School Counselors as Social-Emotional Learning Consultants: Where Do We Begin?
School counselors promote student social and emotional learning (SEL), which is fundamental to a school's academic mission. However, while recognizing the importance of SEL, many school stakeholders view it as secondary and/or important for only some students. To ensure delivery of SEL to all students, school counselors must embrace a service model based on prevention and reposition themselves as SEL consultants. This calls for advocacy, collaboration, and leadership, focused on systemic change in the schools.
The ASCA National Model® (American School Counselor Association, 2005) provides a framework for school counseling programs based on the qualities of leadership, advocacy, and collaboration leading to systemic change. Consistent with the mission of schools, the school counselor's role in this model is to promote the academic, career, and personal/social development of students. Because school counselor training and expertise are in the social and emotional domains, a major school counselor responsibility is to support student academic and career goals by taking a leadership role in promoting student social and emotional development. However, according to many authors, although school personnel often see the connection of social and emotional development to academic achievement, the current trend in the schools is toward a myopic focus on academic development (e.g., Muller-Ackerman & Shelton, 2006; Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, & Walberg, 2007). In the atmosphere of No Child Left Behind (U.S. Department of Education, 2002), which requires academic accountability through student test scores, academic performance becomes the focal point while social and emotional development, essential to students' overall development, takes a back seat. This often leaves school counselors struggling to promote the importance of student social and emotional competence as basic to student academic and career development.
Ensuring that the social and emotional development of all students is enhanced becomes an even more challenging task for school counselors. Many school counselors have historically spent much of their time serving high-achieving or high-risk students, who make up only a small portion of the overall student body (ASCA, 2005). Additionally, when school counselors do serve the school at large, they may often perform inappropriate duties, such as creating master schedules or serving as testing coordinators (ASCA). In the cases where school counselors appropriately provide classroom counseling for all students, social and emotional learning (SEL) is often viewed as auxiliary and lacks infusion into the school's overall curriculum and climate (McCombs, 2004).
The purpose of this article is to encourage school counselors to renew their commitment to social and emotional development, strengthen their prevention work, and reposition themselves as social and emotional learning consultants. Creators of the ASCA National Model set forth a broad goal of facilitating each student's personal/social, academic, and career development. Implementing plans to facilitate this development, however, is challenging, and this article suggests new ways of thinking and strategizing to meet this goal. Facilitating student development in the three areas demands that school counselors advocate for SEL, an often undervalued area. A review of the definition of emotional intelligence and SEL, as well as examples of literature supporting the importance of the two to school and life success, arms school counselors with information for advocacy. School counselors then are encouraged to embrace collaboration with all stakeholders (e.g., teachers, administrators, parents, students) that goes beyond assessing needs to actually including stakeholders in the design and implementation of SEL programming.
The overall process calls for a strong leadership role in prevention programming and consultation. Rather than consultation aimed at responsive services for individual students, school counselors are encouraged to embrace a consultation approach aimed at prevention for all students. The ultimate goal is for school counselors to promote the integration of SEL programming throughout the school culture and offer equal access to SEL opportunities for all students. Through these efforts, the school counselor can emerge as an integral part of the educational team for all students. For some counselors, this may involve a radical shift; and for all counselors it will require a resolute and long-term commitment. However, adopting these responsibilities will help counselors to align their programs more closely with, and possibly to extend, the ASCA National Model (2005).
WHAT IS SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING?
Social-emotional learning is the process through which individuals become socially and emotionally intelligent. Social intelligence is the ability to understand and deal with people and to act judiciously in human relationships; this definition dates back to Edward Thorndike in 1920 and was later called interpersonal intelligence by Howard Gardner in his 1983 book on multiple intelligences (Burns, Bastian, & Nettelbeck, 2007; Pellitteri, 2006). The concept of emotional intelligence was first described in 1990 by Peter Salovey and John Mayer, and later popularized in 1995 by Daniel Goleman in his book Emotional Intelligence (Goleman, 2000). Salovey and Mayer as well as Goleman subsumed social intelligence under emotional intelligence (Goleman, 2006). Currently, there is a wealth of literature on emotional intelligence; however, there is no specific agreed-upon definition (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2007). Bar-On (2007) synthesized the core elements of various definitions of emotional intelligence (EI) to include (a) awareness of and appropriate expression of one's own emotions, (b) the ability to understand others' feelings to establish satisfying relationships, (c) successful adaptation to change and its accompanying emotions for effective problem solving, and (d) the ability to generate positive emotions and self-motivate.
Through SEL, children develop EI as they learn to identify and manage emotions, care about themselves and others, make ethical and responsible decisions, and develop positive relationships with peers and adults (Elias, Zins, et al., 1997). Broadly defined, SEL refers to "the process through which children enhance their ability to integrate thinking, feeling, and behaving to achieve important life tasks" (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007, p. 194). The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) identifies five SEL competency areas-self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision- making-that are basic to negotiating school, work, and life tasks effectively (CASEL, 2008b). Zins and colleagues (Zins, Payton, Weissberg, & O'Brien, 2007) have provided a developmental perspective of each of these skill clusters based on the grade level of students. For example, self-awareness includes recognizing simple emotions for elementary students, analyzing factors that precipitate their emotions for middle school students, and identifying how expression of emotions affects others for high school students. Three "benchmarks" of effective SEL programming include (a) formal and informal training in social and emotional skills throughout the school experience, (b) a safe school climate that supports social and emotional development, and (c) stakeholders (e.g., educators, parents, and community leaders) who are actively involved in SEL (Elias, Zins, et al.).
WHY IS SEL PROGRAMMING IN SCHOOLS IMPORTANT?
Enhancing student personal/social development is at the very heart of school counseling. School counselors know that effective education must extend beyond teaching academic skills to teaching social and emotional competencies, including promoting safe and healthy behaviors. A socially and emotionally intelligent student is less likely to develop aggressiveness, depression, and/or violent behaviors (Poulou, 2005). Moreover, children who develop social and emotional competence are more resistant to issues such as drugs, teen pregnancy, and gangs (Elias, Zins, et al., 1997). In a meta-analysis of 700 studies of interventions to promote the social and emotional development of children (preschool-12th grade), the researchers found multiple benefits for youth, including improved personal and social skills and reduced problem behaviors (CASEL, 2008a). The overall goal in promoting social and emotional development through SEL programming is not only to encourage individual achievement but also to promote prosocial behaviors that contribute to the psychological health of students, the school, and the society at large.
Although school counselors know the value of social and emotional development for students, they must articulate that importance to critical stakeholders (e.g., educators, parents). If school counselors wish to promote SEL programming, they must build a strong case for the impact of social and emotional competence on student academic achievement and career development.
SEL and Academic Achievement
It is well known that many schools across the United States are struggling to improve the academic achievement of their students. The approach to enhancing school performance often emphasizes academic instruction (e.g., individual tutoring, more classroom instruction) and overlooks learning as a social process. However, effective learning also involves the ability to communicate with co-learners as well as interaction and collaboration with teachers, peers, and families (McCombs, 2004; Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). The American Psychological Association (APA Work Group, 1997) identified 14 research-based psychological principles that influence learning. Principle 11 describes the social nature of learning: "Learning is influenced by social interactions, interpersonal relations, and communication with others" (p. 4). Student learning is enhanced through positive social relationships as well as a positive social climate in the school.
Learning is also an emotional process; feelings and their expression can facilitate or impede academic achievement (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). Researchers in the field of neuroscience are advancing our knowledge of the connection between cognitions and emotions. Brain research illustrates how emotion and cognition work "synergistically, with emotion driving attention, learning, memory and other mental activities" (McCombs, 2004, p. 24). For example, if a child is distressed because of a conflict at home or a bullying interaction with a classmate, the child's attentional focus will be drawn away from the learning task in the classroom.
Moreover, research supports the connection between emotional intelligence and academic functioning. Three independent studies examining the impact of emotional intelligence on the school performance (assessed by grade point average) of university students found that successful students were more emotionally intelligent (Bar-On, 2007). Consistent with the studies of university students, findings in elementary, middle, and high schools showed that variations in social and emotional functioning significantly predicted current or later academic achievement (Greenberg, Kusché, & Riggs, 2004; Parker et al., 2004). Further, in a meta-analysis of research on the impacts of 270 school-based SEL programs, researchers found positive effects in multiple areas including significant gains in student achievement test scores (CASEL, 2007). Although far from an exhaustive review, these findings provide some representative examples of the relationship between SEL and student achievement. As such, if the goal of schools is to improve student academic achievement, it makes little sense to neglect the promotion and development of SEL in students.
SEL and Career Development
Attempting to promote career development without including SEL does not make sense either. At a very basic level, career development begins with preventing students from dropping out of school. It is well known that a high school diploma is a prerequisite for many jobs and greatly enhances an individual's earning potential. Risk factors related to dropping out, in addition to academic achievement, include low socioeconomic status and behavioral problems (Christle, Jolivette, & Nelson, 2007; Suh & Suh, 2007). The resilience literature indicates that students who have remained in school despite risk factors had SEL provided by one or two caring persons, often in the schools (O'Neil, 1996). This supports the notion that providing SEL to all students has potential for positive outcomes in keeping students in school, which, in turn, contributes to more positive career outcomes.
Positive career outcomes depend on career development throughout the school years. Career development requires the ability to make informed career decisions, and decision making is a core competency of SEL. Effective decision makers understand the issue, consider the pros and cons of alternatives, and monitor their choices (CASEL, 2008b). Career development also requires self-awareness, another SEL competency. The process of self-awareness requires an honest and forthright examination of one's strengths and weaknesses (Stern, Hyman, & Martin, 2006). Students who have attended schools with SEL programming can employ effective decision- making strategies and what they know about themselves-along with their knowledge of the world of work-to choose successful and satisfying careers.
Social and emotional competence is necessary not only for school success and career choice, but also for career success. Goleman (1995) emphasized the impact of "emotional deficiencies" on the workplace. Just as an emotionally distressed child's focus is drawn away from learning, the distressed adult at work fails to attend, process information, or make clear decisions. Moreover, a harmonious working unit depends on the social and emotional competence of its team members. Exchange of information is critical to efficient team functioning; how that information is exchanged-either critically or artfully- affects both morale and productivity (Goleman). Moreover, employers themselves assert that they want employees skilled in human relations and problem solving, as well as in content knowledge (Fink, 2002). Working to ensure that high school graduates are socially and emotionally competent, in addition to being academically intelligent, will promote their becoming productive members of the workforce. By promoting social and emotional competence, in addition to academics, school counselors can work to ensure that high school graduates become productive members of the workforce.
HOW DO SCHOOL COUNSELORS BECOME SEL CONSULTANTS?
According to the outcome research, SEL programming is most effective if it is comprehensive throughout the school program and continuous throughout the student's school experience (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). School counselors who are building their programs based on the ASCA National Model strive to build such a program-one that is comprehensive and delivered in a systematic way to all students (ASCA, 2005). However, how do seasoned counselors who have traditionally served students through responsive services aimed at those with difficulties initiate a comprehensive SEL program for all students? How do counselors who already implement targeted SEL programming infuse that programming into the overall school curriculum and climate? School counselors must start by processing any concerns they might have about changes in their day-to-day work, an issue that emerges for some school counselors in new program implementation (Poynton, Schumacher, & Wilczenski, 2008). They must believe in the systemic change necessary for SEL programming to be infused into the overall school curriculum and climate. Foremost, they must commit to providing the advocacy, collaboration, and leadership necessary for systemic change-a commitment supported by the creators of the ASCA National Model for school counseling programs.
Advocate for SEL Programming
Developing a truly effective SEL program will require advocacy. As Poulou (2005) asserted, SEL programming as an integral part of the school mission "challenges the current paradigm of schoolbased learning" (p. 39). In order to advocate for integrating SEL into the overall school curriculum and environment, school counselors must address the common concerns of stakeholders.
Many stakeholders question the connection between SEL and academics and hold the view that SEL programming detracts from academic learning- the real mission of schools (Elias, Bruene- Butler, Blum, & Schuyler, 1997). Others worry that SEL programs will usurp parents' roles in teaching social and emotional skills. Still others doubt that SEL will really have an impact on children and school success (Elias et al.).
The best way for school counselors to prepare themselves to advocate for SEL programming is to identify the specific concerns of their stakeholders and become intimately familiar with the research literature on SEL. Elias, Bruene-Butler, Blum, and Schuyler (1997, 2000) drew on information from ethnographic site visits to schools to offer advice on addressing stakeholder concerns about SEL programming. A number of recent books such as Emotional Intelligence and Academic Achievement (Elias & Arnold, 2006) and Building Academic Success on Social and Emotional Learning (Zins, Weissberg, Wang, & Walberg, 2004) offer excellent information. Knowing the research will allow counselors to ease stakeholder worries and argue in favor of SEL as a critical part of student academic development. In advocating for SEL programming, the school counselor is advocating for enhancing the school success of all students.
Collaborate with All Stakeholders
A comprehensive SEL program must indeed target all students and serve the needs of the particular school and population it serves. This undertaking requires collaboration with everyone involved- administrators, teachers, parents, students, and other school personnel-by first getting to know their perspectives. What school issues need to be addressed? What do stakeholders want for the students and the school, in terms of both academics and SEL? What social and emotional qualities do they value? What are ways that these needs and wants might be addressed?
Collaboration, however, must go beyond needs assessment to involvement of stakeholders in the design and implementation of SEL programming. In an effective multiyear, schoolwide SEL program, school staff members attributed the positive receptivity to SEL interventions to stakeholder familiarity with plan proposals (Romasz, Kantor, & Elias, 2004). Stakeholders who actually contribute perspectives and ideas may well show even more commitment to an SEL plan. Moreover, stakeholders who are involved in the design of SEL programming may invest themselves more enthusiastically in plan implementation. Collaboration with all stakeholders in all facets of SEL programming-from initial brainstorming through implementation and ongoing evaluation-is a prerequisite for the success of a program (Elias et al., 2000; Poulou, 2005).
Administrators. It is critical to have initial buy-in from school administrators (Brown, Roderick, Lantieri, & Aber, 2004). Most school counselors have already established positive relationships with administrators. If the counselor has done well in SEL advocacy, administrators will become co-advocates. Support from administrators facilitates the change necessary for SEL infusion into the curriculum and is critically important in fostering a school climate conducive to SEL. The effectiveness of a principal's leadership affects new program implementation; knowing the principal's leadership style can help the school counselor to identify where the principal can be most effective in SEL support (Brown et al.).
Teachers. Teachers are probably one of the most important collaborators, because they are an integral part of successful SEL program implementation. In the CASEL (2007) study of school-based programs, those implemented by teachers rather than researchers showed effectiveness in all the areas examined. When introducing SEL ideas to teachers, school counselors must approach teachers' concerns about SEL interventions with sensitivity. Teachers' worries about taking time and energy away from academics and the possible effects on student performance outcomes are real in the current national climate in which teacher job performance is tied to academic curriculum standards. However, many effective teachers may already integrate social and emotional learning experiences into their classrooms. School counselors can highlight those activities, draw on teacher SEL expertise, and help teachers to develop other activities. Brown et al. (2004) stressed the importance of considering differences in teacher interests and strengths as SEL programming is developed.
Other school personnel. Collaboration should not overlook support staff in the school. From office workers to playground or lunch supervisors, support staff can play an important part in offering a school climate conducive to SEL. Because these individuals often see students in an environment other than the classroom, their perspectives on what needs to be addressed and how that might be done can provide useful information for the school counselor.
Besides support staff, other mental health personnel can serve as helpful collaborators. In designing and implementing SEL programming, it is important to engage school psychologists, social workers, and any other mental health personnel in the school. Romano and Kachgal (2004) outlined the benefits of a stronger partnership between school counseling and counseling psychology in the promotion of systemic change based on their shared focus on developmental theory, career development, and prevention. Because school psychologists, social workers, and counseling psychologists already believe in the benefits of SEL, they can serve as valuable collaborators in promoting, designing, and implementing SEL programming.
Parents. Parent involvement in SEL programming is critical to its success. Social and emotional learning outcomes, as well as academic achievement, correlate with home influences (Christenson & Havsy, 2004). If schools reside in low-income neighborhoods, parents may face various demographic and psychological obstacles that hinder their school participation (Van Velsor & Orozco, 2007); however, the school counselor can initiate active efforts to obtain parents' support. This calls for outreach beginning with building relationships with parents, soliciting their opinions on school needs, educating them about the relationship between SEL and academic achievement, and engaging them in SEL efforts. If parents already participate in the school, they may have varying levels of skepticism about SEL programming. In this case, listening to their concerns and engaging their participation in SEL planning is critical. According to CASEL, school-family partnerships, in which parents participate in all aspects of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, lead to the most effective SEL interventions (Elias, Zins, et al., 1997).
Students. Students, too, must serve as collaborators in SEL programming. Freiberg (1998) highlighted the value of assessing student perceptions about school, and viewed such assessment as fundamental to school change efforts. As with other stakeholders, respect for students' ideas enhances their commitment. If committed, students will actively seek to increase their own social and emotional competencies as well as to contribute to creating an environment conducive to ongoing SEL for others.
Community leaders. One area that may be overlooked in program design and implementation is collaboration with community leaders. These leaders can provide valuable insights about the communities in which students live, the challenges they face, and the values they hold-factors related to SEL. These community connections are critically important, especially in cases where the school serves diverse populations or in instances in which the values of the school may differ from those of the parents. In a study of high-achieving middle schools for Latino students in poverty, researchers found that, in the successful schools, connection with the community was a defining characteristic (Jesse, Davis, & Pokorny, 2004). SEL programming, too, can be enhanced with community connections, which may provide opportunities for SEL outside the school (Johnson & Johnson, 2004).
Become a Leader for Change
The ASCA National Model (2005) calls for school counselors to assume a leadership role to effect systemic change in schools. Because school counselors interact with students, administrators, teachers, support personnel, parents, and outside agencies, they are in an ideal position to do so. One of the changes needed for schools to successfully educate students is the integration of the academic growth of students with their social and emotional development. To achieve this change, the school counselor's role shifts from a traditional focus on responding to individual student needs to a more resolute focus on enhancing the SEL of all students. To execute this role, the school counselor must take on a prevention orientation in a very intentional way and seek to serve (eventually) as SEL consultant to school personnel. This focus on prevention, consultation, and comprehensive SEL programming calls for wide-ranging systemic change not only in the school but also in how school personnel (and, in some cases, school counselors) view school counselor responsibilities.
An effective SEL program starts with prevention efforts aimed at all students (Bruene-Butler, Poedubicky, & Sperlazza, 2006). School counselors can borrow from the public health model, which focuses on prevention interventions designed to alleviate causes associated with problems and, in turn, decrease the number of individuals in need of special services (Strein, Hoagwood, & Cohn, 2003). Although many schools already implement some preventive SEL programming (e.g., dropout prevention, alcohol education) in the form of separate, short-term, didactic programs, these efforts are less effective than long-term coordinated efforts (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). Therefore, school counselors must examine existing programming, look for any overlaps, and identify how existing programming fits into a comprehensive and continuous SEL plan (Elias, Bruene-Butler, et al., 1997, 2000).
Given that some school counselors might be overwhelmed by the task of designing a comprehensive SEL curriculum, it is important to note that there are some available resources to begin the work. One example is the Three Cs (cooperative community, constructive conflict resolution, and civic values) program of SEL, which is based on social interdependence and conflict theories and has been used in a variety of schools from low-income urban schools to high-income private schools (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) is another SEL curriculum, which is developmentally based and designed to improve the social-emotional functioning of elementary school-aged children (Greenberg et al., 2004). Additionally, the CASEL Web site (www.casel.org) provides many targeted SEL programs and activities that can be integrated into a comprehensive counseling program and adapted to local school contexts.
In addition to coordinating schoolwide SEL efforts, school counselors must explore creative ways to fit existing SEL strategies into the academic curriculum (rather than delivering them as a separate service). This means that school counselors must work to make SEL an integral component of students' daily learning environment. Initial efforts may require hands-on work by school counselors-working directly with teachers in their classrooms. These efforts also may require teacher training, because many teachers have little background in SEL strategies (Elias, Bruene-Butler, et al., 1997). Providing information about SEL, establishing an open dialogue with teachers about what they already do (even though they may not call it SEL), and brainstorming ways that SEL activities can fit into academic lessons should all be part of training. School counselor expertise in social and emotional development can serve as a foundation for this work.
Given that student-counselor ratios in schools nationwide preclude direct delivery of SEL activities to students on a daily basis, school counselors wishing to extend their influence must ultimately serve, first and foremost, as consultants to teachers and other school personnel in their ongoing efforts to deliver a SEL curriculum and create a school climate conducive to SEL. Although school counselors have traditionally performed consultation duties, these may have focused more on individual student issues and problems. In this new SEL consultant role, school counselors would move from a direct service model to an indirect service model. In essence, school counselors would "give away" their expertise to the individuals who have the most daily contact with the most children (Conyne, Crowell, & Newmeyer, 2008; Gutkin & Curtis, 2009; Miller, 1969). Consultation, then, offers school counselors the opportunity to positively impact the social and emotional development of all students, rather than just those with difficulties (Gutkin & Curtis).
The change in role requires what Elias, O'Brien, and Weissberg (2006) have called transformative leadership, which involves a willingness "to realign structures and relationships to achieve genuine and sustainable change" (p. 11). According to these authors, transformative leadership requires courage (to advocate for SEL), vision (of SEL programming created in collaboration with stakeholders), and integrity (in committing to ongoing improvement of SEL programming). In a study of new school counselors, Dollarhide, Gibson, and Saginak (2008) found that successful leaders distinguished themselves by their courage in the face of resistance and their integrity in taking responsibility for change and identifying clear, focused, reachable goals.
It is important to highlight that successful systemic change in the area of SEL will require ongoing assessment. School counselors typically support school efforts to evaluate academic progress, important to the goals of individual students and to the overall mission of the school. Beyond academic measures, however, it is critical to use a variety of "yardsticks" to measure change (Muller-Ackerman & Shelton, 2006) from existing and new programming. Measurable outcomes that can affect school performance include student "school attitudes (e.g., motivation, responsibility, attachment) and school behavior (e.g., engagement, attendance, study habits)" (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007, p. 194). To assess process and make ongoing modifications for improvement, an action research approach can prove invaluable (Elias et al., 2000; Romasz et al., 2004) and goes hand in hand with making long-lasting systemic change.
CONCLUSION
School counselors have always contributed to student social and emotional learning in order to enhance academic achievement. Too often, however, by virtue of traditional expectations, counselors have directed services to a small number of students. Additionally, where preventative SEL activities are part of school counseling programs, they often exist as secondary services rather than as primary educational services embedded in the overall school curriculum and environment. This often happens because school stakeholders fail to understand the intimate relationship between social and emotional competence and school success. However, through advocacy for preventative SEL programming, collaboration with stakeholders, and leadership aimed at the creation of developmental SEL activities for all students, school counselors can begin to build "the needed bridge between counseling and education" (ASCA, 2005, p. 2).
The systemic change necessary to move SEL from the periphery of the school into the heart of the classroom and the school requires a long-term commitment. By starting small, however, the undertaking seems less colossal. As Elias et al. (2000) have advised, choosing a "small craft is a sensible way to prepare for a maiden voyage" (p. 269). Schools that have successfully implemented social-emotional learning programs have started with small pilot projects, examined them thoroughly, and committed themselves to ongoing development (Elias, Bruene- Butler, et al., 1997).
Initially, school counselors need to set their sights on reasonable and achievable goals. The initial goal may be to gain stakeholder commitment to the SEL process as a part of academic achievement, adapt and coordinate the prevention programming already in place, and value any small changes that occur (Elias et al., 2000; Romasz et al., 2004). The important work here is to engage wholeheartedly in the process and focus on the continuation of that process (Elias et al.). Just as creating an effective comprehensive school counseling program requires time and talent (Muller-Ackerman & Shelton, 2006), weaving SEL programming into the very fabric of the school environment takes time, creativity, and the patience to sustain efforts over years of development.
Eventually, providing SEL programming for all students will mean a significant change in at least part of the school counselor's role. Instead of focusing on direct service, the school counselor will channel more time into SEL consultation efforts. In this new role, the school counselor will train and oversee other school personnel delivering the SEL curriculum in the classrooms and throughout the school. Given the large caseloads of school counselors, the long-term goal of school counselor as SEL consultant makes perfect sense.
ASCA has set a challenge before school counselors- to craft school counseling programs for systemic change in the schools. Developing social and emotional learning programming for all students supports this call. It serves not only to change the school counselor role, but to change the schools. Through leadership, advocacy, and collaboration, school counselors can contribute to systemic change needed to transform our schools into learning environments dedicated to the success of all students.
Rather than consultation aimed at responsive services for individual students, school counselors are encouraged to embrace a consultation approach aimed at prevention for all students.
In the atmosphere of No Child Left Behind, academic performance becomes the focal point while social and emotional development, essential to students' overall development, takes a back seat.
School counselors know that effective education must extend beyond teaching academic skills to teaching social and emotional competencies, including promoting safe and healthy behaviors.
Schools that have successfully implemented social-emotional learning programs have started with small pilot projects, examined them thoroughly, and committed themselves to ongoing development.
References
American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (2nd ed.). Alexandria,VA: Author.
APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs. (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for reform and redesign.Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.
Bar-On, R. (2007).How important is it to educate people to be emotionally intelligent, and can it be done? In R. Bar-On, J. G.Maree, & M. J. Elias (Eds.), Educating people to be emotionally intelligent (pp. 1-14).Westport, CT: Praeger.
Brown, J. L., Roderick,T., Lantieri, L., & Aber, J. L. (2004).The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program: A school-based social and emotional learning program. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 151-169).New York: Teachers College Press.
Bruene-Butler, L., Poedubicky,V. A., & Sperlazza, J. (2006). Social and emotional learning through comprehensive school counseling: A case study. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller-Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 217-230).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Burns, N. R., Bastian,V. A., & Nettelbeck,T. (2007). Emotional intelligence:More than personality and cognitive ability? In G.Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R.D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 167-196).New York:Oxford University Press.
Christenson, S. L., & Havsy, L. H. (2004). Family-school-peer relationships: Significance for social, emotional, and academic learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P.Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 59-75).New York: Teachers College Press.
Christle, C., Jolivette, K., & Nelson, C.M. (2007). School characteristics related to high school dropout rates. Remedial & Special Education, 28, 325-329.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2007). The benefits of school-based social and emotional learning: Highlights from a forthcoming CASEL report. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.casel.org/downloads/metaanalysissum.pdf
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2008a). Benefits of SEL-Meta-analysis: Project description. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.casel.org/sel/meta.php#rs
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2008b). What is SEL? Skills and competencies. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.casel.org/basics/skills.php
Conyne, R. K., Crowell, J. L., & Newmeyer,M.D. (2008). Group techniques: How to use them purposefully. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Dollarhide, C.T., Gibson,D. M., & Saginak, K. A. (2008).New counselors' leadership efforts in school counseling: Themes from a year-long qualitative study. Professional School Counseling, 11, 262-271.
Elias, M. J., & Arnold, H. (Eds.). (2006). Emotional intelligence and academic achievement: Social-emotional learning in the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Elias, M. J., Bruene-Butler, L., Blum, L., & Schuyler,T. (1997).How to launch a social and emotional learning program. Educational Leadership, 54(8), 15-19.
Elias, M. J., Bruene-Butler, L., Blum, L., & Schuyler,T. (2000). Voices from the field: Identifying and overcoming roadblocks to carrying out programs in social and emotional learning/emotional intelligence. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11, 253-272.
Elias, M. J.,O'Brien,M. J., & Weissberg, R. P. (2006,December). Student services. Produced in collaboration with the National Association of School Psychologists. Retrieved September 3, 2008, from http://www.nasponline.org/resources/principals/Social%20Emotional%20Learning%20NASSP.pdf
Elias,M. J., Zins, J.E.,Weissberg,R.P., Frey,K.S., Greenberg,M.T., Haynes,N.M., et al. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Fink, L.D. (2002). Beyond small groups: Harnessing the extraordinary power of learning teams. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L.D. Fink (Eds.), Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching (pp. 3-26). Sterling,VA: Stylus.
Freiberg, H. J. (1998).Measuring school climate: Let me count the ways. Educational Leadership, 56, 22-26.
Goleman,D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Goleman,D. (2000). Foreword. In R. Bar-On & J.D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. vii-viii). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Goleman,D. (2006). Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships. New York: Bantam Books.
Greenberg,M.T., Kusché, C. A., & Riggs,N. (2004).The PATHS curriculum: Theory and research on neurocognitive development and school success. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 170-188).New York: Teachers College Press.
Gutkin,T. B., & Curtis,M. J. (2009). School-based consultation: The science and practice of indirect service delivery. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (4th ed., pp. 591-635).New York:Wiley.
Jesse,D., Davis, A., & Pokorny, N. (2004).High-achieving middle schools for Latino students in poverty. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 9, 23-45.
Johnson,D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2004).The three Cs of promoting social and emotional learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 40-58).New York: Teachers College Press.
Matthews, G., Zeidner,M., & Roberts, R.D. (2007). Emotional intelligence: Consensus, controversies, and questions. In G.Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R.D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 3-46).New York:Oxford University Press.
McCombs, B. L. (2004).The learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for balancing academic achievement and social-emotional learning outcomes. In J. E. Zins, R. P.Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 23-39).New York: Teachers College Press.
Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 24, 1063-1075.
Muller-Ackerman, B., & Shelton, C. (2006). Practitioners' perspective on school counseling and emotional intelligence. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller- Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 17-27).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
O'Neil, J. (1996).On emotional intelligence: An interview with Daniel Goleman. Educational Leadership, 54, 6-11.
Parker, J.D. A., Creque, R. E., Barnhart,D. L., Harris, J. I.,Majeski, S. A.,Wood, L. M., et al. (2004). Academic achievement in high school:Does emotional intelligence matter? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1321-1330.
Pellitteri, P. (2006). Appendix A: A brief historical perspective of emotional intelligence. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller-Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 253-260).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Poulou,M. (2005).The prevention of emotional and behavioural difficulties in schools: Teachers' suggestions. Educational Psychology in Practice, 21, 37-52.
Poynton,T. A., Schumacher, R. A., & Wilczenski, F. L. (2008). School counselors' attitudes regarding statewide comprehensive developmental guidance model implementation. Professional School Counseling, 11, 417-422.
Romano, J. L., & Kachgal, M. M. (2004). Counseling psychology and school counseling: An underutilized partnership. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 184-215.
Romasz,T. E., Kantor, J.H., & Elias, M. J. (2004). Implementation and evaluation of urban school-wide social-emotional learning programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27, 89-103.
Stern, R., Hyman, L., & Martin, C. E. (2006).The importance of self-awareness for school counselors. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller-Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 49-62).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Strein,W., Hoagwood, K., & Cohn, A. (2003). School psychology: A public health perspective. I. Prevention, populations, and systems change. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 23-38.
Suh, S., & Suh, J. (2007). Risk factors and levels of risk for high school dropouts. Professional School Counseling, 10, 297-306.
U.S.Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind: A desktop reference. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/nclbreference/index.html
Van Velsor, P., & Orozco, G. L. (2007). Involving low-income parents in the schools: Communitycentric strategies for school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 11, 17-24.
Zins, J. E.,Bloodworth,M. R.,Weissberg,R.P., & Walberg,H. J. (2007).The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17, 191-210.
Zins, J. E., Payton, J.W.,Weissberg, R. P., & O'Brien, M. U. (2007). Social and emotional learning for successful school performance. In G.Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R.D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 376-395).New York:Oxford University Press.
Zins, J. E.,Weissberg, R. P.,Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.). (2004). Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? New York: Teachers College Press.
The ASCA National Model® (American School Counselor Association, 2005) provides a framework for school counseling programs based on the qualities of leadership, advocacy, and collaboration leading to systemic change. Consistent with the mission of schools, the school counselor's role in this model is to promote the academic, career, and personal/social development of students. Because school counselor training and expertise are in the social and emotional domains, a major school counselor responsibility is to support student academic and career goals by taking a leadership role in promoting student social and emotional development. However, according to many authors, although school personnel often see the connection of social and emotional development to academic achievement, the current trend in the schools is toward a myopic focus on academic development (e.g., Muller-Ackerman & Shelton, 2006; Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, & Walberg, 2007). In the atmosphere of No Child Left Behind (U.S. Department of Education, 2002), which requires academic accountability through student test scores, academic performance becomes the focal point while social and emotional development, essential to students' overall development, takes a back seat. This often leaves school counselors struggling to promote the importance of student social and emotional competence as basic to student academic and career development.
Ensuring that the social and emotional development of all students is enhanced becomes an even more challenging task for school counselors. Many school counselors have historically spent much of their time serving high-achieving or high-risk students, who make up only a small portion of the overall student body (ASCA, 2005). Additionally, when school counselors do serve the school at large, they may often perform inappropriate duties, such as creating master schedules or serving as testing coordinators (ASCA). In the cases where school counselors appropriately provide classroom counseling for all students, social and emotional learning (SEL) is often viewed as auxiliary and lacks infusion into the school's overall curriculum and climate (McCombs, 2004).
The purpose of this article is to encourage school counselors to renew their commitment to social and emotional development, strengthen their prevention work, and reposition themselves as social and emotional learning consultants. Creators of the ASCA National Model set forth a broad goal of facilitating each student's personal/social, academic, and career development. Implementing plans to facilitate this development, however, is challenging, and this article suggests new ways of thinking and strategizing to meet this goal. Facilitating student development in the three areas demands that school counselors advocate for SEL, an often undervalued area. A review of the definition of emotional intelligence and SEL, as well as examples of literature supporting the importance of the two to school and life success, arms school counselors with information for advocacy. School counselors then are encouraged to embrace collaboration with all stakeholders (e.g., teachers, administrators, parents, students) that goes beyond assessing needs to actually including stakeholders in the design and implementation of SEL programming.
The overall process calls for a strong leadership role in prevention programming and consultation. Rather than consultation aimed at responsive services for individual students, school counselors are encouraged to embrace a consultation approach aimed at prevention for all students. The ultimate goal is for school counselors to promote the integration of SEL programming throughout the school culture and offer equal access to SEL opportunities for all students. Through these efforts, the school counselor can emerge as an integral part of the educational team for all students. For some counselors, this may involve a radical shift; and for all counselors it will require a resolute and long-term commitment. However, adopting these responsibilities will help counselors to align their programs more closely with, and possibly to extend, the ASCA National Model (2005).
WHAT IS SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING?
Social-emotional learning is the process through which individuals become socially and emotionally intelligent. Social intelligence is the ability to understand and deal with people and to act judiciously in human relationships; this definition dates back to Edward Thorndike in 1920 and was later called interpersonal intelligence by Howard Gardner in his 1983 book on multiple intelligences (Burns, Bastian, & Nettelbeck, 2007; Pellitteri, 2006). The concept of emotional intelligence was first described in 1990 by Peter Salovey and John Mayer, and later popularized in 1995 by Daniel Goleman in his book Emotional Intelligence (Goleman, 2000). Salovey and Mayer as well as Goleman subsumed social intelligence under emotional intelligence (Goleman, 2006). Currently, there is a wealth of literature on emotional intelligence; however, there is no specific agreed-upon definition (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2007). Bar-On (2007) synthesized the core elements of various definitions of emotional intelligence (EI) to include (a) awareness of and appropriate expression of one's own emotions, (b) the ability to understand others' feelings to establish satisfying relationships, (c) successful adaptation to change and its accompanying emotions for effective problem solving, and (d) the ability to generate positive emotions and self-motivate.
Through SEL, children develop EI as they learn to identify and manage emotions, care about themselves and others, make ethical and responsible decisions, and develop positive relationships with peers and adults (Elias, Zins, et al., 1997). Broadly defined, SEL refers to "the process through which children enhance their ability to integrate thinking, feeling, and behaving to achieve important life tasks" (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007, p. 194). The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) identifies five SEL competency areas-self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision- making-that are basic to negotiating school, work, and life tasks effectively (CASEL, 2008b). Zins and colleagues (Zins, Payton, Weissberg, & O'Brien, 2007) have provided a developmental perspective of each of these skill clusters based on the grade level of students. For example, self-awareness includes recognizing simple emotions for elementary students, analyzing factors that precipitate their emotions for middle school students, and identifying how expression of emotions affects others for high school students. Three "benchmarks" of effective SEL programming include (a) formal and informal training in social and emotional skills throughout the school experience, (b) a safe school climate that supports social and emotional development, and (c) stakeholders (e.g., educators, parents, and community leaders) who are actively involved in SEL (Elias, Zins, et al.).
WHY IS SEL PROGRAMMING IN SCHOOLS IMPORTANT?
Enhancing student personal/social development is at the very heart of school counseling. School counselors know that effective education must extend beyond teaching academic skills to teaching social and emotional competencies, including promoting safe and healthy behaviors. A socially and emotionally intelligent student is less likely to develop aggressiveness, depression, and/or violent behaviors (Poulou, 2005). Moreover, children who develop social and emotional competence are more resistant to issues such as drugs, teen pregnancy, and gangs (Elias, Zins, et al., 1997). In a meta-analysis of 700 studies of interventions to promote the social and emotional development of children (preschool-12th grade), the researchers found multiple benefits for youth, including improved personal and social skills and reduced problem behaviors (CASEL, 2008a). The overall goal in promoting social and emotional development through SEL programming is not only to encourage individual achievement but also to promote prosocial behaviors that contribute to the psychological health of students, the school, and the society at large.
Although school counselors know the value of social and emotional development for students, they must articulate that importance to critical stakeholders (e.g., educators, parents). If school counselors wish to promote SEL programming, they must build a strong case for the impact of social and emotional competence on student academic achievement and career development.
SEL and Academic Achievement
It is well known that many schools across the United States are struggling to improve the academic achievement of their students. The approach to enhancing school performance often emphasizes academic instruction (e.g., individual tutoring, more classroom instruction) and overlooks learning as a social process. However, effective learning also involves the ability to communicate with co-learners as well as interaction and collaboration with teachers, peers, and families (McCombs, 2004; Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). The American Psychological Association (APA Work Group, 1997) identified 14 research-based psychological principles that influence learning. Principle 11 describes the social nature of learning: "Learning is influenced by social interactions, interpersonal relations, and communication with others" (p. 4). Student learning is enhanced through positive social relationships as well as a positive social climate in the school.
Learning is also an emotional process; feelings and their expression can facilitate or impede academic achievement (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). Researchers in the field of neuroscience are advancing our knowledge of the connection between cognitions and emotions. Brain research illustrates how emotion and cognition work "synergistically, with emotion driving attention, learning, memory and other mental activities" (McCombs, 2004, p. 24). For example, if a child is distressed because of a conflict at home or a bullying interaction with a classmate, the child's attentional focus will be drawn away from the learning task in the classroom.
Moreover, research supports the connection between emotional intelligence and academic functioning. Three independent studies examining the impact of emotional intelligence on the school performance (assessed by grade point average) of university students found that successful students were more emotionally intelligent (Bar-On, 2007). Consistent with the studies of university students, findings in elementary, middle, and high schools showed that variations in social and emotional functioning significantly predicted current or later academic achievement (Greenberg, Kusché, & Riggs, 2004; Parker et al., 2004). Further, in a meta-analysis of research on the impacts of 270 school-based SEL programs, researchers found positive effects in multiple areas including significant gains in student achievement test scores (CASEL, 2007). Although far from an exhaustive review, these findings provide some representative examples of the relationship between SEL and student achievement. As such, if the goal of schools is to improve student academic achievement, it makes little sense to neglect the promotion and development of SEL in students.
SEL and Career Development
Attempting to promote career development without including SEL does not make sense either. At a very basic level, career development begins with preventing students from dropping out of school. It is well known that a high school diploma is a prerequisite for many jobs and greatly enhances an individual's earning potential. Risk factors related to dropping out, in addition to academic achievement, include low socioeconomic status and behavioral problems (Christle, Jolivette, & Nelson, 2007; Suh & Suh, 2007). The resilience literature indicates that students who have remained in school despite risk factors had SEL provided by one or two caring persons, often in the schools (O'Neil, 1996). This supports the notion that providing SEL to all students has potential for positive outcomes in keeping students in school, which, in turn, contributes to more positive career outcomes.
Positive career outcomes depend on career development throughout the school years. Career development requires the ability to make informed career decisions, and decision making is a core competency of SEL. Effective decision makers understand the issue, consider the pros and cons of alternatives, and monitor their choices (CASEL, 2008b). Career development also requires self-awareness, another SEL competency. The process of self-awareness requires an honest and forthright examination of one's strengths and weaknesses (Stern, Hyman, & Martin, 2006). Students who have attended schools with SEL programming can employ effective decision- making strategies and what they know about themselves-along with their knowledge of the world of work-to choose successful and satisfying careers.
Social and emotional competence is necessary not only for school success and career choice, but also for career success. Goleman (1995) emphasized the impact of "emotional deficiencies" on the workplace. Just as an emotionally distressed child's focus is drawn away from learning, the distressed adult at work fails to attend, process information, or make clear decisions. Moreover, a harmonious working unit depends on the social and emotional competence of its team members. Exchange of information is critical to efficient team functioning; how that information is exchanged-either critically or artfully- affects both morale and productivity (Goleman). Moreover, employers themselves assert that they want employees skilled in human relations and problem solving, as well as in content knowledge (Fink, 2002). Working to ensure that high school graduates are socially and emotionally competent, in addition to being academically intelligent, will promote their becoming productive members of the workforce. By promoting social and emotional competence, in addition to academics, school counselors can work to ensure that high school graduates become productive members of the workforce.
HOW DO SCHOOL COUNSELORS BECOME SEL CONSULTANTS?
According to the outcome research, SEL programming is most effective if it is comprehensive throughout the school program and continuous throughout the student's school experience (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). School counselors who are building their programs based on the ASCA National Model strive to build such a program-one that is comprehensive and delivered in a systematic way to all students (ASCA, 2005). However, how do seasoned counselors who have traditionally served students through responsive services aimed at those with difficulties initiate a comprehensive SEL program for all students? How do counselors who already implement targeted SEL programming infuse that programming into the overall school curriculum and climate? School counselors must start by processing any concerns they might have about changes in their day-to-day work, an issue that emerges for some school counselors in new program implementation (Poynton, Schumacher, & Wilczenski, 2008). They must believe in the systemic change necessary for SEL programming to be infused into the overall school curriculum and climate. Foremost, they must commit to providing the advocacy, collaboration, and leadership necessary for systemic change-a commitment supported by the creators of the ASCA National Model for school counseling programs.
Advocate for SEL Programming
Developing a truly effective SEL program will require advocacy. As Poulou (2005) asserted, SEL programming as an integral part of the school mission "challenges the current paradigm of schoolbased learning" (p. 39). In order to advocate for integrating SEL into the overall school curriculum and environment, school counselors must address the common concerns of stakeholders.
Many stakeholders question the connection between SEL and academics and hold the view that SEL programming detracts from academic learning- the real mission of schools (Elias, Bruene- Butler, Blum, & Schuyler, 1997). Others worry that SEL programs will usurp parents' roles in teaching social and emotional skills. Still others doubt that SEL will really have an impact on children and school success (Elias et al.).
The best way for school counselors to prepare themselves to advocate for SEL programming is to identify the specific concerns of their stakeholders and become intimately familiar with the research literature on SEL. Elias, Bruene-Butler, Blum, and Schuyler (1997, 2000) drew on information from ethnographic site visits to schools to offer advice on addressing stakeholder concerns about SEL programming. A number of recent books such as Emotional Intelligence and Academic Achievement (Elias & Arnold, 2006) and Building Academic Success on Social and Emotional Learning (Zins, Weissberg, Wang, & Walberg, 2004) offer excellent information. Knowing the research will allow counselors to ease stakeholder worries and argue in favor of SEL as a critical part of student academic development. In advocating for SEL programming, the school counselor is advocating for enhancing the school success of all students.
Collaborate with All Stakeholders
A comprehensive SEL program must indeed target all students and serve the needs of the particular school and population it serves. This undertaking requires collaboration with everyone involved- administrators, teachers, parents, students, and other school personnel-by first getting to know their perspectives. What school issues need to be addressed? What do stakeholders want for the students and the school, in terms of both academics and SEL? What social and emotional qualities do they value? What are ways that these needs and wants might be addressed?
Collaboration, however, must go beyond needs assessment to involvement of stakeholders in the design and implementation of SEL programming. In an effective multiyear, schoolwide SEL program, school staff members attributed the positive receptivity to SEL interventions to stakeholder familiarity with plan proposals (Romasz, Kantor, & Elias, 2004). Stakeholders who actually contribute perspectives and ideas may well show even more commitment to an SEL plan. Moreover, stakeholders who are involved in the design of SEL programming may invest themselves more enthusiastically in plan implementation. Collaboration with all stakeholders in all facets of SEL programming-from initial brainstorming through implementation and ongoing evaluation-is a prerequisite for the success of a program (Elias et al., 2000; Poulou, 2005).
Administrators. It is critical to have initial buy-in from school administrators (Brown, Roderick, Lantieri, & Aber, 2004). Most school counselors have already established positive relationships with administrators. If the counselor has done well in SEL advocacy, administrators will become co-advocates. Support from administrators facilitates the change necessary for SEL infusion into the curriculum and is critically important in fostering a school climate conducive to SEL. The effectiveness of a principal's leadership affects new program implementation; knowing the principal's leadership style can help the school counselor to identify where the principal can be most effective in SEL support (Brown et al.).
Teachers. Teachers are probably one of the most important collaborators, because they are an integral part of successful SEL program implementation. In the CASEL (2007) study of school-based programs, those implemented by teachers rather than researchers showed effectiveness in all the areas examined. When introducing SEL ideas to teachers, school counselors must approach teachers' concerns about SEL interventions with sensitivity. Teachers' worries about taking time and energy away from academics and the possible effects on student performance outcomes are real in the current national climate in which teacher job performance is tied to academic curriculum standards. However, many effective teachers may already integrate social and emotional learning experiences into their classrooms. School counselors can highlight those activities, draw on teacher SEL expertise, and help teachers to develop other activities. Brown et al. (2004) stressed the importance of considering differences in teacher interests and strengths as SEL programming is developed.
Other school personnel. Collaboration should not overlook support staff in the school. From office workers to playground or lunch supervisors, support staff can play an important part in offering a school climate conducive to SEL. Because these individuals often see students in an environment other than the classroom, their perspectives on what needs to be addressed and how that might be done can provide useful information for the school counselor.
Besides support staff, other mental health personnel can serve as helpful collaborators. In designing and implementing SEL programming, it is important to engage school psychologists, social workers, and any other mental health personnel in the school. Romano and Kachgal (2004) outlined the benefits of a stronger partnership between school counseling and counseling psychology in the promotion of systemic change based on their shared focus on developmental theory, career development, and prevention. Because school psychologists, social workers, and counseling psychologists already believe in the benefits of SEL, they can serve as valuable collaborators in promoting, designing, and implementing SEL programming.
Parents. Parent involvement in SEL programming is critical to its success. Social and emotional learning outcomes, as well as academic achievement, correlate with home influences (Christenson & Havsy, 2004). If schools reside in low-income neighborhoods, parents may face various demographic and psychological obstacles that hinder their school participation (Van Velsor & Orozco, 2007); however, the school counselor can initiate active efforts to obtain parents' support. This calls for outreach beginning with building relationships with parents, soliciting their opinions on school needs, educating them about the relationship between SEL and academic achievement, and engaging them in SEL efforts. If parents already participate in the school, they may have varying levels of skepticism about SEL programming. In this case, listening to their concerns and engaging their participation in SEL planning is critical. According to CASEL, school-family partnerships, in which parents participate in all aspects of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, lead to the most effective SEL interventions (Elias, Zins, et al., 1997).
Students. Students, too, must serve as collaborators in SEL programming. Freiberg (1998) highlighted the value of assessing student perceptions about school, and viewed such assessment as fundamental to school change efforts. As with other stakeholders, respect for students' ideas enhances their commitment. If committed, students will actively seek to increase their own social and emotional competencies as well as to contribute to creating an environment conducive to ongoing SEL for others.
Community leaders. One area that may be overlooked in program design and implementation is collaboration with community leaders. These leaders can provide valuable insights about the communities in which students live, the challenges they face, and the values they hold-factors related to SEL. These community connections are critically important, especially in cases where the school serves diverse populations or in instances in which the values of the school may differ from those of the parents. In a study of high-achieving middle schools for Latino students in poverty, researchers found that, in the successful schools, connection with the community was a defining characteristic (Jesse, Davis, & Pokorny, 2004). SEL programming, too, can be enhanced with community connections, which may provide opportunities for SEL outside the school (Johnson & Johnson, 2004).
Become a Leader for Change
The ASCA National Model (2005) calls for school counselors to assume a leadership role to effect systemic change in schools. Because school counselors interact with students, administrators, teachers, support personnel, parents, and outside agencies, they are in an ideal position to do so. One of the changes needed for schools to successfully educate students is the integration of the academic growth of students with their social and emotional development. To achieve this change, the school counselor's role shifts from a traditional focus on responding to individual student needs to a more resolute focus on enhancing the SEL of all students. To execute this role, the school counselor must take on a prevention orientation in a very intentional way and seek to serve (eventually) as SEL consultant to school personnel. This focus on prevention, consultation, and comprehensive SEL programming calls for wide-ranging systemic change not only in the school but also in how school personnel (and, in some cases, school counselors) view school counselor responsibilities.
An effective SEL program starts with prevention efforts aimed at all students (Bruene-Butler, Poedubicky, & Sperlazza, 2006). School counselors can borrow from the public health model, which focuses on prevention interventions designed to alleviate causes associated with problems and, in turn, decrease the number of individuals in need of special services (Strein, Hoagwood, & Cohn, 2003). Although many schools already implement some preventive SEL programming (e.g., dropout prevention, alcohol education) in the form of separate, short-term, didactic programs, these efforts are less effective than long-term coordinated efforts (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007). Therefore, school counselors must examine existing programming, look for any overlaps, and identify how existing programming fits into a comprehensive and continuous SEL plan (Elias, Bruene-Butler, et al., 1997, 2000).
Given that some school counselors might be overwhelmed by the task of designing a comprehensive SEL curriculum, it is important to note that there are some available resources to begin the work. One example is the Three Cs (cooperative community, constructive conflict resolution, and civic values) program of SEL, which is based on social interdependence and conflict theories and has been used in a variety of schools from low-income urban schools to high-income private schools (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) is another SEL curriculum, which is developmentally based and designed to improve the social-emotional functioning of elementary school-aged children (Greenberg et al., 2004). Additionally, the CASEL Web site (www.casel.org) provides many targeted SEL programs and activities that can be integrated into a comprehensive counseling program and adapted to local school contexts.
In addition to coordinating schoolwide SEL efforts, school counselors must explore creative ways to fit existing SEL strategies into the academic curriculum (rather than delivering them as a separate service). This means that school counselors must work to make SEL an integral component of students' daily learning environment. Initial efforts may require hands-on work by school counselors-working directly with teachers in their classrooms. These efforts also may require teacher training, because many teachers have little background in SEL strategies (Elias, Bruene-Butler, et al., 1997). Providing information about SEL, establishing an open dialogue with teachers about what they already do (even though they may not call it SEL), and brainstorming ways that SEL activities can fit into academic lessons should all be part of training. School counselor expertise in social and emotional development can serve as a foundation for this work.
Given that student-counselor ratios in schools nationwide preclude direct delivery of SEL activities to students on a daily basis, school counselors wishing to extend their influence must ultimately serve, first and foremost, as consultants to teachers and other school personnel in their ongoing efforts to deliver a SEL curriculum and create a school climate conducive to SEL. Although school counselors have traditionally performed consultation duties, these may have focused more on individual student issues and problems. In this new SEL consultant role, school counselors would move from a direct service model to an indirect service model. In essence, school counselors would "give away" their expertise to the individuals who have the most daily contact with the most children (Conyne, Crowell, & Newmeyer, 2008; Gutkin & Curtis, 2009; Miller, 1969). Consultation, then, offers school counselors the opportunity to positively impact the social and emotional development of all students, rather than just those with difficulties (Gutkin & Curtis).
The change in role requires what Elias, O'Brien, and Weissberg (2006) have called transformative leadership, which involves a willingness "to realign structures and relationships to achieve genuine and sustainable change" (p. 11). According to these authors, transformative leadership requires courage (to advocate for SEL), vision (of SEL programming created in collaboration with stakeholders), and integrity (in committing to ongoing improvement of SEL programming). In a study of new school counselors, Dollarhide, Gibson, and Saginak (2008) found that successful leaders distinguished themselves by their courage in the face of resistance and their integrity in taking responsibility for change and identifying clear, focused, reachable goals.
It is important to highlight that successful systemic change in the area of SEL will require ongoing assessment. School counselors typically support school efforts to evaluate academic progress, important to the goals of individual students and to the overall mission of the school. Beyond academic measures, however, it is critical to use a variety of "yardsticks" to measure change (Muller-Ackerman & Shelton, 2006) from existing and new programming. Measurable outcomes that can affect school performance include student "school attitudes (e.g., motivation, responsibility, attachment) and school behavior (e.g., engagement, attendance, study habits)" (Zins, Bloodworth, et al., 2007, p. 194). To assess process and make ongoing modifications for improvement, an action research approach can prove invaluable (Elias et al., 2000; Romasz et al., 2004) and goes hand in hand with making long-lasting systemic change.
CONCLUSION
School counselors have always contributed to student social and emotional learning in order to enhance academic achievement. Too often, however, by virtue of traditional expectations, counselors have directed services to a small number of students. Additionally, where preventative SEL activities are part of school counseling programs, they often exist as secondary services rather than as primary educational services embedded in the overall school curriculum and environment. This often happens because school stakeholders fail to understand the intimate relationship between social and emotional competence and school success. However, through advocacy for preventative SEL programming, collaboration with stakeholders, and leadership aimed at the creation of developmental SEL activities for all students, school counselors can begin to build "the needed bridge between counseling and education" (ASCA, 2005, p. 2).
The systemic change necessary to move SEL from the periphery of the school into the heart of the classroom and the school requires a long-term commitment. By starting small, however, the undertaking seems less colossal. As Elias et al. (2000) have advised, choosing a "small craft is a sensible way to prepare for a maiden voyage" (p. 269). Schools that have successfully implemented social-emotional learning programs have started with small pilot projects, examined them thoroughly, and committed themselves to ongoing development (Elias, Bruene- Butler, et al., 1997).
Initially, school counselors need to set their sights on reasonable and achievable goals. The initial goal may be to gain stakeholder commitment to the SEL process as a part of academic achievement, adapt and coordinate the prevention programming already in place, and value any small changes that occur (Elias et al., 2000; Romasz et al., 2004). The important work here is to engage wholeheartedly in the process and focus on the continuation of that process (Elias et al.). Just as creating an effective comprehensive school counseling program requires time and talent (Muller-Ackerman & Shelton, 2006), weaving SEL programming into the very fabric of the school environment takes time, creativity, and the patience to sustain efforts over years of development.
Eventually, providing SEL programming for all students will mean a significant change in at least part of the school counselor's role. Instead of focusing on direct service, the school counselor will channel more time into SEL consultation efforts. In this new role, the school counselor will train and oversee other school personnel delivering the SEL curriculum in the classrooms and throughout the school. Given the large caseloads of school counselors, the long-term goal of school counselor as SEL consultant makes perfect sense.
ASCA has set a challenge before school counselors- to craft school counseling programs for systemic change in the schools. Developing social and emotional learning programming for all students supports this call. It serves not only to change the school counselor role, but to change the schools. Through leadership, advocacy, and collaboration, school counselors can contribute to systemic change needed to transform our schools into learning environments dedicated to the success of all students.
Rather than consultation aimed at responsive services for individual students, school counselors are encouraged to embrace a consultation approach aimed at prevention for all students.
In the atmosphere of No Child Left Behind, academic performance becomes the focal point while social and emotional development, essential to students' overall development, takes a back seat.
School counselors know that effective education must extend beyond teaching academic skills to teaching social and emotional competencies, including promoting safe and healthy behaviors.
Schools that have successfully implemented social-emotional learning programs have started with small pilot projects, examined them thoroughly, and committed themselves to ongoing development.
References
American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (2nd ed.). Alexandria,VA: Author.
APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs. (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for reform and redesign.Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.
Bar-On, R. (2007).How important is it to educate people to be emotionally intelligent, and can it be done? In R. Bar-On, J. G.Maree, & M. J. Elias (Eds.), Educating people to be emotionally intelligent (pp. 1-14).Westport, CT: Praeger.
Brown, J. L., Roderick,T., Lantieri, L., & Aber, J. L. (2004).The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program: A school-based social and emotional learning program. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 151-169).New York: Teachers College Press.
Bruene-Butler, L., Poedubicky,V. A., & Sperlazza, J. (2006). Social and emotional learning through comprehensive school counseling: A case study. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller-Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 217-230).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Burns, N. R., Bastian,V. A., & Nettelbeck,T. (2007). Emotional intelligence:More than personality and cognitive ability? In G.Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R.D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 167-196).New York:Oxford University Press.
Christenson, S. L., & Havsy, L. H. (2004). Family-school-peer relationships: Significance for social, emotional, and academic learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P.Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 59-75).New York: Teachers College Press.
Christle, C., Jolivette, K., & Nelson, C.M. (2007). School characteristics related to high school dropout rates. Remedial & Special Education, 28, 325-329.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2007). The benefits of school-based social and emotional learning: Highlights from a forthcoming CASEL report. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.casel.org/downloads/metaanalysissum.pdf
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2008a). Benefits of SEL-Meta-analysis: Project description. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.casel.org/sel/meta.php#rs
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2008b). What is SEL? Skills and competencies. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.casel.org/basics/skills.php
Conyne, R. K., Crowell, J. L., & Newmeyer,M.D. (2008). Group techniques: How to use them purposefully. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Dollarhide, C.T., Gibson,D. M., & Saginak, K. A. (2008).New counselors' leadership efforts in school counseling: Themes from a year-long qualitative study. Professional School Counseling, 11, 262-271.
Elias, M. J., & Arnold, H. (Eds.). (2006). Emotional intelligence and academic achievement: Social-emotional learning in the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Elias, M. J., Bruene-Butler, L., Blum, L., & Schuyler,T. (1997).How to launch a social and emotional learning program. Educational Leadership, 54(8), 15-19.
Elias, M. J., Bruene-Butler, L., Blum, L., & Schuyler,T. (2000). Voices from the field: Identifying and overcoming roadblocks to carrying out programs in social and emotional learning/emotional intelligence. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11, 253-272.
Elias, M. J.,O'Brien,M. J., & Weissberg, R. P. (2006,December). Student services. Produced in collaboration with the National Association of School Psychologists. Retrieved September 3, 2008, from http://www.nasponline.org/resources/principals/Social%20Emotional%20Learning%20NASSP.pdf
Elias,M. J., Zins, J.E.,Weissberg,R.P., Frey,K.S., Greenberg,M.T., Haynes,N.M., et al. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Fink, L.D. (2002). Beyond small groups: Harnessing the extraordinary power of learning teams. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L.D. Fink (Eds.), Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching (pp. 3-26). Sterling,VA: Stylus.
Freiberg, H. J. (1998).Measuring school climate: Let me count the ways. Educational Leadership, 56, 22-26.
Goleman,D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Goleman,D. (2000). Foreword. In R. Bar-On & J.D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. vii-viii). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Goleman,D. (2006). Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships. New York: Bantam Books.
Greenberg,M.T., Kusché, C. A., & Riggs,N. (2004).The PATHS curriculum: Theory and research on neurocognitive development and school success. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 170-188).New York: Teachers College Press.
Gutkin,T. B., & Curtis,M. J. (2009). School-based consultation: The science and practice of indirect service delivery. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (4th ed., pp. 591-635).New York:Wiley.
Jesse,D., Davis, A., & Pokorny, N. (2004).High-achieving middle schools for Latino students in poverty. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 9, 23-45.
Johnson,D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2004).The three Cs of promoting social and emotional learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 40-58).New York: Teachers College Press.
Matthews, G., Zeidner,M., & Roberts, R.D. (2007). Emotional intelligence: Consensus, controversies, and questions. In G.Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R.D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 3-46).New York:Oxford University Press.
McCombs, B. L. (2004).The learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for balancing academic achievement and social-emotional learning outcomes. In J. E. Zins, R. P.Weissberg, M. C.Wang, & H. J.Walberg (Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? (pp. 23-39).New York: Teachers College Press.
Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 24, 1063-1075.
Muller-Ackerman, B., & Shelton, C. (2006). Practitioners' perspective on school counseling and emotional intelligence. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller- Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 17-27).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
O'Neil, J. (1996).On emotional intelligence: An interview with Daniel Goleman. Educational Leadership, 54, 6-11.
Parker, J.D. A., Creque, R. E., Barnhart,D. L., Harris, J. I.,Majeski, S. A.,Wood, L. M., et al. (2004). Academic achievement in high school:Does emotional intelligence matter? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1321-1330.
Pellitteri, P. (2006). Appendix A: A brief historical perspective of emotional intelligence. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller-Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 253-260).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Poulou,M. (2005).The prevention of emotional and behavioural difficulties in schools: Teachers' suggestions. Educational Psychology in Practice, 21, 37-52.
Poynton,T. A., Schumacher, R. A., & Wilczenski, F. L. (2008). School counselors' attitudes regarding statewide comprehensive developmental guidance model implementation. Professional School Counseling, 11, 417-422.
Romano, J. L., & Kachgal, M. M. (2004). Counseling psychology and school counseling: An underutilized partnership. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 184-215.
Romasz,T. E., Kantor, J.H., & Elias, M. J. (2004). Implementation and evaluation of urban school-wide social-emotional learning programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27, 89-103.
Stern, R., Hyman, L., & Martin, C. E. (2006).The importance of self-awareness for school counselors. In J. Pellitteri, R. Stern, C. Shelton, & B. Muller-Ackerman (Eds.), Emotionally intelligent school counseling (pp. 49-62).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Strein,W., Hoagwood, K., & Cohn, A. (2003). School psychology: A public health perspective. I. Prevention, populations, and systems change. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 23-38.
Suh, S., & Suh, J. (2007). Risk factors and levels of risk for high school dropouts. Professional School Counseling, 10, 297-306.
U.S.Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind: A desktop reference. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/nclbreference/index.html
Van Velsor, P., & Orozco, G. L. (2007). Involving low-income parents in the schools: Communitycentric strategies for school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 11, 17-24.
Zins, J. E.,Bloodworth,M. R.,Weissberg,R.P., & Walberg,H. J. (2007).The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17, 191-210.
Zins, J. E., Payton, J.W.,Weissberg, R. P., & O'Brien, M. U. (2007). Social and emotional learning for successful school performance. In G.Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R.D. Roberts (Eds.), The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 376-395).New York:Oxford University Press.
Zins, J. E.,Weissberg, R. P.,Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.). (2004). Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does the research say? New York: Teachers College Press.
Written by: Patricia Van Velsor, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Counseling, San Francisco State University, San Francisco.
No comments:
Post a Comment