2025, written by Alex Bregy. Overview of findings regarding the effectiveness of SEL implementation within after-school programs.
In recent years, there has been an emphasis on bringing social and emotional learning (SEL) into classrooms. Though, when educational funding relies on students scoring well on standardized tests, many educators find themselves teaching students to test well rather than how to use what they are learning in the real world. Because of this, many curriculums are already oversaturated and don’t have the time or resources to allocate to SEL. So, this raises the question: where else can students develop social and emotional (SE) skills? After-school programs can help youth develop SE skills through various teaching methods, creating supportive environments/relationships, and prioritizing program enjoyment.
After-School Programs Overview
After-school programs include a wide range of programs that youth attend regularly, during the school year, on weeknights between 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm. These programs can be general enrichment programs, such as a school’s after-school-care program or a community mentorship program. They can also be more specific, such as a sport or art-based club. While each type of program will integrate SEL into their programming differently, there are some key methods that each program can use within their regular activities. These methods include: explicit teaching, planned strategies, and spontaneous teaching moments (White et al 2022).
Explicit Teaching
Explicit teaching is defined as “teaching about the meaning and use of social-emotional skills through explicit lessons” (2022). With this method, after-school educators teach youth about SE skills directly via lessons, rather than being intertwined with the program’s other activities. These lessons often pull from classroom strategies for teaching SEL and are more common in SEL-focused after-school programs. Though, this can be implemented into any after-school program, especially as a remedy to an SE skill deficit that is causing conflict within the program. Also, it has been found that using the explicit teaching method for social-emotional learning has a higher success rate among younger youth, as opposed to pre-teens and teens (Piha and Fasen 2021). So, for after-school programs that serve older youth, it would be more beneficial to utilize other methods of implementing SEL.
Planned Strategies
White and coworkers define planned strategies as “program features, including activities, supportive relationships, and the program’s culture, through which educators can foster SEL” (2022). As opposed to the explicit teaching method, the planned strategies method allows after-school educators to strategically implement SE skill development while not disrupting their regular activities. This is especially important for after-school programs that focus on specific topics/areas (arts, sports, etc.), since the youth attending these programs are expecting specific kinds of activities when they attend. For example, a theater-based after-school program could do an acting game that requires youth to act out and identify the performance of different emotions. Alternatively, a sports-based after-school program could implement a team-building activity to foster communication skill development. Generally, the planned strategies method focuses on planning activities that create challenges, in which youth must use SEL skills to solve.
Spontaneous Teaching Moments
Spontaneous teaching moments include any unplanned moment where social-emotional skills can be taught. Some examples of spontaneous teaching moments include guiding youth through a breathing exercise to de-escalate or talking through a conflict with youth (2022). This method of teaching SE skills can be easily implemented into all programming activities, since it depends on situations that arise spontaneously. That said, due to its unpredictable nature, after-school staff must be observant and fast-acting to enact this method. Staff must identify when youth are struggling and be ready to jump in with a coping skill, or other small activity, that aids SE development. For this, staff not only need to be alert and aware of their youth’s social and emotional challenges, they must also have a solid toolkit of skills ready to teach. So, if a program’s staff do not have a strong understanding of SE skills, they may be unable to use this teaching method effectively.
Staff’s Impact
One of the biggest predictors of effective SEL implementation within an after-school program is the commitment, education, and engagement of the staff (Fisher et. al 2023). While after-school programs are a great place for youth to develop SE skills, the pay for staff in this field is particularly low, resulting in high staff turnover (Hurd & Deutsch 2017). This is particularly alarming, because the relationships that staff build with youth is the backbone of SE skill development. Youth need to be able to trust the staff in their after-school programs in order to learn SE skills from them; but, when staff are rotating regularly, it makes it difficult for youth to develop trusting relationships with them. Alongside this, after-school staff need to be equipped with methods of teaching SE skills, such as a SE toolkit. So, if staff have not been trained in social-emotional learning, or do not have strong social-emotional skills themselves, they may not be able to teach SE skills to the youth in their program. In this way, it is particularly important that after-school staff are consistent, trustworthy, and educated on social-emotional learning/have strong social-emotional skills in order to implement successful SEL programming. Additionally, all youth, and especially older youth, learn through observation. Because of this, staff who teach SE skills but do not model them will likely not be successful in teaching SEL to the youth in their program (2021).
Attendance and Enjoyment
Another important element regarding the efficiency of social-emotional learning in after-school programs is attendance. The American Institute for Research explains, “high-quality programs…[with] high youth participation are critical conditions for [SE] skill building” (2015). Here, we can see that not just the quality of the after-school program is important, but the rate at which youth attend the program; after all, youth cannot develop social-emotional skills from a program they do not consistently attend. This said, attendance alone isn’t a predictor of SEL outcomes, but rather youth’s enjoyment of the program (2017). If a safe and supportive environment is not created in an after-school program, youth will have difficulty developing SE skills, since they do not feel comfortable. Alongside this, if programming is too didactic and does not allow youth to have fun, their enjoyment of the program will lower, and thus, their SEL outcomes will lower as well.
Conclusion
Youth’s development of social-emotional skills in after-school programs is dependent on their enjoyment of the program, the qualities of the staff, and the variety of teaching methods. In order to develop SE skills, youth need to feel safe in their after-school programs, both physically and emotionally. Alongside this, the teaching methods chosen for SEL can greatly impact youth’s enjoyment of their after-school program. If a program consists of only explicit teaching, youth may find the lessons boring and thus not benefit from them. But, using a mixture of explicit teaching, planned strategies, and spontaneous teaching moments, is likely to create an engaging and enjoyable after-school program for youth that aids their social-emotional skill development. That said, it is important to match the SE skill teaching methods to the program’s mission and needs. What teaching methods would work best for your program’s mission? How can you meet your youth’s SE needs without disrupting other programming activities? In the end, social-emotional skill development is intensely personal and it takes thoughtful planning to create effective social-emotional learning within an after-school program.
Works Cited
American Institute for Research. “Supporting Social and Emotional Development
Through Quality Afterschool Programs.” Beyond the Bell, 2015, doi:https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED563826.pdf.
Benavides, Veronica, et al. “Social and Emotional Learning in Afterschool Settings: Equity
Evaluations, Recommendations, and Critiques.” Afterschool Matters, vol. 33, 2020, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1271650.pdf.
Fisher, Amy E., et al. “Predictors of Social Emotional Learning in After‐ School Programming:
The Impact of Relationships, Belonging, and Program Engagement.” Wiley, 2023, doi:10.1002/pits.23113.
Hurd, Noelle, and Nancy Deutsch. “SEL-Focused After-School Programs.” The Future of
Children, vol. 27, no. 1, 2017.
Piha, Sam, and Samantha Fasen. “Social Emotional Learning, Teens and Afterschool Programs.”
How Kids Learn, 2021, pp. 1–30, http://www.temescalassociates.com/uploads/1/1/0/6/110631901/paper- _social_emotional_learning_teens_and_afterschool_programs.pdf.
White, Annie M., et al. “Integrating Social and Emotional Learning: Creating Space for
Afterschool Educator Expertise.” AERA Open, vol. 8, no. 1, 2022, pp. 1–18, doi:10.1177/23328584221101546.
Leave a Reply