Classroom Social-Emotional Learning Programs

Protective factor frameworks that target the precursors of mental health issues for children have become a prominent focus in education (Hoagwood & Johnson, 2003; Strein,

37 Hoagwood & Cohn, 2003), with schools being appropriate settings for population health models to address the prevention of mental health issues for children. Educators have become interested in identifying factors that decrease the chances of a mental health issue occurring for children by incorporating approaches into lessons that strengthen and promote positive behaviours rather than simply decreasing problematic behaviours. Examples include the promotion of social–emotional, behavioural and cognitive skill sets (Catalano et al., 2002; Durlak & Wells, 1997). A meta-analysis of social-emotional school-based interventions conducted by Durlak et al. (2011) demonstrates the importance of schools working to build social-emotional skills with children to achieve longer-term benefits. Of the 213 school-based, universal social and emotional learning (SEL) programs surveyed in the study, involving 270,034 kindergarten through to high school students over a 37 year period, Durlak et al; showed that SEL participants demonstrated significantly improved social and emotional skills, attitudes, behaviour, and academic performance over time. Similarly, in a meta-analysis study of 69 after-school programs over 29 years which promoted personal and social skills in children and adolescents, Durlak, Weissberg and Pachan (2010) showed that participants demonstrated significant increases in their self-perceptions and bonding to school, positive social behaviours, school grades and levels of academic achievement. There were also significant reductions in problem behaviours over time.

Durlak and Wells (1998) described three types of prevention programs within the classroom environment: primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary prevention programs are designed for children with no identified risk factors such as dysfunctional parenting style, poor education or impoverished environmental, cultural or community contexts. Secondary prevention programs are designed for children who display various degrees of these risks, while tertiary prevention programs target children who already exhibit symptoms consistent with a conduct issue. The current study uses a primary prevention program approach, within which

38 the population sample is selected from a mainstream school setting with no significant risk factors for children, as identified by the schools and teachers. Primary prevention programs may be further categorised as universal or multi-focused.

2.12.1 Universal primary prevention programs

Universal primary prevention programs are implemented by teachers in the classroom using established activities within a curriculum. The aim is for children to be provided with an ecological context in which they can practice their acquired skills and behaviours appropriately with others (van Lier, Vuijk & Crijnen, 2005). Zins and Elias (2006) highlighted universal approaches as having the potential to enhance children’s success in school and life. Malecki and Elliott (2002) and Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, Bandura and Zimbardo (2000) noted that these approaches enable children to cope better with life stressors, improve their relationships with parents, teachers and peers and perform better academically. Skills that have shown improvements following universal primary prevention programs include interpersonal skills, prosocial behaviour and problem-solving skills, with an increasing trend in the development of EK and ER skills (Domitrovich, Cortes & Greenberg, 2007). Additionally, these programs have proven particularly effective when teacher training has been offered beforehand (Kam, Greenberg & Walls, 2003).

A distinct advantage of universal programs for social–emotional skill development includes the use of structured manuals and curricula, supporting consistency in their delivery (Catalano et al; 2002). An additional benefit is the development of standardised measures to assess children’s behavioural outcomes. Greenberg et al. (2003) further report that the classroom environments of universal programs provide interactive instructional opportunities together with peer and school community opportunities and child self-direction. Child responses may be rewarded systematically and are more likely to be consolidated through multi-year programs (Greenberg et al., 2003).

39 However, universal programs are limited in their ability to address a variety of contextual risk factors that may contribute to social–emotional difficulties in early childhood, such as ineffective parenting or neighbourhood risks (Domitrovich et al., 2007). The overall trend with these approaches also appears to be one of schools delivering short-term, narrow- band universal program interventions to address specific concerns such as bullying (Adelman & Taylor, 2003). While such programs offer a specific focus (Catalano et al; 2002), they do not provide comprehensive, coordinated whole-school population strategies that combine universal and targeted approaches within multiple domains (e.g., child, peers, school and family). Multi-focused prevention programs address this need and as such, offer a more comprehensive approach.

2.12.2 Multi-focused primary prevention programs

Multi-focused primary prevention programs involve multiple combinations of teacher, parent and child peers as agents of change for children. Transfer and generalisation of acquired social–emotional skills between home and classroom settings are demonstrated to be more effective within these programs than in universal programs (Hughes, Cavell, Meehan, Zhang & Collie, 2005). Ştefan and Miclea (2012) report that multi-focused approaches comprising teacher training, parent training and child-focused activities within a curriculum are the most likely to affect child social–emotional outcomes, particularly for high-risk category children. Webster-Stratton and Hammond (1997) explored the possibilities of multiple combination peer and parent influences by using a social–emotional program to examine child classroom behaviours in children aged four to eight with known conduct problems. They compared a ‘child as peer’ training group with a ‘parent’ training group, a combined ‘child as peer plus parent’ training group and a control group. Their results demonstrate that combining elements of social–emotional skills training leads to superior outcomes for social–emotional skill development, with consolidation of these skills achieved after one year. A further example is

40 offered by Webster-Stratton (2001) in her multi-focused program, The Incredible Years. Children aged 2–13 years with identified behavioural difficulties undertook a ‘teacher plus parent’ combined skills training program. Results showed reductions in child misbehaviours within a classroom setting. Multi-focused programs have also been effective for improving conduct disorders in low, moderate and high-risk category children. For example, Ştefan and Miclea (2012) compared a ‘teacher plus parent plus child’ skills training group (using contingent responding with social–emotional activities) with a control group for children, aged four years. Results show that the multi-focused group achieved significant social–emotional skill improvement across all risk categories.

However, multi-focused interventions have also been criticised for having no additional benefits over universal programs (Tobler et al., 2000). Studies by Durlak and DuPre (2008) and Wilson and Lipsey (2007) suggest that multi-focused interventions are more likely to encounter implementation problems than universal programs, affecting the successful development of skills for children. An example of this may be the difficulty such programs face in following SAFE (sequenced, active, focused and explicit) procedures (Durlak et al., 2011). Such implementation problems may be minimised with universal interventions however, since the teacher leads the program and is able to manage SAFE procedures within the classroom setting.

The current study adopts the multi-focused primary prevention approach, aimed at examining combinations of parent and teacher influences as agents of change for children’s social–emotional skills. The implementation issues with this approach will be addressed in the study’s methodology chapter.