Peer-reviewed article
Social and emotional learning schemes as tools of cultural imperialism: a manifestation of the national and international child well-being agenda?
Peter Wood ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This study examines how primary schools in Britain implement social and emotional learning (SEL) programmes to improve child well-being. Researchers interviewed school staff across three phases—questionnaires, focus groups, and individual interviews—to understand how SEL is interpreted and used in practice. The study found that staff often mix social and emotional learning with moral judgments about behaviour and identity, which can marginalise certain values and norms. The authors argue this approach may actually harm rather than help children's social and emotional well-being, and call for alternative methods.
Key points
- Schools implement SEL interventions in response to national and international pressure to improve child well-being
- Staff conflate social and emotional aspects of self with moralistic constructs of identity
- SEL schemes have potential to act as tools of cultural imperialism by endorsing certain values and marginalising others
- Current realisation of SEL schemes may impede rather than improve children's lived experiences and mental health
- The study calls for alternative approaches to SEL in schools
Limitations
This study focuses only on school staff perceptions and practices in Britain; it does not measure direct outcomes for children themselves or compare different SEL approaches empirically. The analysis is descriptive rather than experimental, so causal claims about SEL's effects on child well-being cannot be drawn.
Abstract
The need for improved well-being of children in Britain has been highlighted in a raft of reports both nationally and internationally. In this paper, I aim to explore some of the practicalities experienced by schools that, in response, have implemented social and emotional learning (SEL) interventions as a means to improve child well-being. I make the case that the discourses of emotions inherent within such schemes, and the various supranational publications, are susceptible to exploitation and manifestation. The study employed a mixed methodological approach, utilising a combination of quantitative and qualitative strategies with primary school staff members including head teachers, teachers, teaching assistants, welfare staff, other support staff, etc. Three phases of study – questionnaires, focus groups and individual interviews – were administered as a means of creating an insight into the interpretation and use of SEL in these settings. The findings demonstrate a propensity for staff to conflate social and emotional aspects of self with more moralistic constructs of identity, revealing how SEL schemes have the potential to act as tools of cultural imperialism by marginalising and/or endorsing certain values, norms and behaviours. After maintaining that such realisations of these schemes may impede rather than improve the lived experiences of children, that are fundamental to their social and emotional well-being and mental health, I make the case for alternative approaches to SEL in schools.