A few weeks ago at this blog, I discussed what developmental psychologists are increasingly understanding about what works (and why) when it comes to social-emotional learning (SEL). Relatedly, I shared some resources for school leaders who are hoping to get more intentional about strengthening their schools’ SEL practices: CASEL’s* Guide to Schoolwide SEL and CORE Lessons, a report and recommendations from FutureED. I hope the post provided some ideas about how to best proceed regarding SEL in your context.
If you’re not quite ready to write up all of next year’s PD calendar, though, or to reformat all your PLCs to incorporate strong SEL emphases, please don’t worry. My primary aim was not to send you rushing straight into action.
Rather: the Big Point was supposed to be that, based on what we know about building kids’ social and emotional strengths, improving SEL in schools requires an approach that’s much different from “finding the right program and implementing it with fidelity,” and that this is especially true for schools serving adolescents. As leading SEL researcher David Yeager says, we’ll be much more effective if we seek to build practices that “weave SEL together with our academic content, rather than separating it out as an extra program.”
While getting intentional about practices that students process as unintentional presents a unique challenge, it’s one that can absolutely be met. At Search Institute, in fact, we work with schools every day doing precisely that. (More specifically, by the way: we help schools improve their students’ academic motivation through developmental relationships.)
This post is the first in a series about steps and guiding principles we follow in such work. Our approach urges schools to think and to use their time a bit differently, but it aligns well with the aforementioned recommendations from CASEL and FutureED and, importantly, it has proven effective for moving our and others’ research fully into schools’ SEL practices.
In the weeks ahead, the series will offer posts on the following topics:
(NOTE: As this is more a set of implementation principles than an implementation playbook, the posts in this series should not be read as following strict orders of sequence or importance. Indeed, several of these steps will intersect with and influence one another over the life of any improvement initiative. In this blog series, though, they will be presented in roughly the same order they are presented to schools in our in-person workshops and consultation.)
If you looked at the earlier-referenced Guide to Schoolwide SEL from CASEL, you may have noticed that their first recommended step in Focus Area 1A (“Build Awareness, Commitment, and Ownership”) is “Create A Team.” Similarly, you may have noticed this assertion from the recommendations portion of FutureED’s CORE Lessons report: “Establishing in-school culture and climate teams creates a sense of collegiality and a shared agenda among school staff, a sense that they’re learning and tackling problems together.”
We at Search Institute agree fully with these recommendations. Based on our field experience, we know that teams of educators provide sturdier foundations for school improvements–and that such a foundation is especially important when a school aims to create wide changes in practices.
In accord, we make the establishment of a leadership team a key step when helping schools be more intentional and strategic about improving academic motivation.
Please note that this is not in any way to disrespect the abilities of single administrators as initiative-leaders. Our rationale here is purely practical and realistic. To name just a few reasons, we’d say that diverse leadership groups (1) improve solution-building processes by bringing in more perspectives and suggestions, (2) keep initiatives’ various elements on track simply by offering more capacity, (3) add to the staff-wide investment and “we-do” mentality (the much-pursued “buy-in,” that is) necessary to build and keep momentum, and (4) contribute to a school’s long-term health by giving non-administrative staff authentic leadership responsibilities.
In our work we call this team the “leadership nucleus,” actually, as in the nucleus of an atom. For just as in the atom, this nucleus is what helps hold the entire strategy/initiative together. The leaders in this nucleus analyze data, determine practical priorities, construct messages to staff, plan professional learning, execute improvement-based monitoring, and so on. (I’ll examine several of these elements more closely in subsequent posts. In the meantime, go get your team.)
Here are a few reminders I commonly give to school leaders as they set out to find their REACH Leadership Nucleus, Relationships/Climate Team, or whatever they decide to brand it:
Good luck building that leadership team. I hope your search and your conversations go well.
In the next post (which will not be as long as this one, I apologize–some prelude was necessary in this one), I’ll start getting to the business of what this team will actually be working on: examining your school’s current improvement landscape and working toward some prioritization of initiatives and preliminary direction-setting.
*®CASEL 2017. The five social and emotional learning (SEL) competencies were developed and defined by the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). For more information, visit https://casel.org/core-competencies/
Search Institute is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit charitable
corporation. All contributions are tax deductible.
Winner of the 2018 Society for Research on
Adolescence Award for Organizational
Excellence in Research and Programming for Youth
We save our best content for our Search Institute subscribers! Join us!
© Copyright 2021 | Search Institute