as well as on-going professional development on topics
related to SEL (Todd et al., 2022).
Implementing social-emotional learning (SEL) faces several challenges, including the
need to integrate it into an already packed academic schedule, secure funding for resources and
personnel, adequately train teachers, garner support from stakeholders, and assess its
effectiveness. Teachers are particularly concerned about the time constraints, given the
pressure to meet standardized testing expectations. Schools must ensure that SEL programs are
seamlessly integrated into the daily routine. Additionally, securing necessary funds for
curriculum, personnel, and professional development is a hurdle, requiring school leaders to
explore grant opportunities and government funds. Adequate teacher training is crucial for
effective SEL instruction. These roadblocks underscore the importance of addressing both
logistical and financial considerations when implementing SEL in schools (Kaspar & Massey,
2022).

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

28

Recognizing the growing significance of SEL in schools, along with the widespread
adoption of SEL programs, it is crucial for teacher candidates to graduate from their education
programs equipped to actively contribute to these initiatives. One school of thought is that
colleges and universities must establish a Professional Learning Community (PLC) model among
their faculty members to create an effective, successful preparatory program for pre-service
teachers. This model should emphasize shared leadership, a unified vision, collective learning,
and the application of acquired knowledge, all within a supportive environment. The adoption
of the PLC approach has proven to be a valuable method for integrating effective SEL practices
into teacher preparation curricula. This incorporation of social-emotional learning into teacher
training programs not only benefits educators after graduation but also positively impacts their
students. Research indicates that teachers who cultivate SEL skills not only experience improved
mental health but also demonstrate more effective teaching strategies. Consequently, it is
imperative for schools of education to mimic K–12 programs by integrating social-emotional
learning to better support their teacher candidates (Nenonene et al., 2019).
Another challenge that faces effective implementation of SEL is the social and emotional
competence of the school principal. The role of school principals extends to significant impacts
on various facets of their schools, encompassing school climate, teacher well-being and
retention, and student success. The personal and professional development of principals is
crucial in establishing a nurturing school environment where adults and children feel welcomed,
cared for, and appropriately challenged. However, there is a growing acknowledgment that
principals face substantial job-related stress, posing a potential threat to their personal wellbeing and leadership effectiveness that undoubtedly will influence the implementation of any
school initiative. When the building leaders have an elevated level of social emotional
competence and positive well-being, they are more likely to lead effectively, build healthy

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

29

relationships, engage with families more productively, and ultimately lead SEL implementation
with greater success.
Figure 6
The Prosocial School Leader

Note. The figure shows the relationship between the leadership’s social emotional competence
and their ability to effectively lead the implementation of an SEL program in school (Mahfouz &
Gordon, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020620932351).
As shown in Figure 6, to set building leaders up with success it is important to
incorporate strategies that support their well-being. Just like there is a need for pre-service
teachers to be entrenched in SEL during their college years, principal preparatory programs
should have a focus on social emotional competence and cover such topics as mindfulness
practices, emotional intelligence training, and systems thinking. In addition to administrators
learning about these strategies through their educational leadership programs, there is also a
need for school district to commit to their on-going professional development during their
tenure as school leaders (Mahfouz & Gordon, 2020).
Although building leaders are one of the most critical conduits of success for SEL
implementation, they require other teacher leaders and district administrators to support their
efforts. As student mental health has declined, especially in the wake of the COVID-19

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

30

pandemic, it is more essential than ever for school districts to hire employees, such as SEL
Coaches and Instructional Specialists, who are dedicated to the social emotional well-being of
students. These specialists can help ensure fidelity of SEL programming and lead on-going
professional development for staff that supports their understanding of social emotional
learning. Furthermore, the SEL Coach plays a crucial role in influencing the teaching and learning
processes within school buildings. Their impact is direct, as they offer onsite coaching to
individual teachers, highlighting effective instructional practices. Beyond coaching, the SEL
Coach should possess expertise in collecting and utilizing assessment data to formulate datadriven goals and initiatives. This multifaceted approach ensures that the SEL Coach not only
supports teachers in real-time but also contributes to the overall improvement of educational
practices through informed and targeted strategies based on assessment outcomes (Savitz &
Ippolito, 2023).
Critiques of Social Emotional Learning
Despite the overwhelming support for SEL curricula in schools, there are criticisms to
simply choosing an SEL program and implementing it in schools. Although there are
considerable research studies and meta-analysis studies that illustrate the positive effects of SEL
programs, these studies rarely use a social justice or cultural lens when considering how to
integrate SEL curriculum that meets the needs of students from various backgrounds. According
to Desai, et. al., this approach leads to inequitable outcomes for students because the
curriculum itself is tailored for a particular type of student rather than considering diverse types
of students and their social emotional needs. SEL programs need to consider the content that is
being offered and for whom the program is designed. Recently, there has been more focus on
including diverse cultures in SEL to acknowledge that students have varying ways of
understanding and dealing with emotions. However, the measures and goals of SEL programs

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

31

often follow a narrow perspective, not considering different types of SEL that could improve
emotional well-being.
When schools are looking into SEL programs, they should think about factors like the
students' age, ethnicity, economic background, the type of school, and the staff. Once they
choose an SEL curriculum, it is important for everyone involved, including school staff, students,
families, and the community, to look at it from a social justice standpoint. An ideal SEL program
should offer guidance on how to adapt lessons to meet the needs of a diverse range of students
and families, as not everyone sees emotional expression in the same way. It is crucial to ensure
that the SEL curriculum respects cultural diversity rather than assuming a single model of
emotional competence works for all cultural backgrounds.
For those looking at SEL from the social justice lens, the concern of equity, as it relates
to accessibility of SEL curriculum, comes into the forefront. If all students are supposed to
receive equal opportunities and experiences regarding their educational opportunities, then
they should be offered similar accessibility to curricula, regardless of socioeconomic status.
Unfortunately, due to the potential expense of such programs, SEL programming is more likely
to exist in school districts that are resource laden, whereas resource-poor districts struggle to
provide similar curricular options. In impoverished school districts, SEL programs are often seen
as luxuries, not necessities. This creates a scenario of the ‘haves and have-nots' (Desai et al.,
2014).
One such criticism of social-emotional learning as a school curriculum comes from
educational pundits, Effrem and Robbins, who see the SEL “fad” as a progressive, governmental
push to create students that fit their desired mold. These proponents argue that SEL research –
despite the studies that suggest improvement in student behaviors and outcomes - is limited by
the inability to truly assess character development. Naysayers also argue that the focus on

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

32

character development and emotional regulation takes precious time away from academic
instruction, at a time when national student achievement average scores remain below
proficiency.
Effrem and Robbins also argue that there is little agreement on a definition for SEL,
including limited understanding of common standards and areas to assess. CASEL, the leading
thought leader of SEL standards and curriculum, have isolated their core competencies as the
pillars of SEL, yet Effrem and Robbins argue that the competencies are far too subjective to
quantify and that these competencies have been entrenched in good instruction by teachers for
decades. Perhaps their biggest argument is the politicizing of character education, believing that
such tenets are to be taught in the household – and to those who are most qualified to define
what good character is – rather than in classrooms with contrived definitions of ethics and
values. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), they argue, asserts federal control over
classrooms, with explicit directives to incorporate SEL curricula in schools. Effrem and Robinson
argue that this influence in schools is an overreach and “political manipulation” by the federal
government (Effrem & Robbins, 2019).
Another counter argument to SEL is that it can be a controlling tool that focuses on
student compliance more so than a mechanism that promotes social and emotional skills. A rigid
SEL program, in the name of “regulating” and “managing” student emotions, can become a
construct that seeks conformity from students to reinforce the status quo. Much of Varner's
critique of SEL is centered around equity, or a lack thereof for students who are outside of
society’s norm, including those who are black, brown, and/or students who identify as LGBTQ+.
Varner's stance on SEL is less of a rebuke of such curricula and more of an admonishment or
cautionary tale regarding outcomes related to stringent, unchecked implementations of SEL
programs. The author argues that SEL can be implemented appropriately only when the

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

33

educators are able to dissect their own implicit biases so that they are better informed, and
thus, more intentional about allowing marginalized groups to uniquely express themselves
(Varner, 2023).
Future Direction and Implications of Social Emotional Learning
Research underscores the pivotal influence of social and emotional factors on academic
achievement. The cultivation of pro-social skills and the mastery of emotional self-regulation are
essential for all students. Because money is a limited resource for schools and academic time is
precious, it is often difficult to explicitly teach an SEL program in all schools. This, however, does
not mean that SEL skills cannot still be taught in classrooms. In fact, there are some who believe
SEL standards can and should be introduced to students across various academic disciplines
rather than being a standalone program, but to do so, the educational system must shift to
accommodate this endeavor. Teacher preparatory programs, for example, would need to
emphasize the importance of SEL in lesson planning. When considering a lesson plan template –
which usually includes objectives, steps of the lesson, student assessment, etc. - educational
institutions should begin promoting a section that includes social-emotion skills and
competencies that the prospective teacher intends to support in their academic lesson. In
addition to lesson plan design that involves SEL skills, teaching colleges and universities must
place emphasis on the CASEL core competencies – much like Bloom’s Taxonomy or Maslow’s
Theory are explicitly taught - so that student teachers are very aware of how to integrate socialemotional learning into each of their lessons (Taylor & Lein, 2023).
Educational systems are increasingly acknowledging the prevalence of chronic stress
and trauma among their staff and students. In response to this recognition, they are embracing
system-wide policies and practices designed to foster healing from these harmful experiences.
These policies and practices aim to create more compassionate and supportive educational

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

34

environments. This shift represents a growing awareness of the importance of addressing not
just academic needs but also the social and emotional well-being of all those within the
educational community.
One vital aspect of this change in thinking is the revision of student codes of conduct.
Traditionally, these codes focused on punitive measures for behavior violations. However,
forward-thinking educational systems are now expanding their scope to encompass the root
causes of such behaviors. By acknowledging the underlying issues that students may be
grappling with, educational institutions can create more empathetic and effective solutions.
These revised codes of conduct often include provisions for offering healing resources to help
students address the challenges they face. These resources can take various forms, such as
counseling services, mentorship programs, and access to social and emotional learning tools
(Portilla, 2022).
Moreover, providing professional development to educators has emerged as an integral
component of these efforts. Educators play a pivotal role in students' lives, serving as mentors,
role models, and sources of support. To equip educators with the tools they need to foster a
healing-oriented educational environment, professional development programs now emphasize
the science of learning and human development. By deepening their understanding of how
students' minds work and how trauma can impact them, educators become better equipped to
address the unique needs of their students. This knowledge equips them with strategies to
create safe and nurturing classrooms where learning and healing can take place side by side
(Taylor et al., 2012).
Recognizing that stress and trauma affect students and staff members, educational
systems are making concerted efforts to support their employees' social and emotional wellbeing. In an educational setting, teachers and staff members are often exposed to the same

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

35

stressors and traumas that students experience. Consequently, institutions are increasingly
offering resources and support to help staff members navigate these challenges. This support
may include access to counseling services, stress management programs, and initiatives that
promote work-life balance. By investing in the well-being of their staff, educational systems are
not only promoting a healthier work environment but also setting an example for students
about the importance of self-care and seeking help when needed (Grossman et al., 2021).
Furthermore, classroom-based practices have taken on a pivotal role in these healingfocused initiatives. These practices are designed to help children regulate their emotions and
behavior. In the past, classrooms were primarily seen as places for academic instruction, with
limited attention given to the social and emotional aspects of learning. However, a growing
body of research shows that students are more likely to succeed academically when they feel
safe, supported, and emotionally regulated. To create this conducive learning environment,
educators are incorporating practices such as mindfulness exercises, conflict resolution
strategies, and social-emotional skill-building activities into their daily routines. Mindfulness
exercises, for instance, can help students become more self-aware and learn to manage their
emotions. These practices involve techniques such as deep breathing, meditation, and guided
imagery, which enable students to gain better control over their emotional responses. By
incorporating mindfulness exercises into their daily routines, educators help students develop
the skills needed to manage stress and trauma-related triggers, enhancing their overall wellbeing and ability to focus on their studies (Portilla, 2022).
Beyond the classroom, there is a strong push for further governmental support for SEL
implementation in all classrooms. Although there is significant research that shows that each of
the 50 states in the United States of America have social-emotional learning state standards in
place to address preschool, all but three states are without state standards in K-12 public

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

36

schools. Nearly every state, however, does have some sort of comprehensive health standards
that are clearly defined and address some of the CASEL competencies (Eklund et al., 2018, p.
319-320). This research suggests that, in K-12 public school environments, social-emotional
learning is addressed, in part, at the secondary level and often overlooked at the elementary
level. As noted in earlier chapters, many SEL programs exist, many of which are implemented at
the elementary level; however, these programs are typically at the discretion of local school
districts rather than as an expectation from the state.
CASEL has urged the federal government to adopt specific standards of social-emotional
learning that address all five of the core competencies, or at the very least, to require all fifty
states to clearly articulate K-12 SEL standards. CASEL argues that state standards for SEL would
compel districts to implement a framework, K-12, that addresses spiraling competencies for all
students including what skills they will learn and how they will be assessed in academic settings.
CASEL believes SEL standards should be as ubiquitous as math or ELA standards and thus,
federal and state level policies would be a necessary mechanism for universal SEL
implementation (Eklund et al., 2018, pp. 317-318).
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), a United States law passed in 2015 with
bipartisan support, holds a significant role in shaping public education policy. While the term
"social emotional learning" is not explicitly used by ESSA's authors, the legislation's provisions
offer numerous opportunities for proponents of SEL. These opportunities encompass defining
overarching measures of success for schools and advocating for funding allocations detailed in
the ESSA law. Particularly within ESSA's Title IV, Part A, the law emphasizes the expansion of
activities that grant students access to a comprehensive education and establish systems that
promote the well-being and safety of students. Even though SEL is not overtly mentioned, ESSA

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

37

presents several potential pathways for states and local educational agencies (LEAs) to bolster
and endorse SEL initiatives (Richerme, 2020).
Summary
From the implementation of character education to teaching ethics and value-based
theories to SEL, social emotional learning has evolved in public education to be an intentional,
purposeful curriculum that is explicitly taught in schools. Although there are many varied
curricula and approaches to how it is implemented, SEL in the 21st century is almost exclusively
rooted in CASEL’s five core competencies of self-awareness, self-management, responsible
decision-making, relationship skills, and social awareness. These competencies provide a
continuum for students of all ages – first understanding themselves and then understanding
how they impact and influence those around them. What SEL programming is not, is a mental
health service for students; however, when the two are interwoven together, they provide a
supportive and caring framework for students.
The critiques of SEL are sparse but they reveal unpalatable truths that must be
unpacked, challenging the inherent constructs that exist in our society and our schools. These
critics often argue that SEL programs are rarely developed with a cultural lens that focuses on
social justice or equity. Some contend that SEL lessons, which are intended to be “universally”
taught, are often not provided for students who are intellectually disabled or emotionally
disturbed as they are naturally excluded in self-contained classrooms. And then, of course, there
are the naysayers who craft their political barbs and blindly thrust them towards the education
system, claiming that schools are indoctrinating children with liberal agendas.
If SEL is to be universally implemented across K-12 schools, both the federal and state
governments will need to emphasize support for such programs. Although the underwriting of
ESSA hints at bolstering SEL, it does not demand that individual states require that social

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

38

emotional learning occurs in its schools. Passing legislation would compel federal, state, and
local resources to be allocated for SEL programs, and thus, the well-being of students.
Government funding for SEL could also be utilized for staff improvement through ongoing
professional development that focuses on training for trauma-informed instruction, culturally
responsive teaching, and restorative practices - all which support pro-social development of
students and the education of the whole child.
Most importantly, there is a clear dearth of emphasis on social emotional learning
within teacher and principal preparatory programs. For SEL to become ubiquitous in the
American education system, preparatory programs at the collegiate level need to ensure that
pre-service teachers are fully aware of the CASEL core competencies and how to appropriately
implement them with fidelity through SEL programming. Additionally, educational leadership
programs need to educate future administrators on the importance of implementing SEL and
how to effectively embed such curricula with other student-focused initiatives like PBIS, SAP,
and restorative practices.
Regardless of the critical reviews, the data shows that SEL programs undoubtedly
provide an additional safety net for students. When thoughtfully considered, the feedback can
help shape the future of character education and social development of students. One thing
that can be unilaterally accepted is that there is certainly room for improvement in SEL
programming. SEL is just one pillar of student support, and when schools integrate other
nurturing systems – PBIS, MTSS, trauma-informed instruction, culturally responsive teaching –
students reap the benefits of a welcoming and inclusive learning environment that will lead to
successful outcomes in school and beyond.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

39

CHAPTER III. Methodology
Methodology
The review of literature provides extensive detail on the importance of social emotional
learning and articulates the need for schools to be the main conduit for this universal approach
to supporting students. Considering the devastation that COVID-19 pandemic caused on society
and households, especially within marginalized communities, the need for support beyond
academics is greater than ever. Not only did student academic growth plummet during the
pandemic and the ensuing years since, so did student mental health. With the number of
students demonstrating a need for targeted emotional and behavioral support, a universal SEL
framework that is schoolwide and spans all students and staff is imperative.
Although definitive studies that define a clear pathway for SEL are lacking, it is
undeniable that such frameworks are crucial for the success of students. The literature suggests
that the priorities of K-12 public schools must shift to focus on the development of the wholechild. While the focus on academic achievement must always exist, the research shows that
healthier, happier, more engaged students who are educated in a safe, welcoming environment
are far more likely to experience academic growth.
Purpose
The literature review focused on the purpose of SEL and the potential impact that a
universal SEL curriculum has on student behavior across K-12 settings. It highlighted the
challenges that students experience and emphasized the importance of proactive SEL
interventions to address social emotional issues and to promote a more comprehensive
approach to the prosocial development of students. Additionally, the study aimed to assess
middle school teachers' perceptions of SEL before and after its implementation, using a mixedmethods approach to gather qualitative and quantitative data. Through the data analysis, the

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

40

study intended to examine state reportable disciplinary data to measure the effectiveness of SEL
implementation. The chosen SEL curriculum, School-Connect, aligns with the CASEL framework
and provides flexibility for teachers while offering structured lessons tailored for secondary level
students.
Regarding the future of SEL in public schools, one clear and obvious area of growth
outlined by the literature was the lack of social emotional learning as a focus in teacher prep
programs. While most educational programs introduce pre-service teachers to Bloom’s
Taxonomy and Maslow’s Theory, there is minimal examination of social emotional curriculums
and their effectiveness. Additionally, researchers have not exactly agreed upon a common way
to measure the success of SEL programming amongst public schools across the nation. Although
the research suggests that SEL often demonstrates a positive effect on school climate and
culture, there is no commonly accepted measure of each respective program’s success.
One thing that is generally agreed upon by SEL researchers is that there is little
downside to implementing an SEL program beyond the time and effort that goes into planning
for the initiative. Some critics argued the importance for educators to consider marginalized
groups as they further develop along the SEL continuum. In other words, social justice advocates
would argue that there needs to be greater emphasis on equity and inclusion, and finding ways
to incorporate scenario-based activities that are derived from various cultural, socioeconomic,
and ability backgrounds rather than simply portraying the norm.
Through this action-based research study, two data streams were collected and
analyzed. The first data set focused on middle school teachers’ perspectives regarding their
understanding of SEL and its effectiveness when implemented in the classroom. The perception
survey and self-assessment was provided to the teaching staff before implementation of SEL, to
be completed at their option. Additionally, after implementing the SEL curriculum in a classroom

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

41

setting for a semester, the same survey was provided to teachers to see if their perception of
SEL programming had changed. This data provided the researcher with both qualitative and
quantitative data for the research study, particularly on how effective they believed the
curriculum was at reducing negative student behaviors, and to demonstrate if teacher attitudes
changed over time after implementing the SEL curriculum.
The second data set involved the comparison of state reportable student behavioral
data, which typically included behavioral events that required the suspension of a student or
students, and thus, reported to the PDE Office for Safe Schools. This aggregate data was
collected for Penndale students from September 2021 through January 2024 (before
implementation) and then from February 2024 through May 2024 (during implementation). This
quantitative data allowed the researcher to look at baseline behavioral data prior to
implementation of the SEL curriculum and then compare it to behavioral data during and after
implementation of the SEL program to look for trends.
Both data sets that were collected assisted the researcher in identifying teachers’ belief
in the SEL curriculum across a universal setting, as well as the program’s effectiveness at curbing
negative student behaviors. The following three research questions guided the study:
1. What are middle school teachers’ perceptions about the efficacy of social emotional
learning and its impact on student behavior?
2. Does the implementation of a specific, research-based SEL curriculum have a positive
impact on student behavior?
3. How does the implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum influence staff
perceptions on student behavior in their classroom?
Teachers’ understanding of evidence-based SEL and their belief in its ability to shape
student awareness and decision making is crucial to the long-term success and sustainability of

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

42

any curriculum, as it has a profound effect on their enthusiasm behind their instructional
delivery. This research study delves into the SEL framework, exploring challenges, opportunities,
and experiences highlighted in the literature, with a specific focus on the perceptions of the
educators delivering the SEL content. The study's objective is to develop recommendations that
augment the universal social emotional learning platform and provide a more integrated
approach to student well-being and academic success.
The Institutional Review Board approval letter can be found in Appendix A of this
research paper. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved this research study on August
11th, 2023, as there was no need for edits after the initial submission. Resubmission would only
be required if there were changes to the procedures within the study or specific events that
impacted on the safety and well-being of the participants.
Setting and Participants
The entire scope of the research study was administered at Penndale Middle School
within the North Penn School District. Penndale Middle School is the largest of three middle
schools in the school district, serving approximately 1250 students. The middle school structure
in North Penn is grades 7th through 9th, which makes it unique compared to other middle
schools in southeastern Pennsylvania. Of the three middle schools in the district, Penndale is the
most diverse and has the greatest socioeconomic need, and for the past two years the
researcher has served as the principal.
Approximately five years ago, the thirteen elementary schools within the North Penn
School District implemented the Second Step SEL curriculum for students K-6. Additionally,
every start to the elementary school day across the district begins with a morning meeting. In
turn, the district's middle schools have been searching for a middle-level SEL program to
universally administer to students. District and building level SEL Core Teams were identified to

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

43

select an SEL curriculum and to develop a scope and sequence for the roll out of the program. At
the district level, the Core Team consisted of an SEL Coach, a BCBA, middle school principals,
and school climate coordinators from respective buildings. Conversely, the Penndale Middle
School Core Team was comprised of the building principal (researcher), school climate
coordinator, health teacher, special education teacher and inclusion facilitator.
The daily schedule at Penndale Middle School is an “A/B” day block schedule, with each
block scheduled for 84-minute blocks. One block for each grade level is separated into two half
blocks of 40 minutes with four minutes of transition time built into the block. This block allows
for minor classes in one half and an advisory period in the other half. The SEL lessons were
taught to 7th and 8th grade students during this advisory period during the academic day, which
ensured that the SEL curriculum was being implemented universally to all students within these
grade bands. The middle school schedule runs on a six-day cycle, and SEL lessons were
administered once per cycle.
All staff members directly involved in teaching the School-Connect SEL lessons were
provided with training on the interface and orientation on the scope and sequence of the
curriculum prior to the first SEL lesson. The Penndale Middle School Core Team continued to
meet regularly through the second semester of the 2023-2024 school year to monitor and adjust
practice based on staff feedback. Also, Core Team members were available as needed to help
staff members navigate the online SEL program and facilitate lessons with students. Each cycle,
the Core Team provided all staff with the core concepts taught in the most recent SEL lesson
and what would be taught in the upcoming SEL lesson. This was done so that all staff members
could revisit topics in their general education classes and reinforce the SEL topics learned by 7th
and 8th grade students during the advisory period.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

44

To obtain the perception of middle school teachers regarding SEL and its impact on
behavior, a research-based survey instrument was identified and offered to Penndale Middle
School teachers to complete. The pre-survey was provided to staff in January 2024, just prior to
the implementation of the SEL curriculum which began in February 2024. As shown in Figure 7,
21 staff members participated in the pre-survey given in January 2024.
Figure 7
Pre-survey Participants’ Years of Experience

Note. The figure displays the years of teaching experience for each of the pre-survey
participants given in January 2024.
After administering the SEL program during the second semester of the 2023-2024
school year, the post-survey was provided to staff in late May 2024. 38 staff members
participated in the post-survey given in late May 2024, after the majority of the SEL lessons were
provided to students. Staff members invited to participate in both surveys were classroom
teachers who work directly with students, regardless of grade level and their role with the
School-Connect SEL curriculum. The format of the survey was a google form, so participants

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

45

could electronically acknowledge their consent to anonymously partake in the research study.
The informed consent document provided to prospective participants of the research study can
be found in Appendix C. Participation was anonymous and voluntary.
Figure 8
Pre-survey Participants’ Years of Experience

Note. The figure displays the years of teaching experience for each of the post-survey
participants given in late May 2024.
As noted in Figure 7 and Figure 8, participants in the study brought a variety of
classroom experiences to the study. Additionally, staff members who responded spanned across
all grade levels in the building (7th-8th-9th), namely because some teachers taught multiple grade
levels. Because of complete anonymity in both surveys, it was not possible to compare
responses of specific staff members from January to late May. However, the purpose of the
study was to gauge teacher perception from before SEL implementation to after SEL
implementation, as a litmus test, to understand if teacher attitudes across the building had

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

46

changed. Also, state reportable student behavioral data was provided to teachers so that they
were aware of the building's climate and culture beyond their respective classroom and hallway.
Intervention and Research Plan
Throughout the literature review, successful studies heeded one consistent caution:
ensure staff buy-in by seeking their feedback and providing intentional and methodical
opportunities for training and professional development. Without properly educating school
staff on the purpose of social emotional learning for students during the instructional day, staff
were more likely to have negative perceptions regarding the implementation of an SEL
curriculum that steals instructional minutes from the academic day. Additionally, the research
suggested ongoing professional development that supports teachers’ ability to facilitate SEL
lessons with students as well as professional learning communities that identify ways to
interject SEL in cross-curricular environments beyond the classroom where the SEL lesson was
introduced to students.
As the Penndale SEL Core Team began planning for the rollout of the School-Connect
curriculum, the team felt that it was imperative to provide many opportunities for the staff
within the building to familiarize themselves with the program. In November 2023, building
administration introduced the Penndale staff to the School-Connect interface so that they could
see the many different components to the program, including lessons, community-building
prompts, and other ancillary resources. Staff were able to look at the topics and themes within
the curriculum and offer feedback to the Penndale SEL Core Team as they embark on curating
the lessons and developing the scope and sequence for the near future. Health teachers
identified topics they covered in their health curriculum for each grade so that efforts were not
duplicated. Teachers felt that it was important that many of the introductory lessons were
utilized and not dismissed since the SEL curriculum was being implemented mid-year.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

47

The SEL Core Team continued to meet to sharpen the focus of the scope and sequence
of the curriculum, using staff feedback to help shape the lessons, prioritizing a user-friendly
format. In early February 2024, building administration utilized professional development time
to reflect on the schoolwide discipline data and highlighting the need to support the social
emotional needs of students. Additionally, staff were provided with the School-Connect training
and orientation, led by the School-Connect staff developers. This gave staff a better
understanding of the curriculum and its purpose and the chance to see a mock lesson. Again,
staff asked questions and gave the SEL Core Team more feedback before the official rollout in
mid-February. The following week, the Core Team engaged all 7th and 8th Grade students in the
introductory SEL lesson, outlining the purpose of social emotional learning and the basic
expectations for the lessons. This was also an opportunity for the teaching staff to observe a
modeled lesson and helped to ease their worries before respective teachers facilitated the
School-Connect curriculum. Additionally, SEL Core Team members provided multiple
opportunities before school for staff to ask any questions before commandeering the SEL
lessons. On February 20th, 2024, the official launch of SEL began at Penndale Middle School
during the 7th and 8th Grade advisory period.
Leading up to the implementation of the SEL curriculum at Penndale Middle School, the
researcher hypothesized that consistent SEL conversations with 7th and 8th Grade students
regarding self-awareness, self-management, responsible decision-making, relationship skills, and
social awareness would lead to students making more positive choices during the academic day.
Thus, the researcher surmised that there would be a correlation between the selected SEL
curriculum and a decrease in state reportable offenses. In this research study, all classroom
teachers in the building who directly work with students were invited to participate in the
research study. Their participation was entirely voluntary and anonymous. 21 teachers

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

48

volunteered to participate in the pre-survey, identifying their comfortability with social
emotional learning and their level of belief in its efficacy.
Once every six days, each respective grade level (7th and 8th grades) would receive the
same SEL lesson. Teachers would be provided with the necessary digital resources for the
lesson, with additional options for them to use based on the conversation amongst their
classroom of students. This allowed teachers to use a basic, universal framework to follow, but
also permitted them the autonomy to extend the lesson using complimentary resources if time
permitted. Following the lesson, the School Climate Coordinator provided follow-up to all staff
outlining the main ideas and themes of each SEL lesson so that all staff could adopt common
language to augment the core SEL lesson and activity. This step was another opportunity for all
staff members to engage with the School-Connect curriculum, no matter their role in the SEL
implementation.
The School-Connect platform required a financial investment, albeit notably lower than
comparable SEL products explored. The annual school license costs $3000, encompassing all
lessons, supplementary resources, and staff training. These expenses were accommodated
within the site-based building budget. In the event of program success, there will be no extra
costs besides the annual license fee and time allocated for internal professional development.
Research Design, Methods, and Data Collection
The research study used a mixed-methods approach due to the multiple data
measurements used to extrapolate information regarding the efficacy of a social emotional
learning curriculum in a middle school setting. These measurements were both in the form of
qualitative and quantitative data. Depending on the specific data examined, the research study
used a mixed-methods approach and a causal-comparative research method to draw
conclusions.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

49

The purpose of the research study is to better understand the perception of middle
school educators regarding SEL’s impact on student behavior. In nearly all of the research
studies identified in the review of literature a mixed-methods approach was utilized to inform
the researchers about the effectiveness of each respective SEL program. Therefore, a data tool
that allowed teacher feedback that included both quantitative and qualitative was critical to this
study's outcome. Teacher ratings will provide quantitative data, particularly on how effective
they believe the curriculum will be in reducing student behaviors. Teacher commentary on SEL
will provide the researcher with qualitative data as to how well they understand the purpose of
SEL.
Before implementing the SEL curriculum across grade levels, the researcher surveyed
staff in January 2024 using an anonymous self-assessment and questionnaire for teachers to
complete, composed of Likert scales and open-ended responses to questions. Teachers will selfassess their understanding of SEL and provide their perception of its effectiveness when
implemented in the classroom. This resulted in qualitative and quantitative data for the
researcher to analyze at the research study's conclusion. Below, in Figure 9, the sample
questions from the Self-Assessment and Questionnaire can be seen.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

50

Figure 9
Sample questions from the Teacher Self-Assessment and Questionnaire

Note. The figure is a sample of the survey questions that staff were asked before and after they
facilitated the SEL curriculum with their students. Questions 1 through 9 of the 32 questions are
shown above. The entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.
Additionally, the researcher gave staff the same teacher self-assessment and
questionnaire in June 2024 after the school implemented the SEL curriculum for a semester. This
allowed for a snapshot of teacher perceptions both before and after the rollout of the SchoolConnect at Penndale Middle School, which the researcher could use to analyze how teacher
perceptions may have changed. Ultimately, these perception surveys helped the researcher
answer the first research question: What are teacher’s perceptions about the efficacy of socialemotional learning and its impact on student behavior?
The other major data set used in the research study was student discipline data pulled
from Penndale Middle School. Specifically, the researcher targeted state reportable offenses

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

51

from before the implementation of the SEL curriculum to after the SEL curriculum, to compare
the number of state reportable infractions to see if there was a correlation between student
behavior and systemic conversations with students regarding the CASEL core competencies of
self-awareness, self-management, responsible decision-making, social awareness, and
relationship skills (CASEL, 2023). State reportable offenses are those student conduct offenses
that must be reported to the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE). Such offenses
typically include issues regarding violence, weapons, drugs, and alcohol, and generally result in
suspension or contact with law enforcement. These incidents get submitted to PDE’s Safe
Schools Office. In contrast, minor incidents, such as tardies or class cuts are simply recorded by
the school and typically not reported to PDE.
In the study, the researcher isolated behaviors from the 2022-2023 school year as a
baseline for overall student discipline throughout the school year. Initially, the research study
was supposed to include an SEL curriculum at the start of the school year; however, issues with
grant funding prevented the SEL program from starting until February 2024 at the start of the
second semester of the school year. Because the School-Connect SEL curriculum was not
implemented until the second semester of the 2023-2024 school year, the student disciplinary
data was broken down into semesters for comparison. The baseline data was represented as the
state reported offenses from the second semesters from the 2022-2023 school year and the
2021-2022 school year, respectively.
After implementation of the School-Connect SEL curriculum, student discipline data was
pulled, and state reported offenses were isolated. Ultimately, the purpose of the study was to
identify if there was a cause-and-effect relationship that the SEL curriculum had on student
behavior. Again, student disciplinary data was broken down to strictly the timeframe that SEL

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

52

was being implemented during the second semester of the 2023-2024 school year (February
through May 2024).
Although initially intended to begin at the start of the 2023-24 school year, the delivery
of the SEL lessons were delayed and, in turn, were truncated to be delivered from February 2024
through the end of May 2024. The researcher sought to use the causal-comparative research
method to see if there was a cause-and-effect relationship between the universal SEL curriculum
and student behavior. The students were to receive explicit SEL instruction during their advisory
period for a finite period of time, and over time, the researcher would track the number of state
reportable offenses. To that end, the SEL curriculum (or lack thereof) was the independent
variable while student behavior was the dependent variable in the study. This was intended to
allow the researcher the ability to examine existing differences in student discipline, year over
year, to draw conclusions based on behavioral outcomes. Essentially, the intention of the causalcomparative research method was to help the researcher identify if there was a relationship
between the timeframe that SEL lessons were delivered versus the timeframe that SEL was not
delivered, in order to answer the second research question: Does the implementation of a
specific, research-based SEL curriculum positively impact student behavior?
After implementation of SEL in 7th and 8th grades at the end of May 2024, the same selfassessment questionnaire was given to the teaching staff. This was done to identify if
perceptions of the faculty and staff changed due to the implementation of the SEL curriculum. In
the survey, staff were given the opportunity to assess whether their mindset shifted after
months of utilizing the SEL curriculum with their students in the classroom setting. This also
allowed teachers to identify if the implementation of the SEL curriculum led to them
incorporating further elements of the SEL curriculum in their lessons beyond the environment

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

53

where SEL was being discussed explicitly with students. This feedback provided both
quantitative data and qualitative data for the researcher to examine.
The third and final research question was: How does the implementation of a researchbased SEL curriculum influence staff perceptions on student behavior in their classroom? The
goal of this research question was to utilize the pre-assessment to better understand how staff
members viewed social emotional learning at the onset of its implementation. Furthermore, the
intention of the post-survey was to see if facilitation of the SEL lessons provided staff members
with greater clarity on the purpose of SEL and its efficacy. The self-assessments given to
teachers both before and after the SEL curriculum was employed with students allowed the
researcher to look at staff perceptions and identify whether there was a change in their overall
belief in SEL programming in the middle school setting. This data will demonstrate if the staff
training, teacher preparation, and ultimately, the implementation of the School-Connect
platform led to teachers having more or less confidence in the efficacy of social emotional
learning in the school setting. Table 1 shows the data collection plan and timeline.
Table 1
Data Collection Plan and Timeline

Note. The table shows the data collection timeline for the research study, including the data
sources used and the research question to which it corresponds.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

54

Allowing staff to respond in an open response format allowed them to provide
qualitative feedback to the researcher regarding their understanding of social emotional
learning. Conversely, the Likert scales provided quantitative data that allowed the researcher to
see how teacher perceptions fluctuated during the SEL implementation. One of the main
priorities of the research study was to identify the perception that teachers have regarding the
effectiveness of a universal SEL program in a middle school setting, and having before and after
data helped the researcher acknowledge how staff feelings changed over time.
The School-Connect platform required a financial investment, but it offered considerable
savings compared to similar products. The school license cost $3000 and included all lessons,
supplementary resources, and staff training. These expenses were accommodated within the
site-based building budget. Should the program prove successful, there will be no extra charges
beyond the time invested in internal professional development and ongoing coaching. The
researcher did not utilize any data collection and manipulation tools to analyze data, therefore,
there were no additional costs associated with the research study.
Validity
Validity in action research is more about ensuring the trustworthiness of the research
findings than achieving perfect objectivity. There are four key elements to establish
trustworthiness, and thus, increase the validity of the data including credibility, transferability,
dependability and confirmability. Credibility provokes the researcher to ascertain how believable
the findings are to ensure that accurate conclusions are drawn. Transferability, however,
addresses how well the findings can be applied to other contexts. This can be done by describing
the setting and participants in detail to allow readers to assess the transferability to other
situations. Dependability focuses on the consistency of the research process. This involves
detailed documentation of methods and data collection procedures so that someone else could

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

55

repeat the study and potentially get similar results. Lastly, confirmability ensures that the
findings are not solely the product of researcher bias (Hendricks, 2017).
In this study, the data was triangulated through multiple data collection methods. These
data collection methods included qualitative and quantitative data through the teacher selfassessment questionnaires (both before and after SEL implementation) and student disciplinary
data. Student disciplinary data was retrieved from the PDE Office of Safe Schools as all state
reportable offenses are viewable and obtainable for the public. Using multiple data sources
allowed the researcher to corroborate the efficacy of the SEL curriculum within the selected
educational environment rather than fixating on a smaller, myopic data set.
Additionally, the researcher was part of a larger SEL Core Team that allowed for inherent
peer debriefing regarding the data collected in the study. The Core Team, composed of
educational professionals across the school building and an external committee member, was
aware of the research study but had no investment in it. As part of the responsibility of the Core
Team, they met often to discuss steps to improve the effectiveness and facilitation of SEL lessons
throughout the school year. The team also looked at the data collected from the staff
questionnaires and the student disciplinary data to ensure it was valid and to help confirm that
the findings were accurate and not a direct result of the researcher’s bias.
Providing specific details regarding the setting and participants is crucial in the research
process to assist with validity. The researcher provided in-depth information about the
environment in which the SEL lessons would be taught and the independent and dependent
variables within the study. The researcher also made clear their inherent biases so that their
biases were understood. These strategies allowed for greater transparency and further increased
the validity of the study.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

56

Summary
This mixed methods research aimed to explore teachers' perspectives and
understanding of social and emotional learning, and to ascertain whether there was a
relationship between implementing a universal SEL program and a reduction in student
behavioral issues. Data were gathered through various means, including pre and post
questionnaires, alongside an examination of student disciplinary records spanning recent years.
The study focused on a single school, with active teachers serving as participants. By gaining
insights into SEL and teachers' viewpoints, the collected data will inform future research
endeavors, shape professional development initiatives, and facilitate the integration of further
resources and support systems.
The data collected during this research study was triangulated to analyze the
effectiveness of an SEL curriculum in a middle school setting and to see if staff perception
changed after implementation of the SEL program. In Chapter IV, Data Analysis and Results, the
researcher will go into greater depth about the data analysis and communicate the study's
results.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

57

CHAPTER IV. Data Analysis and Results
Data Analysis and Results
In this chapter, the researcher will explain the process used for collecting data
throughout the Capstone project, including an interpretation of the findings from the reported
data. In this mixed-methods study, multiple sources of data were identified to provide specific
information for each of the three research questions posed by the researcher. Each of the three
research questions will be extrapolated further and the data will drive the conclusions of each
respective question. Below are the three research questions that directed the study:
1. What are middle school teachers’ perceptions about the efficacy of social emotional
learning and its impact on student behavior?
2. Does the implementation of a specific, research-based SEL curriculum have a positive
impact on student behavior?
3. How does the implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum influence staff
perceptions on student behavior in their classroom?
Teacher Self-Assessment and Questionnaires
The teacher self-assessment and questionnaire, which was created by Dr. Nicholas
Yoder from the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders, was entirely optional and given to
Penndale teachers prior to the official implementation of the School-Connect social emotional
learning platform and lessons. In the pre-survey, the dataset contains unique definitions of
"Social-Emotional Learning" provided by the respondents (Yoder, 2014). Each definition has
been mentioned only once, indicating a wide variety of perspectives on what Social Emotional
Learning entails. Some of the definitions include:
•

Content to help and assist students through depression, anxiety, etc.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

•

58

An attempt to instruct learners with respect to emotional, social, and community wellbeing.

•

Learning that considers self-control, self-awareness, and interpersonal skills.

•

Meeting the emotional needs of our students.

•

A lifelong process of developing skills required for healthy emotional-social functioning.

•

Participating in activities that are not academic but instead address the social and
emotional well-being of students.

•

Social-Emotional Learning is helping kids feel better about themselves and helping them
understand their role in society so they can play a positive role in it.
Each of these respective participant definitions reflects a unique understanding of

Social-Emotional Learning, emphasizing its importance in addressing emotional well-being,
interpersonal skills, community involvement, and personal development. Respondents
highlighted the importance of content and activities designed to support students' mental
health, addressing issues such as depression and anxiety. This approach involves teaching
emotional, social, and community well-being, fostering self-control, self-awareness, and
interpersonal skills. It aims to meet the emotional needs of students through a lifelong process
of developing the necessary skills for healthy emotional and social functioning. By participating
in non-academic activities that focus on their social and emotional well-being, students are
better equipped to understand their role in society and contribute positively to it. This holistic
approach, known as Social-Emotional Learning (SEL), helps students feel better about
themselves and their social interactions.
By asking participants to define SEL, the pre-survey aimed to get a better grasp on what
teacher’s perceive the purpose of SEL, and thus, how it might be beneficial, or not, to student
outcomes. It is evident that staff, theoretically, perceive SEL to potentially have a positive

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

59

impact on student wellness especially as it relates to self-awareness and interpersonal skills. The
respondents varied, spanning all three grade levels taught in the school building (7th through 9th
grades), and most having at least six years of teaching experience.
The responses from the self-reflection questionnaire highlighted participants'
perceptions of their knowledge, experience, and strategies related to social-emotional learning
(SEL) and its core competencies as outlined by CASEL - self-awareness, self-management, social
awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making. Interactions were assessed in
four domains including Student-Centered Discipline, Teacher Language, Responsibility and
Choice, and Warmth and Support. For each of the domains, the questionnaire utilized a Likert
rating scale of one through five, respectively represented by the following:
1 – I do not implement this practice
2 – I struggle to implement this practice
3 – I implement this practice reasonably well
4 – I generally implement this practice well
5 – I implement this practice extremely well
Similarly, the post-survey utilized the same questions along with the same rating scale.
This was determined by the researcher in order to identify if there was a change in teacher
perception regarding SEL implementation, and more specifically, if teachers perceived a change
in their ability to deliver in each of the four domains – Student-Centered Discipline, Teacher
Language, Responsibility and Choice, and Warmth and Support – after having taught the lessons
over a four-month period.
In the post-survey given to staff at the conclusion of the study, participants were able to
generate greater depth in their definition of “Social-Emotional Learning”. Although definitions
had some similar thoughts and ideas, it was clear that respondents had a much deeper

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

60

understanding of SEL. The central theme in their statements is the importance of SocialEmotional Learning in fostering students' overall development. This includes teaching students
to understand and manage their emotions, build positive relationships, and make responsible
decisions, thereby supporting their emotional and social well-being alongside academic success.
This qualitative data allowed the researcher to acknowledge that staff, after implementing the
School-Connect lessons with students, were able to better articulate their understanding of the
purpose of SEL at the middle school level.
Data Analysis of Questionnaire
In the pre-survey questionnaire given to teachers in January 2024 prior to introducing
the School-Connect platform to students, 85% of study participants identified being “somewhat
familiar”, “familiar” or “very familiar” with SEL classroom practices, demonstrating a basic to
strong understanding of social emotional learning. After the SEL pilot, 95% of respondents
identified being “somewhat familiar”, “familiar” or “very familiar” with SEL classroom practices.
Additionally, over 70% of respondents in the pre-survey noted that they believe it to be
“important” or “very important” to implement SEL lessons with students during the instructional
day, whereas after implementation, 74% acknowledged the incorporation of SEL lessons to be
“important” or “very important.” What was most notable about this post-survey response was
that there was a dramatic increase in the percentage of respondents who believed
implementing SEL lessons was “very important,” going from 33% to nearly 53% over just a few
short months.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

61

Figure 10
Post-survey Question: Teachers’ Perception on Importance of Implementing SEL during the
Instructional Day

Note. The figure, taken from the post-survey completed in late May 2024, demonstrates teacher
perception on how important it is for middle school students to be exposed to SEL lessons
during the instructional day. The entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.
Figure 10 illustrates the perceptions that staff held regarding the importance of SEL
lessons during the instructional day. Furthermore, when participants were asked if they were
willing to incorporate SEL within their classroom, more than 80% responded positively, either
stating that they were “willing” or “very willing” to facilitate SEL lessons. Additionally, only one
responding staff member had a negative view regarding their role in implementing SEL lessons
to students during the academic day. Below, Figure 11 demonstrates teachers’ willingness to
incorporate SEL lessons in the classroom setting.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

62

Figure 11
Pre-survey Question: Teachers’ Willingness to Incorporate SEL in the Classroom

Note. The figure, taken from the pre-survey completed in January 2024, demonstrates the
willingness that teachers had to implement SEL lessons within their classroom. The entire
questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.
Staff buy-in, regarding any schoolwide initiative, is critical to successful implementation.
At the very least, the pre-survey made it clear that middle school teachers held a positive,
optimistic outlook for SEL implementation at its inception at Penndale Middle School. Although
in the post-survey there was a nominal increase to the percentage of surveyed participants who
were “willing” or “very willing” to incorporate SEL lessons, there was a significant increase in the
percentage of staff who were “very willing” to do so, going from 38% to 47%. With more than
80% of staff willing to implement SEL at the onset, the initiative appeared to be setup for
success. Additionally, at the beginning of the SEL journey, 86% of surveyed participants believed
SEL to be a “somewhat effective”, “effective”, or “very effective” tool in promoting positive
behaviors of middle school students. By the end of May 2024, that number rose to a staggering
92% of respondents viewing SEL as effective, leading the researcher to believe that participating

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

63

staff were seeing value in the program. Consequently, those who saw SEL as “effective” or “very
effective” increased from 48% to 58%.
Figure 12
Post-survey Question: Teachers’ Belief in Effectiveness of SEL

Note. The figure, taken from the post-survey completed in late May 2024, demonstrates how
effective staff perceived SEL to be in promoting positive behaviors. The entire questionnaire can
be found in Appendix D.
Figure 12 asks staff about their belief regarding the effectiveness of SEL and its impact
on promoting positive student behavior. This prompt gets to the crux of two of the study’s
research questions:
1. What are middle school teachers’ perceptions about the efficacy of social emotional
learning and its impact on student behavior?
2. How does the implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum influence staff
perceptions on student behavior in their classroom?
The initial perception that staff held about SEL was generally positive; however, that
belief was emboldened after SEL was actually implemented with students during the

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

64

instructional day during the second semester of the 2024-25 school year. In turn, this has led the
researcher to believe that the implementation of a research-based SEL program positively
influenced staff perceptions on student behavior in the classroom.
Going deeper into the analysis of the self-reflection questionnaires, the researcher
sought to breakdown the larger domains within the surveys. When analyzing the four domains
in the teacher questionnaire surveys – Student-Centered Discipline, Teacher Language,
Responsibility and Choice, and Warmth and Support – the domain with the highest rating on the
pre-survey was “Teacher Language” with an average rating of 4.05, closely trailed by “Warmth
and Support” at 3.97. Conversely, the lowest average rating was “Responsibility and Choice”
with an average rating of 3.21. As noted in Table 2, it was evident in the results of the
questionnaire that all participants had a greater level of self-confidence in the domains of
“Teacher Language” and “Warmth and Support”, especially when compared with their selfratings in the “Responsibility and Choice” area of focus.
Table 2
Teacher Questionnaire Pre-Survey: Average Score of Each Domain
Four Domains from Survey

Average Respondent Score

Student-Centered Discipline

3.54

Teacher Language

4.05

Responsibility and Choice

3.21

Warmth and Support

3.97

Note. This table illustrates the average score that teachers self-reported for each of the four
domains when taking the pre-survey teacher questionnaire. The entire questionnaire can be
found in Appendix D.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

65

In the post-survey questionnaire provided to staff, each of the domains reflected a
positive increase in staff perception across the four domains within the questionnaires. Based
on the staff responses from January to late May, each area increased by approximately six
percent or more. Regarding “Warmth and Support,” specifically, there was nearly a ten percent
increase in the average score as self-reported by staff at Penndale Middle School, as the average
in each response went from 3.97 to 4.36, surpassing the “Teacher Language” domain which was
previously the highest of the respective categories within the questionnaire. Table 3 shows the
rise across the board in each of the domain averages, which echoes the positive change in staff
attitudes towards SEL in the middle school setting and their own SEL competency.
Table 3
Teacher Questionnaire Post-Survey: Average Score of Each Domain
Four Domains from Survey

Average Respondent Score

Student-Centered Discipline

3.77

Teacher Language

4.29

Responsibility and Choice

3.43

Warmth and Support

4.36

Note. This table illustrates the average score that teachers self-reported for each of the four
domains when taking the post-survey teacher questionnaire. The entire questionnaire can be
found in Appendix D.
The researcher cross-examined the data by looking at each individual prompt within
each of the domains on the pre and post-surveys to identify particular responses that saw a
dramatic shift in teacher perception from January to the end of May 2024. In an effort to use
the data to illustrate a major shift in staff thinking, the researcher identified responses that

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

66

increased or decreased by ten or more percentage points over the four-month time period
based on staff responses that fit the “I generally implement this practice well” and “I implement
this practice extremely well” (well/extremely well). The purpose was to compare the before and
after surveys and use the quantitative data to isolate the prompts and responses that best show
a change in staff attitudes, beliefs, and/or a more or less favorable opinion towards the varying
tenets of social-emotional learning.
When looking at responses from the “Student-Centered Discipline” domain, there was a
rather significant increase in a multitude of prompts that suggest that staff were able to shift
their mindset in terms of student discipline, focusing on the student and his or her needs rather
than simply looking for punitive measures.
Figure 13
Teacher Self-Reflection Questionnaire Survey Data: Student-Centered Discipline

STUDENT-CENTERED DISCIPLINE

I respond to misbehavior by considering [social
emotional] factors associated with the behavior

I ask my students to reflect and redirect their
behavior when they misbehave

I teach students strategies to handle the
emotions that effect their learning
0
Pre

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Post

Note. The figure represents the change in teacher perception from the pre-survey to the postsurvey, after SEL was implemented in the classroom regarding “Student-Centered Discipline.”
The entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

67

As seen in Figure 13, there were sharp increases in staff responses to recognizing the
whole-child and the outside experiences that they bring to school, as well as being intentional
about redirecting students and discussing coping strategies to handle their frustrations and
stressors. SEL is entirely based on student reflection, and the more times students are asked to
reflect on their actions, the greater the likelihood for them to generate empathy for others. It is
pretty astounding to see that when staff members were asked how often and how well they ask
students to reflect and redirect their behavior, 71% responded to the post-survey with
“well/extremely well” as compared to only 49% in the pre-survey. If nothing else, this uptick
suggests that staff are learning with students that reflection is critical to student success.
In the “Teacher Language” domain, there was a significant change in teacher responses
from the pre-survey to the post-survey. When prompted with, “I promote positive behaviors by
encouraging my students when they display good work habits,” staff responses of
“well/extremely well” rose from 81% to 91%. This dramatic increase from staff has led the
researcher to assume that they are more likely to use reinforcing language with students as a
proactive measure to encourage positive behaviors.
In education, it is paramount for the adults in the building to provide students with a
level of care beyond simply teaching lessons and grading papers. Thought Leader, John Maxwell
has stated, “Students don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” This
notion aptly describes the intention and purpose behind the “Warmth and Support” sector of
the teacher self-reflection questionnaires provided to staff at the beginning and end of the SEL
pilot. As previously noted, the “Warmth and Support” domain saw the greatest increase in
positive sentiment from staff respondents. When extrapolating the data from the two surveys, a
number of prompts solicited positive energy after the implementation of the SEL lessons. This
can be seen in Figure 14.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

68

Figure 14
Teacher Self-Reflection Questionnaire Survey Data: Warmth and Support

WARMTH AND SUPPORT
I demonstrate to each student that I appreciate
him/her as an individual
I use the interests and experiences of my students
when teaching
I let my students know that it is okay to get answers
wrong or think outside of the box
I check in with my students about academic and
nonacademic concerns they might have
I create structures in the classroom where my
students feel included and appreciated
0
Pre

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 100

Post

Note. The figure represents the change in teacher perception from the pre-survey to the postsurvey, after SEL was implemented in the classroom regarding “Warmth and Support.” The
entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.
As illustrated in Figure 14, teachers identified in the self-reflection questionnaire a
change in their own approach to students within their classroom environment. Specifically,
teachers noted a greater likelihood in talking to students about their adolescent concerns – both
academic and nonacademic – and a greater likelihood of seeking out ways to make students feel
more included and appreciated. With nearly twice as many participants in the post-survey as
compared with the pre-survey, the researcher noted a dramatic positive shift in teacher
attitudes from the onset of the SEL lessons to the end of the lessons throughout the second
semester of the 2023-24 school year.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

69

Data Analysis of Student Behavioral Data
The researcher also set out to analyze student behavioral data prior to implementing
the School-Connect SEL platform, versus after implementation. More specifically, the researcher
identified “state reportable offenses” as the data measurement as there is less subjectivity with
such behavioral data. Because the study occurred during the second semester of the 2023-24
school year, and in particular February 2024 through the end of May 2024, the researcher
isolated behavioral data on a semester to semester basis to identify any trends.
Figure 15
Penndale State Reported Discipline by Year, by Semester

Penndale State Reported Discipline: By Year, By Semester

2021-22

137

2022-23

145

186

2023-24

209

95

0

50

157

100

150
1st Sem

200

250

300

350

400

2nd Sem

Note. The figure illustrates the number of State Reportable Offenses for Penndale Middle School
students during each semester of the past three school years. The entire questionnaire can be
found in Appendix D.
Figure 15 shows the state reported offenses that occurred at Penndale by semester,
year over year. The researcher was looking for any trends in the student discipline data that

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

70

might show a causal-comparative effect of the SEL lessons that were implemented over the
course of the second semester of the 2023-24 school year at Penndale Middle School. The 202223 school year certainly had far more state reported offenses when compared to the prior and
ensuing school years, respectively; however, it was difficult for the researcher to identify a clear
pattern.
Results
This study triangulated the obtained data by utilizing diverse data collection methods.
The research gathered both qualitative and quantitative data via teacher self-assessment
questionnaires administered before and after the SEL program's implementation, alongside
student disciplinary records. These disciplinary records were isolated to those infractions that
were reported to the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s (PDE) Office of Safe Schools,
where all state-reportable offenses are publicly accessible. By integrating various data sources,
the researcher could validate the effectiveness of the SEL curriculum in the targeted educational
setting, rather than relying on a limited and narrow data set.
Each research question was intended to hone in on a specific area of the study,
providing the research with unique findings to drive different conclusions on varied aspects of
the study. The first question was: what are middle school teachers’ perceptions about the
efficacy of social emotional learning and its impact on student behavior? This helped the
researcher understand how teachers perceived social emotional learning prior to
implementation. As noted in the aforementioned Data Analysis of Questionnaire, staff began
their School-Connect journey with positive perceptions on SEL. Most notably, 85% of
participating staff viewed SEL as “somewhat effective” to “very effective”, and more than 80%
were “willing” to “very willing” to implement curated SEL lessons in their classroom setting.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

71

Based on the data from the pre-survey questionnaire it was evident at the onset of the study
that staff were open to facilitating SEL and had a positive perception of the initiative.
The second research question was: does the implementation of a specific, researchbased SEL curriculum have a positive impact on student behavior? This question aimed at
identifying if there was a relationship between SEL lessons and student behavioral referrals.
More specifically, the researcher utilized the causal-comparative research method to tease out
if there was a data link between the behavioral data and the SEL lessons facilitated each cycle
with students. Although there are clear disparities, year over year, in the state reported
discipline, the review of the semester by semester disciplinary data does not show a clear and
obvious change in student behavior. When looking at the second semester of the 2022-23
school year versus the second semester of the 2023-24 school year when SEL lessons were
utilized in the classroom setting, there was nearly a 25% drop in state reported offenses.
However, an even greater disparity existed in the first semester of each of these school years,
respectively. Simply put, there is not enough data to draw obvious conclusions related to a trend
in student disciplinary infractions and the implementation of the SEL lessons over this time
period.
The researcher’s third research question was: how does the implementation of a
research-based SEL curriculum influence staff perceptions on student behavior in their
classroom? This question sought to provide the researcher the ability to draw conclusions on
teacher perception subsequent to implementation due to having a post-survey after teachers
facilitated SEL lessons with all 7th and 8th grade students. Essentially, after seeing how
implementing such lessons impacts students in the classroom, the participating staff members
could reasonably hypothesize if SEL discussions have a positive impact on students and their
decision making. The responding staff members clearly demonstrated a shift in their own

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

72

behaviors within their classroom environment, which may be the most critical data within the
study. In each of the four domains of the self-reflection questionnaire – Student-Centered
Discipline, Teacher Language, Responsibility and Choice, and Warmth and Support – participants
expressed a shift in their approach to the students in their classroom, as evidenced by an
increase in each of the aforementioned domains of the survey after facilitating SEL lessons with
their students.
Table 4
Teacher Questionnaire Surveys: The Change in Average Score of Each Domain
Four Domains from Survey

Pre-Survey:
Average Score

Post-Survey:
Average Score

% Change

Student-Centered Discipline

3.54

3.77

6.50%

Teacher Language

4.05

4.29

5.93%

Responsibility and Choice

3.21

3.43

6.85%

Warmth and Support

3.97

4.36

9.82%

Note. The table shows the change in the average score that teachers self-reported on the selfreflection questionnaires for each of the four domains from the beginning of SEL
implementation to after implementation. The entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.
Furthermore, as noted in Table 4, the post-survey data suggests that staff participants
saw great value in utilizing the School-Connect SEL platform with students, with nearly all of the
survey data showing positive increases across the prompts. Most important to the survey
surrounding teacher perception of SEL at the middle school level was teacher willingness to
implement lessons, their viewpoint on the SEL’s importance, and how effective they believe
social emotional learning to be in the academic setting. As per the survey data, staff became
more willing to implement SEL in their lessons with 47% of respondents being “very willing” as

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

73

compared to only 38% at the beginning of the SEL pilot initiative. Similarly, there was a sharp
increase in the percentage of participants who believed SEL was “very important,” with 53% in
the post-survey as compared to only 33% in the pre-survey. Additionally, as noted in Figure 16,
the percentage of staff respondents who believed the SEL program to be an “effective” or “very
effective” step in promoting positive behaviors in middle school students rose from 86% to 92%
between the surveys.
Figure 16
Change in Staff Perception of SEL

Change in Staff Perception of SEL

Willingness to Facilitate SEL - "very willing"

Importance of SEL - "very important"

Effectiveness of SEL - "effective" or "very effective"
0
Pre

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 100

Post

Note. This figure shows the change in staff perception of SEL from the beginning of
implementation to the end of implementation, as per data from the pre and post-surveys. The
entire questionnaire can be found in Appendix D.
Discussion
In the research study examining teacher perceptions about Social-Emotional Learning,
the data analysis process played a pivotal role in unraveling the nuances of teacher attitudes
and understanding towards the SEL initiative at Penndale Middle School. Through a meticulous

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

74

examination of pre and post-survey questionnaire responses, the researcher was able to delve
into the evolving perspectives and insights of the participating staff members before and after
exposure to the implementation of the School-Connect SEL initiative. The analysis entailed both
quantitative and qualitative approaches, scrutinizing staff open-ended responses and the
changes to their Likert scale responses from the pre and post-surveys.
The quantitative data enabled the researcher to identify statistical shifts in perceptions
over time, highlighting changes in attitudes and beliefs of the Penndale Middle School teachers
and staff. Specifically, the pre-survey data demonstrated that staff perceptions surrounding SEL
were positive at the start of the initiative. The respondents demonstrated an openness to
piloting SEL in the classroom and they were willing to facilitate the School-Connect lessons with
students. Meanwhile, the post-survey data made it clear that enthusiasm for SEL only increased
as survey participants were more inclined to respond favorably about their own social emotional
practices within their respective classrooms. The qualitative analysis offered depth of staff
understanding of SEL and its purpose in the school setting. In the post-survey, staff members
provided the researcher with responses that had a higher degree of acumen and awareness
regarding the tenets of SEL as compared to the brevity provided in the open-ended responses in
the pre-survey. By triangulating both quantitative and qualitative findings, the researcher could
construct a comprehensive understanding of teacher and staff perceptions towards SEL.
Additionally, the researcher also sought to use the causal-comparative research method
to investigate the impact of Social-Emotional Learning on student discipline. The interpretation
of the data analysis process underscored the complexity of assessing the effects of SEL on
student behavior. Despite meticulous analysis, the findings did not yield sufficient evidence to
demonstrate a clear and obvious impact of SEL lessons on student discipline.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

75

Summary
The research study conducted at Penndale Middle School focused on analyzing data
obtained from teacher perception surveys to identify the sentiment that staff held toward SEL
before and after implementation, and whether their perception shifted due to the
implementation of intentional SEL lessons within the classroom environment. Through an
analysis of the staff surveys the researcher identified changes in teacher perception that
revealed consistent positive sentiment for SEL lessons within the School-Connect platform as
staff gained a better understanding of the purpose of SEL and as they became more comfortable
with the learning platform. Additionally, the study also extracted student disciplinary data from
before the implementation of these SEL lessons and then compared the behavioral data to
identify if there were any causal effects of SEL and student behavior. Despite not identifying any
clear trends, the analysis of the behavioral data did shed light on the need for more systemic
class wide conversations regarding specific behavioral trends specific to the context surrounding
specific student behaviors.
Throughout the study the researcher was able to obtain data to analyze and draw
conclusions that show discernible trends which helped provide greater hope for the future of
SEL at the middle school level. However, as with any research study, there are inherent variables
that impact the overall outcome of the data. In Chapter V, the researcher will provide further
discussion on the conclusions, limitations and future recommendations.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

76

CHAPTER V. Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions and Recommendations
In this chapter, the researcher will provide their conclusions and recommendations from
the research study, as well as the limitations that may have impacted the outcomes of the study.
Using the data collected from the pre and post-surveys from the self-reflection questionnaires,
as well as the student behavioral data, outcomes from the research study will be presented.
Additionally, considering the limitations within this particular study, the researcher will provide
reflections on how future research could be more effective and efficient regarding social
emotional learning and its impact on the well-being of middle school students.
Conclusions
At the inception of the study, the researcher identified three leading questions to guide
the research process. Below are the three research questions that directed the study:
1. What are middle school teachers’ perceptions about the efficacy of social-emotional
learning and its impact on student behavior?
2. Does the implementation of a specific, research-based SEL curriculum have a positive
impact on student behavior?
3. How does the implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum influence staff
perceptions on student behavior in their classroom?
Research Question One
Each of the aforementioned questions attempts to identify a unique aspect of SEL and the
impact, or potential impact, that an SEL program could have within a middle school. Two of the
three research questions, specifically, target the perceptions of teachers and staff and their
belief in the effectiveness of such an initiative. As with any initiative, staff buy-in is critical, and
the first research question hones in on teacher perception prior to implementing a research-

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

77

based SEL program within the school, identifying baseline attitudes of staff. Penndale Middle
School staff members were provided an optional and anonymous survey with a combination of
open-ended response and Likert-scale questions about social-emotional learning including
questions about their own classroom practices. The research-based survey asks teachers to
evaluate their own teaching practice as it relates to their own social-emotional competence. The
survey tool emphasizes that teachers must also develop their own SEL competencies, as those
directly influence their interactions with students both socially and academically.
During the review of literature, numerous sources referenced the need to have staff
members on board with the start of any SEL initiative if the educational institution wants to see
success. In particular, this was noted by the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional
Learning, who argued that It is crucial that schools carefully plan their approach before
implementing any SEL program. While delivery method, staffing, and funding are significant
considerations, schools must also assess their unique strengths and requirements (CASEL). Quite
a few sources expressed the need to allow for stakeholders to have a voice in planning for the
logistics of SEL implementation, and therefore, the multiple surveys, staff trainings, and
feedback sessions inevitably helped the SEL pilot gain traction leading up to the second
semester of the 2023-24 school year at Penndale Middle School.
The pre-survey provided staff participants the option for open response to expound on
their pre-conceived notions of SEL. This allowed staff to demonstrate whether they had a true
understanding of what “social-emotional learning” means to them, and could also provide the
researcher with more insight into whether or not they had a grasp on its purpose in schools.
Although many of the open-ended responses lacked a strong depth of the topic, it was clear that
participants had a solid, working knowledge of SEL and the role that the curriculum and the

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

78

school play in the process. Responses from staff were typically rooted in various elements of the
CASEL competencies, demonstrating a foundational grasp of the purpose of SEL.
Furthermore, the quantitative results of the pre-survey outlined a basic understanding
that staff held about SEL and provided the researcher with a baseline on their willingness to lead
the lessons and facilitate dialogue with students surrounding social-emotional learning. The presurvey also outlined staff perceptions on the effectiveness of SEL prior to implementing any
lessons. Staff were generally positive to start the SEL journey at Penndale Middle School, with a
limited amount of apprehension. 80% of staff members reported a positive outlook to
incorporate SEL lessons within the school day whereas only one staff member had a negative
viewpoint while the remaining balance were neutral towards SEL. Not only were reporting staff
members willing to facilitate the School-Connect resource, they also believed the curriculum and
its lessons to hold importance during the academic day, as just over 70% acknowledged the
implementation for SEL lessons to be "important" or "very important." Additionally, as reported
in January 2024, the pre-survey results highlighted that staff demonstrated a belief that SEL was
a generally effective way to impact student behavior. This was evidenced by 86%
initial respondents perceiving SEL to be "somewhat effective," "effective," or "very effective"
and can be seen very poignantly in Figure 11.
It is also important to note that within section two of the pre-survey self-assessment,
respondents reflected on their current SEL practices within their classroom environment.
Inevitably, the everyday instructional practices of teachers have a direct impact on the social,
emotional, and academic skills of their students. This, too, provided a baseline for the
researcher to comprehend how effective participants were at implementing fundamental
components of the SEL core competencies in their classes prior to facilitating the School-Connect
lessons. As was illustrated in Table 2, the two domains where staff respondents self-assessed

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

79

with the highest ratings were “Teacher Language” (4.05 out of 5) and “Warmth and Support”
(3.97 out of 5).
Positive teacher language considers how educators communicate with students,
emphasizing encouragement of student effort and improvement. Effective teacher language
goes beyond mere praise, guiding students on how to monitor and regulate their own behavior
rather than simply dictating correct behavior. Having a high self-reported score shows that staff
members believe that they are using effective teacher language during instructional moments
with students. Warmth and support in the classroom refer to nurturing environments where
teachers demonstrate care for students through actions such as asking questions, addressing
concerns, sharing personal stories, and promoting a safe atmosphere for risk-taking and inquiry.
Teachers also establish inclusive structures, such as restorative circles or sharing ‘new and
goods,’ to foster peer and teacher appreciation among students. Similarly, high marks in the
“Warmth and Support” domain, as self-reported by staff, illustrates their belief that they have
created safe and supportive environments for students, at least as a baseline before embarking
on the SEL journey with their students.
The other two domains – Student-Centered Discipline and Responsibility and Choice –
had well represented self-ratings of 3.54 and 3.21, respectively, albeit, these ratings were
significantly lower than the aforementioned domains. Student-centered discipline involves
classroom management strategies that are developmentally appropriate and motivational for
students. Effective implementation of student-centered discipline means allowing students to
be self-directed and involved in classroom decisions. Teachers avoid over-managing or using
punitive measures, instead fostering shared norms and values with students. Proactive
management strategies are emphasized, ensuring consistency and alignment with classroom
norms. Responsibility and choice in the classroom refer to how teachers empower students to

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

80

make responsible decisions regarding their work. Teachers establish an environment where
students contribute meaningfully to class procedures and academic choice. Although these two
domains may have scored lower compared to “Teacher Language” and “Warmth and Support,”
these ratings proved to be an effective baseline for the researcher to use to compare ratings
over the course of multiple surveys, after the post-survey was given.
In using the pre-survey data, the researcher was able to determine that there was a firm
enough understanding of SEL held by teachers, including the interplay between their own
teaching practices and the impact they have on students’ social-emotional competencies. More
importantly, the pre-survey highlighted teacher optimism for the SEL initiative, as the majority
of staff respondents believed that the research-based School-Connect curriculum could
potentially deliver positive results concerning student behavior. Consequently, this strong belief
held by the Penndale staff at the inception of the initiative allowed the researcher to conclude
that staff perception regarding the efficacy of social-emotional learning and its impact on
student behavior was positive.
Research Question Two
The second research question in the study was, does the implementation of a specific,
research-based SEL curriculum have a positive impact on student behavior? The researcher
sought to pull data showing the quantity of state reportable offenses during the timeframe that
the SEL curriculum was utilized and then compare the quantity of state reportable offenses prior
to using SEL during the academic day. Although the student discipline data from the second
semester of the 2023-24 school year was significantly lower than the data from the second
semester of the 2022-23 school year, the same could not be true when comparing the data from
the first semester with the second semester from the 2023-24 school year. In the latter

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

81

scenario, it was the same students in the same school year, yet the number of state reportable
offenses, in that case, had increased dramatically.
Because of the arbitrary, back and forth nature of the data sets, and the limited amount
of time working with the School-Connect platform, the ambiguous disciplinary data was too
narrow in scope for the researcher to draw any causal relationship between the execution of the
chosen SEL platform and an increase in positive student behavior and decision-making. As a
result, the researcher was unable to conclude the impact, one way or another, that SEL had on
student discipline at Penndale Middle School, and the researcher will discuss limitations in
further depth throughout this chapter.
Research Question Three
On a more positive note, the researcher was able to identify and utilize both qualitative
and quantitative data to draw conclusions surrounding the final research question. The third
research question was, does the implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum influence
staff perceptions on student behavior in their classroom? Having the pre-survey results from
January 2024 as baseline data and feedback, the researcher was able to analyze this information
and compare it with the staff responses from the post-survey to see if perception of staff had
changed over the course of the SEL implementation. 38 staff members completed the optional
post-survey questionnaire as opposed to only 21 participants before introducing SEL lessons.
In the open-ended prompts about SEL, staff responses showed significantly deeper
insights in the post-survey following four months of facilitating SEL lessons. Early responses prior
to implementation often spoke about coping strategies and decision-making, which are
perfectly fine responses but often stated in a fragment of a sentence. In the post-survey
responses, participants provided far more robust language and depth in their responses,
speaking to the CASEL competencies, fostering empathy, and developing the ‘whole-child.’

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

82

Meanwhile, nearly every quantitative measure from the pre- to post-surveys
demonstrated a positive change in staff perception towards SEL and its impact on student
behavior. Participant willingness to facilitate SEL amplified, belief in the effectiveness increased,
and perception of SEL’s importance for students rose dramatically over the four-month
implementation. This was illustrated in Figure 16, showing the significant change in staff
sensitivity to the SEL core programming being presented to students over the second semester
of the 2023-24 school year.
Beyond the willingness, effectiveness and importance of SEL, the questionnaire tools
presented to participants before and after implementation brought to light the positive growth
made by staff regarding their own SEL competency. As noted in Table 4, staff participants
acknowledged an uptick in each of the four domains of – Student-Centered Discipline, Teacher
Language, and Responsibility and Choice, and Warmth and Support.
In each domain, the respondents demonstrated a clear and obvious change in their
interactions and approaches toward students. Teachers identified that their own attitudes
surrounding their social-emotional teaching practices were improving through the facilitation of
the School-Connect SEL lessons in just over a four-month period. Through the self-reflection
tools, respondents reported being more likely to use positive, reinforcing language with
students, more likely to show a greater degree of warmth and support to students, and more
likely to ask students to reflect on their choices. The data suggests that the SEL lessons have
changed staff behaviors and attitudes as they have begun to develop their own core
competencies further, which has improved their instructional practices and approach to their
students.
After analyzing all of the quantitative data from the survey instruments provided to
participants before and after the SEL initiative, it is rather conclusive that the implementation of

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

83

the research-based SEL curriculum has influenced staff perceptions on student behavior at
Penndale Middle School. Participants expressed a greater willingness to facilitate lessons and
they articulated a stronger, more emboldened belief in SEL’s effectiveness and importance for
students. Most importantly, teachers demonstrated an immense amount of personal growth in
their own personal SEL journey that undoubtedly has an impact on their perception of the
universal core intervention for students.
Limitations
Due to unforeseen circumstances, the duration of the SEL implementation was limited
to four months rather than the anticipated seven to eight months. Initially, RethinkEd was the
SEL curriculum that Penndale Middle School was going to use in 7th and 8th grade classrooms.
However, the funding for the SEL program was tied to grant funding through the Montgomery
County Intermediate Unit and the grant was written by the county for high school (grades 9-12)
SEL participation. Originally, the school district was informed that they would qualify because
North Penn middle schools operate under a 7th-8th-9th grade model, but unfortunately, just
before adopting RethinkEd, the school district was told that their middle schools do not qualify
for the grant funding. The operating costs for RethinkEd were between $15,000 and $20,000 for
a three-year contract per building. These costs exceeded what the school district was willing to
budget for when considering an SEL program. As a result, the school district’s SEL committee
began seeking out other less expensive SEL curriculum options.
The switch from RethinkEd to School-Connect was not as simple as merely interjecting a
different program. Rather, the district’s SEL committee needed to verify that the School-Connect
curriculum met the needs of the school district and its students and staff. As a result,
implementation was pushed back to the second semester of the 2023-2024 to provide ample

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

84

time for staff to become familiar with the curriculum using appropriate staff in-service time as
per the professional development calendar set forth by the school district.
The confines of the Capstone project being limited to a one-year initiative was another
limitation to this particular study. This type of research study would be best as a three to fiveyear study to truly see if SEL had an impact on the school environment over a sustained period
of time. Disciplinary data, when tracked in an acute month to month manner such as this, is
influenced by so many varying factors. However, if the behavioral data was tracked over a threeyear period, for example, true patterns could emerge to determine if there was a causal
relationship between the SEL lessons and student behavior.
Along this same vein, the North Penn School District experienced a traumatic event in
one of the three middle school in mid-April 2024 that involved. This event occurred at
Pennbrook Middle School, less than a mile from Penndale Middle School, where one 7th grade
student had attacked another 7th grade student with a metal Stanley cup in the cafeteria during
lunch. As a result, the victim was bleeding from their head, which required EMS services and the
individual being taken to the hospital in an ambulance. In a matter of one or two days, this
event became a national news story and sent shock waves throughout the district. Community
members were calling for more strict disciplinary procedures and began demanding at school
board meetings and in the media for immediate consequences for any aggressive student
behavior. This created great tension within all school buildings within the North Penn School
District as small underlying student issues became magnified and principals began to err on the
side of caution in regards to student discipline. Consequently, building administrators became
far quicker to leverage student suspensions, thus, leading to further state reportable offenses
which may have skewed the behavioral data being scrutinized in the study.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

85

Another local factor unique to the North Penn School District, and more specifically,
Penndale Middle School, was the installation of the Halo vape detectors in all student
bathrooms throughout the building in February 2024. This technology immediately alerts the
security and building administrative teams when a student is vaping in the bathroom. Per
district policy, building administration, with the support of school security, is expected to
conduct a search of student belongings. Inevitably, this led to the discovery and confiscation of
far more vapes then otherwise would have been discovered. Furthermore, this led to additional
offenses that get reported to the state, and thus, led to a greater number of suspensions.
Another limitation in the research study was the number of participants who completed
the researcher’s SEL pre-survey. The pre-survey, which was entirely optional and anonymous,
was completed by 21 staff members. The post-survey, which was provided to staff after
facilitating the School-Connect curriculum, was completed by 38 staff members and provided a
better overall sample size. A step that would have benefited the researcher would have been to
survey staff members from the other two middle schools within the North Penn School District
that were also embarking on a similar SEL journey.
Because the surveys were entirely anonymous, it was impossible to have the same staff
members complete both the pre-survey and the post-survey. The researcher could only use the
pre-survey and post-survey data as a comparable litmus test regarding the overall perception of
the staff before and after SEL implementation. While this was a limiting factor on how the data
could be utilized, it still was useful data to better understand teacher perception regarding the
implementation of the SEL curriculum with all 7th and 8th grade students.
Due to the building schedule, implementing the SEL curriculum to 9th grade students
during the 2023-24 school year was not feasible. Having 9th grade students participate in the SEL
implementation, and thus incorporating all 9th grade teachers, would have truly created a

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

86

universal SEL program across the entire school. Because the SEL Core Team was not able to
accomplish this without disrupting the building schedule, they were limited to only two-thirds of
the building participating in social emotional learning.
Undoubtedly, the researcher’s personal bias surrounding the topic of SEL and their
desire to see the success of the initiative could have affected the overall study. Additionally, due
to the researcher’s former experience as an elementary school principal where SEL was
implemented daily, it is reasonable to surmise that inherent bias existed to create a similar
environment at the middle level.
Recommendations for Future Research
The data collected and analyzed within the scope of the research study has provided the
researcher with a far deeper understanding of the perceptions and beliefs that teachers and
staff hold towards SEL. This, however, is just one small development in the scope of the larger
social-emotional learning journey within the school and district, and it is important for future
exploration and analysis to continue by building off of prior studies such as this. Although the
research study was able to provide some answers, it certainly opened up a myriad of questions
that could allow the researcher to expand further on the development of teacher perception of
SEL as well as the impact SEL might have on student behavior.
Within this study specifically, the researcher would have benefitted from targeted
observations within classrooms. The pre- and post-surveys, using the four teacher domains –
Student-Centered Discipline, Teacher Language, Responsibility and Choice, and Warmth and
Support – identified teachers reflecting and growing in their practice regarding specific teaching
strategies and approaches. Targeted walkthrough observations, with the intention of seeing
specific SEL teaching practices in the classroom would have provided a greater layer of fidelity to
this specific research study.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

87

Furthermore, such observations, coupled with teacher interviews at the end of the
semester and SEL implementation, would have provided the researcher with extensive
feedback. Qualitative data such as this would have generated a deeper, more concentrated
layer of feedback from staff, allowing the researcher to identify a more genuine level of staff
perception towards SEL and its impact on student behavior.
As noted throughout the review of literature, numerous sources referenced a need for
more specific data tools to help researchers identify what success looks like with an SEL
program. Simply identifying upward or downward trends in student discipline data is limiting, as
the number of variables is considerable. Unquestionably, any researcher would find greater
fidelity if the research were to span three to five years versus one semester within a school year
as was the case in this study.
Possibly more important than student disciplinary data is the use of student data that
would show social-emotional growth over time. Within the North Penn School District, all
secondary students completed a “belonging survey” which was a perceptual tool used as a
litmus test on student well-being. “Belonging surveys,” for example, or aggregate data from the
Pennsylvania Youth Survey (PAYS) which is given to students in sixth through twelfth grades
every two years, would be able to provide researchers with a better idea of where students are
at in their mental health journey. As valuable of a tool that this is, its use in a larger SEL research
study would require a more systemic, chronological timeline that spans multiple years of SEL
implementation, a much longer a time period than this Capstone study affords.
Beyond the borders of the school district, future research on the topic of SEL would
benefit students, staff, and administrators as SEL is certainly not going away any time soon. The
need for mental health supports is too great and exponentially getting more challenging for
students and educational communities. SEL will continue to expand, however, further

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

88

exploration on the matter will provide the pathway to more effective social-emotional learning
and greater student success. Future research should focus on developing frameworks and
practices within SEL that actively address and mitigate biases, thereby fostering inclusive
environments where all students, regardless of background, can thrive and develop essential
social and emotional competencies. In the review of literature, a central concerning theme of
researchers involved the potential for implicit bias in SEL curricula and its impact on minority
groups and students of color.
There was limited data to draw specific conclusions, however, there was enough
concern to warrant a deeper look into how SEL programs can be more equitable for all students.
Something that cannot be denied is the clear and obvious disproportionate discipline data that
exists for children of color, especially for black, brown, and Hispanic students. More extensive
research and development of SEL programs that intentionally and purposefully target the needs
of these students would likely have a universal benefit for all students.
Summary
As student stress and anxiety continues to exponentially rise due to a number of societal
factors, the need for student mental health supports is more imperative than ever. Rather than
simply adding more mental health services as a reaction, school communities are implored to
provide more expansive Tier 1, universal programming to support the social-emotional
development of children. This programming, however, cannot stop at the elementary level,
where SEL has become rather ubiquitous, and must continue into the teenage years of
adolescents.
The data identified within this research study only adds to the credibility for developing
a districtwide plan to continue with SEL lessons for middle school students, and potentially at
the high school as well. The high level of optimism and momentum within the school community

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

89

suggests that further augmentation of the SEL curriculum would lead to greater student
outcomes socially, emotionally, and academically. It is the researcher’s recommendation that
the School-Connect platform continue to be leveraged for all students within the three middle
schools of the North Penn School District. As noted in the various surveys of this study, the
teacher feedback suggests a high degree of support for the initiative and its cause, as the
participants within the study expressed great benefit to their own teaching practices, and
ultimately, the potential to benefit all students. Additionally, continued research on SEL would
benefit the entire educational community. The CASEL competencies are a great starting point
for educators to reference, but further studies need to identify data measurements that outline
what SEL success looks like for schools.
In conclusion, this research study underscores the importance of teachers' perceptions
of SEL in fostering the success and development of students. As teachers enhance their capacity
to facilitate SEL lessons and strengthen their own social-emotional competencies, their influence
on children's growth will be even more profound.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

90

References
Baghian, N., Shati, M., Sari, A. A., Eftekhari, A., & Rasolnezhad, A. (2023). Barriers to mental and
social health programs in schools: A qualitative study. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry,
18(2), 97–107.
Balch, M. (1993). Values education in American public schools: Have we come full circle? ASCD,
94, 1–34.
Bergin, C., Cipriano, C., Wanless, S., & Barnes, T. (2023). Five key questions educators ask about
SEL. Kappan, 104(7), 47–52.
CASEL. (2023). What is the CASEL Framework?. https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/what-isthe-casel-framework/#:~:text=The%20CASEL%205%20addresses%20five
Daunic, A. P., Corbett, N. L., Smith, S. W., Algina, J., Poling, D., Worth, M., Boss, D., Crews, E., &
Vezzoli, J. (2021). Efficacy of the social-emotional learning foundations curriculum for
kindergarten and first grade students at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders.
Journal of School Psychology, 86, 78–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2021.03.004
Desai, P., Karahalios, V., Persuad, S., & Reker, K. (2014). A social justice perspective on socialemotional learning. Communique, 43(1), 14–16.
Edutopia. (2011). Social and emotional learning: a short history.
https://www.edutopia.org/social-emotional-learning-history/
Effrem, K., & Robbins, J. (2019). Social-emotional learning: K-12 education as new age nanny
state. Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research, 192.
Eklund, K., Kilpatrick, K. D., Kilgus, S. P., Haider, A., & Eckert, T. (2018). A systematic review of
state-level social-emotional learning standards: Implications for practice and research.
School Psychology Review, 47(3), 316–326. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR2017.0116.V47-3

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

91

Espelage, D. L., Rose, C. A., & Polanin, J. R. (2016). Social-emotional learning program to
promote prosocial and academic skills among middle school students with disabilities.
Remedial and Special Education, 37(6), 323–332.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932515627475
Green, A. L., Ferrante, S., Boaz, T. L., Kutash, K., & Wheeldon‐Reece, B. (2021). Social and
emotional learning during early adolescence: Effectiveness of a classroom based SEL
program for middle school students. Psychology in the Schools, 58(6).
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22487
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,
27(1), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2017.0001
Grossman, J., Sepanik, S., Portilla, X., & Brown, K. (2021). Educational equity: Solutions through
social and emotional well-being. MDRC.
Hendricks, C. (2017). Improving schools through action research: A reflective practice approach
(4th ed.). Pearson.
Jones, S., Bailey, R., Brush, K., & Kahn, J. (2018, March 26). Preparing for effective SEL
implementation. Harvard Graduate School of Education.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Preparing-forEffective-SEL-Implementation.pdf
Kaspar, K. L., & Massey, S. L. (2022). Implementing social-emotional learning in the elementary
classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 51(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643022-01324-3

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

92

MacDonnell, M., McClain, K., Ganguli, A., & Elias, M. J. (2021). It’s not all or nothing: Exploring
the impact of a social-emotional and character development intervention in the middle
grades. RMLE Online, 44(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2020.1868226
Mahfouz, J., & Gordon, D. P. (2020). The case for focusing on school principals’ social–emotional
competencies. Management in Education, 35(4).
https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020620932351
McDaniel, S., Bardhoshi, G., & Kivlighan, M. (2022). Universal SEL implementation to improve
community and prosocial skills: A pilot study. School Community Journal, 32(2), 57–76.
Milson, A. (2000). Creating a curriculum for character development: A case study. Clearing
House, 74(2), 89–93.
Nenonene, R. L., Gallagher, C. E., Kelly, M. K., & Collopy, R. M. (2019). Challenges and
opportunities of infusing social, emotional, and cultural competencies into teacher
preparation. Teacher Education Quarterly, 46(4), 92–115.
Perryman, K., Popejoy, E., & Conroy, J. (2020). A phenomenological study of teachers and
mental health paraprofessionals implementing the Jesse Lewis Choose Love program.
Journal of School-Based Counseling Policy and Evaluation Counseling Policy and
Evaluation, 2(2), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.25774/9wpw-pq36
Portilla, X. (2022). Healing school systems: solutions for educational equity through social and
emotional well-being. MDRC.
Revell, L., & Arthur, J. (2007). Character education in schools and the education of teachers.
Journal of Moral Education, 36(1), 79–92.
Richerme, L. K. (2020). Every Student Succeeds Act and social emotional learning: Opportunities
and considerations for P-12 arts educators. Arts Education Policy Review, 122(3), 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2020.1787284

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

93

Rose, C. A., Monda-Amaya, L. E., & Espelage, D. L. (2011). Bullying perpetration and victimization
in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 32.
Savitz, R. S., & Ippolito, J. (2023). Case study of an SEL coach and instructional specialist:
Understanding a new role. Michigan Reading Journal, 56(1), 35–48.
Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2019). Advancements in the landscape of social and emotional learning
and emerging topics on the horizon. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 222–232.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1633925
Snyder, F., Flay, B., Vuchinich, S., Acock, A., Washburn, I., Beets, M., & Li, K.-K. (2009). Impact of
a social-emotional and character development program on school-level indicators of
academic achievement, absenteeism, and disciplinary outcomes: A matched-pair,
cluster-randomized, controlled trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness,
3(1), 26–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740903353436
Taylor, A., & Lein, A. (2023). Integrating social and emotional learning (SEL) into academic
content: A path for education preparation programs. Kentucky Journal of Excellence in
College Teaching and Learning, 19, 38–55.
Taylor, L., Weist, M., & DeLoach, K. (2012). Exploring the use of the interactive systems
framework to guide school mental health services in post-disaster contexts: Building
community capacity for trauma-focused interventions. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 50(3), 530–540.
Terrasi, S., & de Galarce, P. C. (2017). Trauma and learning in America’s classrooms. Phi Delta
Kappan, 98(6), 35–41.
Todd, C., Smothers, M., & Colson, T. (2022). Implementing SEL in the classroom: A practitioner
perspective. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas,
95(1), 18–25.

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

94

Varner, E. (2023). Toxic SEL: Beware the temptation to become the compliance police. Journal of
General Music Education, 36(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/27527646231157684
Whalen, C., & Moore, A. (2023). Effectiveness of RethinkEd’s wellness curriculum for students
with neurodiversity [White paper]. RethinkEd. https://www.rethinked.com/wpcontent/uploads/2023/10/effectiveness-rethinked-wellness-curriculum-studentsneurodiversity-white-paper-v26-20230912.pdf
Yoder, N. (2014). Self-assessing social and emotional instruction and competencies: A
tool for teachers. Center on Great Teachers & Leaders: American Institutes for Research.
https://gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/SelfAssessmentSEL.pdf

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Appendices

95

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Appendix A. IRB Approval

96

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Appendix B. IRB Proposal

97

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Appendix C. Participation Consent Form

98

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Appendix D. Teacher Self-Assessment Questionnaire

99

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

100

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

101

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

102

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

103

Social Emotional Learning and Its Impact on Student Behavior

Appendix E. NPSD District Research Approval Letter

104