Universal program frameworks
Universal programs can be distinguished by their orientation and underpinning theoretical frameworks of which there are said to be four (Nolan et al., 2016). First, the Positive Psychology framework (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) focuses on the development of the self, one’s happiness and general wellbeing. Positive relationships and social skills are considered fundamental to achieving these goals. Second, the Positive Youth Development framework (Lerner et al., 2005) adopts a community focus, arguing that optimal youth development is an outcome of meaningful relationships and engagement experienced with their community. Third, the Social Competence framework (Waters & Sroufe, 1983) is a cognitive behavioural approach informed by a theoretical model of children’s social cognitive processing. This framework focuses on teaching social information processing skills known to be involved in social competence. Last, the Social Emotional Learning framework (Elias et al., 1997) is an advocacy approach which has synthesized a large body of research regarding social skills programs. Academics and practitioners driving this framework have defined a set of evidence-based competencies to guide schools, and promote social and emotional learning of all students.
The Positive Psychology framework is defined by the priority of enhancing positive emotions and character traits to increase wellbeing and individual happiness (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Positive social skills are considered fundamental for achieving personal wellbeing and happiness. In 2004 Peterson and Seligman published a Positive Psychology manual called Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification (CSV) (Peterson & Seligman, 2004), offered as a counterpoint companion to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders- IV (DSM-IV) (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). One of the key features of the Positive Psychology framework is the PERMA model of positive functioning (Seligman, 2012). This model defines six character strengths including; (1) positive emotions, (2) positive engagement, (3) positive accomplishment, (4) positive purpose, (5) positive relationships, and (6) positive health (Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Social skills are recognised as supporting the development of these character strengths, with universal programs based on this framework offering social skills training in assertiveness, problem solving, empathy, cooperation, self-control and self-regulation (Lee, 2011).
The Positive Youth Development framework offers universal programs designed to improve social skills through the experience of participating in meaningful and engaging activities within a young person’s community. First proposed in the 1990’s, the Positive Youth Development framework argues that the interacting effects of biology, psychological characteristics, one’s family, culture, and community are all necessary to nurture an individual’s development (Lerner et al., 2005). Social skills learning is typically led by a mentor or facilitator, with a focus on discussions about skills that support improved peer relationships during group activities. Social skills, along with a sense of community and resilience are nurtured through leadership opportunities, role-modelling and positive peer interactions (Scales et al., 2000). There are countless universal programs in schools that align with the Positive Youth Development framework. While most are designed for adolescents, the focus here will be on programs from this framework developed for middle-primary school age children.
Positive Youth Development programs have been extensively evaluated. Most commonly self-ratings are used to measure students’ perceptions of their level of engagement with the program, connectedness with others and self-esteem. Catalano et al. (2002) conducted a meta-analysis of 25 Positive Youth Development programs and concluded that overall participants reported improved perceptions of self-control, interpersonal skills, problem solving, quality of relationships and academic achievement. Another meta-analysis (Durlak et al., 2017) reviewed 82 school-wide Positive Youth Development programs and reported increases in participants’ self- perceptions of their social engagement, mental health and academic progress in follow- up assessments at 6 and 18 months. These positive results are often attributed to the activity-based nature of the experiential group programs linked with the Positive Youth Development framework.
The Social Competence framework (Waters & Sroufe, 1983) offers universal programs informed by research into children’s social cognitive processing skills and deficits. These universal programs are most commonly based on research from the Social Information Processing (SIP) model (Crick & Dodge, 1994). This is a cognitive behavioural model. The SIP model suggests that six interacting social information processing skills inform children’s social behaviour. A large catalogue of empirical studies has helped to validate this model (see Fontaine, 2010; ven Reemst et al., 2016). Hence, universal programs from this framework typically focus on building children’s social information processing skills. The model presents a sequence of six social information processing skills, however it is suggested that they may also operate simultaneously. The six social information processing skills are (1) encoding of cues, (2) interpretation of cues, (3) clarification of goals, (4) response construction, (5) response decision, and (6) behavioural enactment. Social information processing skills are informed by a child’s database of social knowledge and prior social experiences. Emotions are also said to influence each processing skill (Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000). The model was initially developed to understand the cognitive processing skills that differentiated aggressive and non-aggressive boys (Dodge, 1986) and later was extended to describe all social behaviour (Crick & Dodge, 1994). Universal programs from the Social Competence framework typically present a sequence of lessons relating to the social information processing skills of the SIP model, teaching social problem solving, understanding and managing emotions, and role-play to build practice experiences.
The SIP model lends itself to empirical analysis. The model provides explicit definitions of each social information processing skill involved in social competence. This makes it possible for programs to teach each skill, also making it possible for program evaluations to directly measure children’s learning of each SIP skill, compared pre- and post- intervention (Durlak et al., 2011). This is one of the key features that differentiates the Social Competence framework from the two frameworks described above. Social information processing skills are typically investigated by presenting participants with hypothetical scenarios of a peer conflict and examining responses to those scenarios. Comparisons are made between responses pre- and post-intervention. Differences in children’s social information processing skills pre- and post-intervention offer direct evidence of skill acquisition and program impact.
Social Competence framework program evaluations also commonly use additional qualitative or quantitative measures to examine program impact. This might include a measure of children’s social or behavioural functioning from teacher, parent or self-rating questionnaires to establish the participant’s mental health status prior to the intervention program, and then again after program exposure. Teacher and parent questionnaires can offer insights from a close observer. Other measures commonly reported by Social Competence framework program evaluations include peer nominations of behaviours and direct observations.
An important outcome from Social Competence framework research is the finding that social information processing skills are different for girls when compared to boys (see Fraser et al., 2005; Fraser et al., 2011; de Castro et al., 2002). This is verified by consistent findings that SIP model programs aimed at general social skills and general social themes were not proving to have an impact for girls (see Fraser et al., 2005; Low et al., 2015). The research that led to this finding will be described in the next chapter, however one of the key outcomes is a call for gender-specific programs to develop the SIP skills of girls (Hanson et al., 2011; de Castro et al., 2002). Two Social Competence framework universal programs with published evaluations have focus on the social learning needs of girls specifically. These evaluations will be described.
The Social Emotional Learning (SEL) framework was developed by the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) (www.CASEL.org, 1994) and draws together empirical studies from across psychology and education to offer one consolidated hub for evidence-based programs. The CASEL group is a collaboration between academics and practitioners. Recommendations from evidence-based research are considered alongside the experiences, practicalities and challenges reported by teachers in schools. This has resulted in a synthesis of best- practice guidelines, advocacy and advice to support educators in their selection and implementation of evidence-based social and emotional learning programs in classrooms. Universal programs from all social learning frameworks are considered, provided that they can (1) align with the set of skills and competencies developed by the CASEL group and (2) be demonstrated to be evidence-based.
The skills and competencies incorporated in the SEL framework have been compiled according to their empirical evidence base. This includes a great deal of research informed by SIP-based research and Positive Youth Development framework evaluations (Durlak et al., 2015). The result is a broad index of 38 social and emotional skills to help schools build children’s social and emotional capacity. The 38 skills are grouped into five core competencies; Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social Awareness, Relationship Skills and Responsible Decision Making. The broad nature of these five core competencies allows most social learning programs to identify skills and competencies that align with the SEL framework.
The SEL framework was originally funded by the US government for US schools, however the popularity of the framework has spread to many countries. The CASEL group are credited for bringing social and emotional learning priorities to many governments, and shaping policies that are bringing social and emotional learning priorities to schools. Australia is no exception. Within Australia the SEL framework has had considerable influence. The National Safe Schools Framework (2004, later revised in 2011) was influenced by the research from the CASEL group to define the national approach towards promoting the mental health and wellbeing of Australian children (Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs, 2011). In addition, the nationwide funded Kids Matter program, a whole school health promotion, prevention and early intervention program was developed in accordance with the work published by the CASEL group (Graetz et al, 2008). This project is continuing in 2020, still informed by the work of CASEL, but now named Be You and managed by the not-for-profit mental wellness organisation Beyond Blue (http://www.beyou.edu.au). In 2017 the Department of Education and Training (DET) in the Australian state of Victoria, released a Personal and Social Capability curriculum from foundation-year (the first year of primary school in Victoria) to Year 10 (Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, 2020). DET referenced CASEL and the SEL framework as the approach informing this curriculum component.
In 2009, a two-year evaluation of the Australian Government initiative Kids Matter was published, reporting on the impact of SEL programs in 101 participating schools (Slee et al., 2009). One of the key measures used within this evaluation was the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) student, teacher and parent forms (Goodman, 2007). The SDQ was used to identify students as functioning within the normal, borderline, or abnormal range for mental health strengths and difficulties. At the commencement of the Kids Matter project, 34% of all students were identified within the borderline or abnormal range however, this figure was reduced to 24% at the conclusion of the trial (Slee et al., 2009). Overall the Kids Matter evaluation reported that across all students involved, SDQ total difficulties scores declined with a small effect size.
Overall, SEL framework program evaluations to date have had positive impact in schools. Durlak et al. (2011) conducted a meta-analysis of 213 universal programs that identified with the SEL framework. This included programs for kindergarten through to secondary school. The volume of programs is indicative of the many options available to schools. Criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis required that a universal program focused on one of the five competencies within the SEL framework, was delivered to the whole class by the class teacher, included evaluation measures of student outcomes, and included a measure of the quality of program delivery (also referred to as implementation quality). The evaluation methods included in these studies varied from self-report questionnaires to direct measures of social information processing skills. The meta-analysis demonstrated that, in general, participation in a SEL program resulted in improved social emotional skills, attitudes, behaviours, and academic performance compared to the control groups. A 2017 review of six meta-analyses of SEL programs across the US highlighted that most studies reported improvements in children’s social skills and mental health (O’Connor et al., 2017). Five of the six meta-analyses reported academic benefits. They also highlighted, however a concerning lack of impact for girls. To date, few gender-specific evidence-based SEL programs are available.
The SEL framework recognises a number of program evaluation methods as providing evidence of program impact. In particular, common measures include self- report questionnaires, trained observers’ records, parent or teacher rating scales, and measures of children’s social problem-solving skills from hypothetical scenarios (McKown et al., 2019). The SEL framework also advocates a focus on measuring strengths to inform improvements in practice, rather than simply identifying deficits and diagnosing or categorizing individuals (Franklin et al., 2019). This approach has been influenced by Positive Psychology and Positive Youth Development frameworks. Most recently, a global review of SEL program evaluations reported that “While surveys of students’ self-perceptions and teachers’ observations are common and widely available, direct assessments, in which students directly demonstrate their level of competency, are largely missing from the catalogue of assessment tools...” (Read et al., 2019, p.1). To support SEL evaluations towards direct measurements of social skills, the CASEL group commissioned a Design Challenge that spanned three years (Read et al., 2019). This challenge was setup as a competition, encouraging submissions that offered direct measurement ideas to support SEL program evaluations. From this design challenge, six winners were selected. Most winning submissions included a rubric for observational assessments in the form of teacher ratings pre- and post-intervention. Interestingly, one of the winning submissions was a web-based performance task measure, assessing students’ capacity to identify emotions, perspective-taking skills, and social problem solving. This direct measure of children’s social and emotional skills was called SELweb, developed by xSEL Labs (http://www.xsel-labs.com). This measure was first evaluated in 2013 to assess children’s encoding, interpretation and reasoning skills (McKown et al., 2013), and extends the long-standing use of hypothetical scenarios and social problem-solving questions typical of the Social Competence framework. In this way the SEL framework is helping to synthesize best practice methods to bolster the quality of social learning resources available to schools.
A Summary
Universal programs can be classified by their underpinning framework: the Positive Psychology framework (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), the Positive Youth Development framework (Lerner et al., 2002), the Social Competence framework (Waters & Sroufe, 1983), and the Social Emotional Learning framework (Elias et al., 1997).
Positive Psychology framework universal programs are designed to improve student wellbeing, with program impact largely measured using self-report measures of wellness and self-reports of general behaviour. The Positive Youth Development framework offers engaging hands-on programs intended to bolster social skills through positive social experiences in community projects.
Positive Youth Development framework programs typically measure program impact using self-report measures of engagement and self-reports of participants’ perceptions of themselves and others. Universal programs aligning with these two frameworks have reported positive experiences for the participants and have increased positive self-concept. However, reliance on self-report ratings of general behaviour has been highlighted as a limitation of these evaluations. Self-report measures as used in these evaluations do not tap directly into participants’ knowledge and use of social skills. Hence, knowledge of the full impact of interventions aligned with these two frameworks on participants’ social skills, is currently limited.
The Social Competence framework is based upon a theoretical model which defines specific social information processing skills. Social learning programs drawing on this framework typically focus on building these social information processing skills. Program impact is often measured using methods that directly measure social information processing skills and it has been demonstrated that social learning programs that align with the Social Competence framework have shown improvements in children’s social information processing skills. Consequently, the Social Competence framework offers a targeted theory on which to base development of children’s social skills, and has introduced some of the most direct and comprehensive measures of social skills and competence.
The last of the four frameworks, the Social Emotional Learning framework, involves collaboration between academics and practitioners, synthesizing evidence- based research outcomes from across frameworks to inform schools’ social-emotional curriculum policies, practices and program choices. The Social Emotional Learning framework is now an overarching framework influencing government policy and school curriculum in many countries. This framework is celebrated for its strong and effective advocacy for social developmental programs.
