Why “Do” SEL If It Doesn’t Improve Student Behavior in the Classroom and Across the School?

Focusing on Individual and Group Skills to Enhance Student Engagement and Cooperative Group Outcomes

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   I am not a big “label” or “program” guy when it comes to school discipline programs.

   In general, the all-purpose, one-size-fits-all “programs” marketed to schools and districts are often poorly researched, they pull “magical data” out of a hat to allegedly “prove” the program’s “success,” and they over-sell and under-deliver.

   Moreover, many programs’ “successful” outcomes usually are NOT due to the program as a whole, or to the program at all. That is, the successes are either due (a) to some (usually unidentified) small part of the program; or (b) to the fact that school faculty have committed to clear student outcomes and, as such, they are interacting with students in more consistent, goal-directed, and observable ways, respectively.

   Finally, even when positive outcomes occur, most programs rarely work dependably in schools that vary significantly across different and diverse historical, demographic, and other background characteristics and conditions relative to their students, staff, neighborhoods, and communities.

   Most programs also have difficulty attaining and sustaining the needed buy-in and involvement of a critical mass of staff, the fidelity of their implementation, and the resources, training, and coaching needed for success.

_ _ _ _ _

   Relative to labels: The name of a program typically is chosen to enhance its marketability. . . to demonstrate that “We are different from the others who came before us”. . . “We are better than those before us”. . . and “If you join our movement, we can lead you to the Promised Land.”

   Early in my career, schools simply talked about school safety and discipline, classroom management and engagement, and student behavior and self-control.

   Then—starting in 1997, and still to this day—the U.S. Department of Education began its multi-million dollar investment in “Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports” (PBIS).

   Rather than calling PBIS a “program,” it marketed itself as “new and different” by organizing its strategies in a “framework.”

   But that didn’t work, because districts and schools used the strategies in the framework as a “fruits to nuts” framework menu—simply choosing the strategies that they wanted to do (rather than what they needed to do), and ending up with initiatives that did not produce real, observable, and sustainable student outcomes—especially with challenging or very challenging students.

   Indeed, over the years, objective program evaluations of PBIS—some funded (and then hidden) by the U.S. Department of Education—have shown that most PBIS schools:

·       Implement only at the Tier I level—never getting to Tier II or Tier III levels where the challenging students “live;” 

·       Rarely sustain their implementation for more than three years—at which time, the faculty kick the framework “to the curb,” and search for something “new;” and

·       Eventually realize that they could have produced real student outcomes with fewer resources, less time, and without the need for unnecessary rituals (like having to quiz students and staff about “our three primary PBIS “pillars”).

   For the past decade or more, the U.S. Department of Education has tried to maintain PBIS’s relevance by creating “PBIS apps” to “fix” many of the most pressing social, emotional, or behavioral challenges in our homes and families, neighborhoods and communities, and in our society at-large.

   This includes school climate and safety, teasing and bullying, multi-tiered services and mental health, disproportionality and racial equity, poverty and parenting, and school shootings and pandemic relief.

   It has not worked. . . largely because PBIS comes historically from a special education—and not a multi-dimensional psychological—foundation, and because it focuses more on eliminating student deficits, rather than teaching and motivating student strengths.

   Indeed, the PBIS National Technical Assistance Center has always been funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs.

   And, PBIS’s “benchmark” outcome has consistently been to decrease students’ office discipline referrals. . . rather than the development of preschool through high school students’ social, emotional, and behavioral skills, self-management, and competence.

   Said a different way: The school discipline, classroom management, and student self-management goal for all districts and schools should be the developmentally-sensitive and differentiated teaching of students’ behaviorally-observable interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills. . . across the multi-tiered continuum of student needs and challenges.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Social-Emotional Learning: The “Next Kid” on the Block

   Not long after PBIS began its U.S. Department of Education-marketed push into schools across the country, a group of psychologists used Emotional Intelligence as a foundation to establish the “Social-Emotional Learning” framework (Yes. . . yet another framework and menu).

   At this point, virtually everyone in education “knows” the term SEL—even though, according to Harvard University’s Ecological Approaches to Social Emotional Learning (EASEL) Laboratory and Education Week, no one really knows what SEL is.

   Indeed, Harvard’s EASEL Lab identified more than 40 different SEL frameworks a few years ago, concluding that “SEL is in a state of confusion.”

   And this state of confusion has not changed as Education Week recently noted (December 19, 2022):

Immerse yourself in the world of social-emotional learning, and one thing quickly becomes clear: What, exactly, social-emotional learning is can be hard to pin down, and people often resort to analogies and examples to explain it.

 

And. . .

(While) educators say they recognize the importance of developing students’ social and emotional skills, such as managing emotions and setting goals. . . they feel that in order to teach academic subjects effectively, there is little time for social-emotional learning lessons.

 

A recent EdWeek Research Center survey polled teachers, principals, and district leaders nationally and found . . . (that) the biggest (SEL) barriers remain educators’ usual foes: time is too short, students’ needs are too big, and there are not enough resources.

_ _ _ _ _

   Attempting to clarify the confusion over “what SEL is,” Education Week asked seven national SEL experts to define social-emotional learning (December 22, 2022).

   From the President and CEO of CASEL, to district directors of SEL and MTSS, to (again) the Director of Harvard’s EASEL Lab, the answers were confusing, sometimes contradictory, laden with jargon, classroom and teacher un-friendly, and all across the galaxy.

   Quite honestly, Education Week’s attempt to “clarify the confusion,” only escalated the confusion.

   But one of the root causes of this confusion is that so many organizations, companies, consultants, and others are trying to “carve out” their piece of the “SEL pie.”

   And while the U.S. Department of Education created the PBIS pie, the SEL pie was largely baked by the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that launched its movement using power and politics, and foundations and their funds. Critically, one of CASEL’s primary “services” is to lobby at both the state and federal levels to influence different state’s educational strategic planning processes in the areas of social-emotional learning.

_ _ _ _ _

   Indeed. . . what many educators don’t know is that SEL’s popularity evolved because its founders courted wealthy foundations, powerful movers and shakers, influential members of the U.S. Congress, and state politicians . . . and that many of the large districts working with CASEL have paid for its consultative services (some as much as $150,000 per year).

   Again, historically: Knowing that the leaders of PBIS had the U.S. Department of Education in their pocket, the SEL leaders went a different route by targeting individual states. One of CASEL’s goals was to successfully codify SEL “standards” in state education or related laws, regulations, or in benchmark White Papers.

   And the primary foundation to the SEL leaders’ argument—initially—were three meta-analytic studies that appeared to demonstrate how a wide variety of different “social and emotional programs” had a positive impact on students’ “social-emotional outcomes” (which were similarly diverse and wide-ranging) and academic achievement, respectively.

   But there were (and are) significant methodological problems with these three studies which we have previously discussed.

See:  

Social-Emotional Learning is Education’s Newest Bandwagon: The History of How We Got There and Why Most Schools are Wasting Time and Resources by Implementing Scientifically-UnSound SEL Practices

[CLICK HERE for this Past BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

   Briefly, among a number of concerns, these three meta-analytic studies:

·       Are correlational—not causal—in nature.

They only demonstrate that some schools that implemented social-emotional programs—among a wide variety of other school discipline, classroom management, and student behavior approaches—had a higher probability of showing social, emotional, behavioral, and academic student outcomes (versus schools without these programs).

_ _ _ _

·       Only one of the three studies was objectively reviewed by an independent panel of peer-experts (and was subsequently published), while the earliest paper “published” by CASEL co-mingled the three studies.

_ _ _ _ _

·       The only formally published study had significant methodological flaws that call its results into question.

The most critical flaw—relative to generalizing the study’s results to U.S. schools—was that 46% (38 of 82) of the studies used in the meta-analysis were in non-American schools. 

Beyond this, the authors reported that an unspecified number of the 82 studies were taken from books and were not published in refereed journals. 

Finally, the authors also reported that (a) 34% of the studies did not use a randomly-selected sample; (b) 18% of the studies reported “significant implementation problems;” (c) 27% and 45% of the studies either did not have (or did not report) reliable or valid outcome measures at follow-up; and (d) 28% of the studies collected their outcome data only from the students and not also from teachers and/or administrators.

_ _ _ _ _ 

   While CASEL continues to highlight research that demonstrates that SEL “works” (I recently received a CASEL Newsletter headline “New Research”), here is the bottom line:

·       As noted above, NONE of the meta-analytic or single-focused research studies can validate “SEL” when there are 40 or more different SEL frameworks, and there is confusion as to what SEL “is.”

_ _ _ _ _

·       None of the studies collectively validates a specific SEL program or SEL implementation process; and none validates an approach on how to effectively select, resource, prepare for, implement, or evaluate a specific SEL program.

(Indeed, CASEL publishes a resource of “effective” SEL programs that are selected based on CASEL’s own criteria, and that often identify programs that have only one study demonstrating a specific program’s efficacy.)

_ _ _ _ _

·       CASEL is using the research to its own self-serving benefit.

CASEL promotes its own framework (which it recently modified without showing any research to support the modification), and it often highlights research that appears to “validate SEL” in a way to suggest that its framework is valid.

_ _ _ _ _

   Please understand: I fully believe, from a research-to-practice perspective, that teaching students to apply learned and mastered social, emotional, and behavioral skills to school and classroom interactions does contribute to academic engagement and achievement, and social-emotional self-management and proficiency.

   But this occurs, as noted earlier, because districts and schools are teaching students, in a developmentally-sensitive and differentiated way, behaviorally-observable interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills. . . across the multi-tiered continuum of student needs and challenges.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 What Should Districts and Schools Do?

   Summarizing psychological and behavioral science, sprinkled with forty-plus years of working successfully with students and staff in thousands of schools across the country, the “goal statement” in the paragraph immediately above can only be accomplished by the following:

·       Schools need to identify the observable, teachable, and measurable behavioral skills—including thoughts—that students need to demonstrate to be socially successful.

The skills need to be practical and school-specific. . . the individual, small group, and large group skills that students need to be successful in the classroom and across the school. 

The thoughts related to students’ attributions. . . the attitudes, beliefs, expectations, and interpretations. . . that positively support students’ efforts and successes, as well as to how they respond to challenging situations, disappointments, or even “failures.”

_ _ _ _ _ 

·       Schools need to teach students how to demonstrate their skills under conditions of emotionality. 

At times, academically, students have mastered the content and skills needed to “pass the (proficiency) test,” but they are not confident (they don’t “believe they can succeed”) and/or they are unable to handle the pressure. And thus, they underperform or even “fail.” 

One of our scientific principles is that “Mastery is attained when students can demonstrate their skills under conditions of emotionality.”

Hence—just like an athlete, a doctor in an Emergency room, a performer on stage—students need to learn how to demonstrate their social and interpersonal skills under adverse or stressful circumstances.

This is a learned skill that needs to be practiced by preschool through high school students.

That is, just like the basketball coach who has the team run different plays for the “last seconds of a game” during practice, students need to roleplay their social skills under simulated levels of stress.

_ _ _ _ _

·       The skills, attributions, and ability to perform “under pressure” need to be taught in consistently positive and supportive settings by staff who are consistent and teaching with fidelity.

Here, the instruction should include strategies to “transfer the training” so that students can demonstrate their skills more and more independently in real-life situations.

They also include motivational (especially, self-motivational) approaches that complement the instruction. These systems employ the positive responses and periodic incentives (that are faded out over time) that reinforce appropriate or progressively appropriate behavior.

They also include consequences paired with re-teaching, restitutional, and/or restorative practices when students make “bad choices,” and consistent administrative responses (by school principals) when inappropriate behavior is persistently disruptive, physically harmful, or dangerous.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Finally, supported by related services/mental health professionals (in the district or out in the community), schools need to have an accessible multi-tiered continuum of services, supports, and interventions for students with mild to significant social, emotional, behavioral, and/or mental health challenges.

_ _ _ _ _

   I know that this appears to be a lot.

   But this is the science-to-practice that works.

   And we have demonstrated that the actions and strategies within each of the bullets above can be reasonably implemented and sustained with commitment, planning, and the right training and resources in one to three-year school-wide effort.

[Link HERE to Three Free Resources from the Project ACHIEVE Store with will the information you need to succeed:

Evaluating School-wide Discipline/Positive Behavioral Support Systems: Three Years of Sequenced Implementation Activities

The Stop & Think Social Skills Program: Exploring its Research Base and Rationale

A Multi-Tiered Service & Support Implementation Blueprint for Schools & Districts: Revisiting the Science to Improve the Practice

_ _ _ _ _

   Bottom Line: Schools do not have the time, the staff, or the resources to waste on approaches that will not work, that might delay needed services and supports to students, and/or that could make existing problems worse or more resistant to change.

   Indeed, as in the title of this Blog, why would districts and schools implement “SEL programs” that don’t improve students’ collaboration and interactions in classrooms and across other settings in their schools?

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Drilling Down with a Few More Specifics

   Let’s take two of the “bullet areas” above, and provide more specific research and practice examples.

Examples of Practical Individual and Group Social Skills

   Below are some of the practical and school-based social skills taught in our evidence-based Stop & Think Social Skills Program.

·       Listening

·       Following Directions

·       Using Nice Talk

·       Contributing to Discussions

·       Asking and Answering Teacher Questions

·       How to Interrupt

·       Asking for Help

·       Asking for Permission

·       Waiting for an Adult’s Attention

·       Waiting for Your Turn

·       Joining an Activity

·       Beginning and Ending a Conversation

·       Ignoring Distractions

·       Apologizing/Excusing Yourself

·       Accepting Consequences

·       Asking and Answering Questions

·       Setting and Evaluating Goals

·       Avoiding Trouble/Conflict Situations

·       Deciding Whether to Follow the Group

·       Dealing with Peer Pressure

·       Being Honest/Acknowledging your Mistakes

·       Dealing with Teasing

·       Dealing with Being Rejected or Left Out

·       Dealing with Losing or Not Attaining Desired Goals

·       Showing Understanding of Another’s Feelings/Empathy

·       Dealing with and Responding to Another Person’s Anger or Emotionality

·       Walking Away from a Fight/Conflict

·       Negotiating to Resolve Conflicts Peacefully and Productively

_ _ _ _ _

   Examples of (additional) skills that students in small cooperative or project-based groups need to learn and demonstrate include:

·       Listening to Peers with an Open Mind

·       Remaining On-Task

·       Doing Your Share

·       Taking Turns

·       Interacting Positively with Each Other

·       Ensuring that All Group Members Contribute

·       Problem-Solving and Compromising when needed

·       Setting goals

·       Asking Clear Questions

·       Identifying Roles for Group Members

·       Being a Good Leader/Follower

·       Checking  with Others for Consensus

·       Communicating Clearly/Asking for Clarification when needed

·       Awareness of Other Group Members’ Emotions

·       Verbalizing One’s own Challenges/Emotions

·       Knowing When and How to “Check Out” Others’ Emotions

·       Managing Time Effectively

·       Giving/Accepting Compliments

·       Standing Up for Your Position/Rights

·       Knowing When/How to Agree, Disagree, and Agree to Disagree

·       Dealing with Disappointment or Failure

[See MORE Skills in our Previous Blog:

What Social, Emotional, Attributional, and Behavioral Skills Do ALL Students Need from an SEL Initiative?

_ _ _ _ _

What is the Science-to-Practice for Teaching Social Skills?

   As validated in research beginning with Bandura’s Social Learning Theory in 1977 and continuing through analyses by Harvard University’s Ecological Approaches to Social Emotional Learning (EASEL) Laboratory, there are five essential steps when successfully teaching students social skills.

   They are:

·       Teaching the steps and related behaviors/interactions of a desired social skill. 

·       Modeling the steps and the social skills language (or script). 

·       Roleplaying the steps and the script with students in a classroom- or school-related scene or scenario.

·       Providing Performance Feedback to the students relative to how accurately they are verbalizing the skill script and how successfully they are behaviorally demonstrating the new skill.

·       Transferring and Applying the skill and its steps as much as possible during the day to reinforce the teaching over time, in different settings, with different people, and in different situations.

_ _ _ _ _

   When Teaching and Modeling, teachers need to make sure that students:

·       Have the prerequisite skills to be successful

·       Are taught using language that they can understand

·       Are taught in simple steps that ensure success

·       Hear the social skills script as the social skills behavior is demonstrated

_ _ _ _ _

   When Practicing or Roleplaying, teachers need to make sure that students:

·       Verbalize (or repeat or hear) the steps to a particular social skill as they demonstrate its appropriate behavior

·       Practice only the positive or appropriate social skill behavior

·       Receive ongoing and consistent practice opportunities

·       Use relevant practice situations that simulate the “emotional” intensity of the real situations so that they can fully master the social skill and be able to demonstrate them under conditions of emotionality

·       Practice the skills at a developmental level that they can handle

_ _ _ _ _

   When Giving Performance Feedback, teachers need to make sure that the feedback is:

·       Specific and descriptive

·       Focused on reinforcing students’ successful use of the social skill, or on correcting an inaccurate or incomplete social skills demonstration

·       Positive—emphasizing what was done well and what can be done well (or better) next time

_ _ _ _ _

   When Transferring or Applying Social Skills after Instruction, teachers need to make sure that they reinforce students’ prosocial skills steps and behavior when they:

·       Have successfully demonstrated an appropriate social skill

·       Have made a “bad” choice, demonstrating an inappropriate social skill

·       Are faced with a problem or situation but have not committed to, nor demonstrated, a prosocial skill

·       Must use the skill in situations that are somewhat different from those used when the skill was originally taught and practiced

[See RELATIVE INFORMATION in our Previous Blog:

The SEL Secret to Success: You Need to “Stop & Think” and “Make Good Choices” - Project ACHIEVE

_ _ _ _ _

What Conditions Help Schools to Effectively Implement a Social Skills Program?

   Harvard University’s EASEL Laboratory, among a select group of other researchers and practitioners have identified some critical school conditions that facilitate the implementation of a school-wide social skills initiative.

   They include:

·       Facilitate ownership and buy-in 

·       Ensure sufficient staff support, training, and coaching

·       Allocate the time needed to implement the program effectively and with fidelity

·       Extend social skills learning and application beyond the classroom into the common areas of the school

·       Provide opportunities for students and staff to apply and transfer social skills and strategies to real-life situations

_ _ _ _ _

   Some additional “common characteristics” noted are that the school-wide initiative:

·       Establishes and maintains safe and positive settings and interactions for children and adults

·       Supports the development of high-quality relationships between children and adults

·       Is developmentally, demographically, and culturally sensitive, relevant, and engaging for children

·       Provides opportunities for direct skill building, feedback, mastery, and application

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This Blog began by encouraging districts and schools to address their school safety and discipline, classroom management and engagement, and student behavior and self-control needs by focusing on observable and measurable student outcomes. . . rather than pre-packaged and marketed programs that change their labels to appear “new and improved.”

   We specifically provided the history, research, and questionable (if not, poor and unsustained) outcomes from the PBIS and SEL frameworks.

   From a psychological research-to-practice perspective, we emphasized that schools anchor themselves on the following goal:

   The developmentally-sensitive and differentiated teaching of students’ behaviorally-observable interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills. . . across the multi-tiered continuum of student needs and challenges.

   To accomplish this, we detailed the needed science-to-practice components, social skills, instructional approach, and school and staff implementation characteristics needed for school success.

   Schools do not have the time, the staff, or the resources to waste on approaches that will not work, that delay needed services and supports to students, and/or that could exacerbate existing problems.

   As in the title of this Blog, why would districts and schools implement “SEL programs” that don’t improve students’ collaboration and interactions in classrooms and across other settings in their schools?

   Why are we hanging onto frameworks that have never objectively demonstrated consistent (across 90 or more percent of the implementing schools), sustained (more than three years), and multi-tiered success (i.e., PBIS).

   And why are schools “doing SEL” based on meta-analytic research that does not causally validate specific universal SEL practices, that is being used to advance the interests of an independent—even if non-profit—company (i.e., CASEL), and that reflects over 40 different frameworks with leaders who have widely different definitions of “SEL”?

   We can and must “get back to the psychological basics.” We can and must do better in this important area supporting education.

_ _ _ _ _

   As we begin this “next stretch” of the school year, I hope that the thoughts above, and the resources provided (both our FREE Monograph or Papers, and our past Blogs) are helpful to you.

   Significantly, we are only half-way through the school year. There is plenty of time to make the mid-course corrections needed to make this an incredibly successful school year.

   If I can help you in any way, please do not hesitate to contact me—especially in the areas discussed above.

   I am currently the “National Consultant” on three five-year federal School Climate Transformation Grants—which have me in the participating school districts approximately 40 days per year. So. . . I am partnering in these school discipline areas all of the time.

   If you are already thinking about next year, know that I help many schools and districts to map out their futures—for example, in the areas of (a) school improvement, (b) multi-tiered (including, special education) services and supports, and (c) interventions for challenging students.

   Feel free to contact me to begin this process.

Best,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Ebony and Ivory: Education’s “Racial Divide” Cannot be Crossed Until We Can “Talk Like Friends”

 Dear Colleagues,

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

 

Introduction

   As we—in our nation’s schools and classrooms—enter a New Year of controversy, concerns, and challenges. . . disconnect, discontent, and disruption. . . confusion, conflict, and even crisis, everyone seems to agree that “something has got to change.”

   But what many disagree with is what specifically needs to change. . . and how and where to start.

   Not to be naïve, but as a psychologist who has studied bias and prejudice, and cognitive dissonance and social change, it seems that our biases change when we establish strong positive and personal relationships with people who are members of social groups that we do not know, have doubts about, or have negative attitudes (or worse) toward.

   For example, as we develop personal relationships with members of different cultures and religions, our initial prejudiced biases (if they existed) change.

   When we travel (physically or virtually) and develop personal relationships with those from different geographic or social-economic backgrounds, our initial prejudices or inaccurate perceptions (if they existed) change.

   And, when we develop personal relationships with those with different sexual orientations or disabilities, our initial stereotypes or biases (if they existed) change.

_ _ _ _ _

   This week, I want to highlight the ongoing “racial divide” in education—focusing largely on the adults in our schools.

   The effects of this racial divide is evident (for example) in:

·       The racially inequitable funding of education at a state and/or local level; 

·       The formal (before Brown v. Board of Education) and still informal segregation of our schools; 

·       The disproportionate academic and behavioral (e.g., office discipline referrals and school suspensions) disproportionality experienced by students of color; and 

·       The significant (again, dating back at least to the “integration” of our schools following Brown v. The Board of Education) gap in the number of Black educators, related service professionals, and administrators in our nation’s schools and districts.

   Along with this Blog, one of the ways that I wanted to highlight the atrocities above was to discuss it on Larry Jacob’s Education Talk Radio with my good friend Dr. Deborah Crockett. Deb was the first African-American President of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), and she founded NASP’s Minority Scholarship Program back in 1991.

   Deb and I have been colleagues and friends since (before) I was the President of NASP over 30 years ago. More importantly, she (as an African-American woman) and I (as a White male) have worked together and challenged each other through debates, agreements, and periodic disagreements on the difficult issues of race and education over the years.

   For me, the underlying reason why I wanted Deb and I together on Education Talk Radio was to reinforce how personal relationships allow us to bridge education’s “racial divide” because we can talk as friends.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Backwards to Go Forward—I

   It was a great disappointment to hear that, during her first days as the new Governor of Arkansas last week, Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed an Executive Order to Prohibit Indoctrination and Critical Race Theory in Schools.

   While couched in language that suggests her concern with “traditional American values of neutrality, equality, and fairness,” this action is remarkable in that, like similar legislation and executive orders in other states, this Executive Order (a) does not define Critical Race Theory (CRT) or its specifically “offensive” components, and (b) does not demonstrate that CRT even exists in Arkansas schools, and yet it (c) does suggest that CRT is discriminatory—even as many of the discriminatory and inequitable atrocities discussed above exist in many Arkansas’ schools and were not addressed during the 18 years that I lived there.

   Significantly, at least two of our Blogs discussed the realities of CRT, and the impact of the national debate around its existence well over a year ago.

December 4, 2021  Will the Controversy Over Critical Race Theory Damage Students’ Pursuit to Better Understand Cultural, Racial, and Individual Differences? Is Our Nation At-Risk. . . for Different Reasons than in 1983?

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

July 31, 2021  The Critical Common Sense Components Needed to Eliminate Disproportionate School Discipline Referrals and Suspensions for Students of Color: This is NOT About Critical Race Theory (But We Discuss It)

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

   In the end, it is uncertain why Governor Sanders would sign one of her first Executive Orders about an issue that is largely dated and defunct at this point.

   Nonetheless, this Executive Order appears to represent a politically-motivated action that will—intentionally or unintentionally—maintain or exacerbate the racial divide in Arkansas’ schools to the detriment of students and staff.

   In short, and consistent with the theme of this piece, this Executive Order will make it more difficult for Black, White, and other educators of color to openly and comfortably discuss issues of race and culture, relating these discussions to the effective and collaborative instruction and support of the multi-racial mix of students who they teach.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Backwards to Go Forward—II

   Before returning to the theme of how personal relationships allow us to cross education’s “racial divide” (because we can talk as friends), let’s recognize that challenging problems are solved with both sound strategies and the collaborative interactions that ensure their implementation with integrity.

   Relative to the former, previous Blogs have discussed, for example, both the unsound and sound strategies used to address disproportionate disciplinary practices in our schools—a core manifestation of inequity for students of color and with disabilities.

   Addressing the unsound (largely, policy-driven) “strategies” that many states and districts have tried (but that have not decreased this inequity), we point to the following Blog.

September 25, 2021  How Have Districts Tried and Failed to Eliminate Disproportionate Discipline Rates for Students of Color and With Disabilities? It’s Not About the Plan, It’s About What’s IN the Plan. . . and the Most Frequently Recommended Strategies Do Not Work

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

   Relative to the latter, we have shared a number of evidence-based research-to-practice student, staff, and classroom strategies that do significantly decrease disproportionate disciplinary actions with students of color and with disabilities.

August 14, 2021  The Components Needed to Eliminate Disproportionate School Discipline Referrals and Suspensions for Students of Color Do Not Require Anti-Bias Training: Behind Every Iron Chef is an Iron-Clad Recipe (Part II)

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

July 9, 2022  Reviewing Three New Studies on Student Discipline, Disproportionate Office Referrals, and Racial Inequity. It’s Not about School Shootings! It’s about Recognizing What Needs to Change in our Classrooms

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

   But critically, even the best strategies can be undermined by half-hearted implementation due to insufficient staff commitment and collaboration.

   Indeed, when effective and proven practices to improve schools’ racial disproportionality and inequity are implemented by staff who are racially separated on personal and professional levels, they have a limited chance of long-term and sustained success.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Establishing Connections between Racially Different Staff in Schools

   While they may be a start, there is now enough evidence that formal professional development, in-service, or “self-awareness” workshops or programs—focused on multi-cultural history, awareness, sensitivity, or “culturally-competent” interactions—in and of themselves—do not successfully impact issues related to implicit bias and high-quality, day-to-day interactions between Black and White (and other) educators.

   For a summary validating this statement, please see our past Blog:

December 5, 2020  Training Racial Bias Out of Teachers: Who Ever Said that We Could? Will the Fact that In-Service Programs Cannot Eliminate Implicit Bias Create a Bias Toward Inaction?

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

   At the same time, White educators do need to know and understand the historical events related to and that impact implicit and explicit bias, and the challenges of “growing up Black in America.”

   Included here is the reality of White Privilege, and—as but one example only—the fear felt in Black families even when their children and adolescents simply walk out of their front doors to do an errand.

[SEE our Past Blog—with two Videos that EVERYONE should watch}:

September 5, 2020  Celebrating Our Labors on Labor Day . . . While Recognizing the Contribution of White Privilege

[CLICK HERE to LINK to BLOG]

_ _ _ _ _

   Conversely, Black educators should also understand the power and impact of others’ implicit biases. . . and that, by their very nature, these biases are largely hidden to those who express or enact them.

_ _ _ _ _

   A September 6, 2022 Education Week article, “Why Can’t We Talk to Each Other Anymore? How Binary Thinking Is Dividing the K-12 World,” discussed some of the psychological processes affecting difficult discussions in today’s schools.

   The article began (with minor edits):

Watching all this binary, dichotomous, either-or thinking play out in K-12 education over the past few years has been frustrating. . . It has been one of the ugliest periods of factionalism in the United States I have witnessed in my 59 years.

 

And it got me thinking: Why do we do this? Why is it so bad now? And, most importantly, how do we move past this rigid way of thinking and behaving so it doesn’t get in the way of meaningful and effective teaching and learning?

 

Turns out, the answer to the first question begins with how our brains work. For most of us, our tendency is to jump to conclusions with limited evidence. In other words, the first mistake our minds make is to move too quickly. This, in turn, denies us the opportunity to consider the nuances of a problem or issue. Some of us engage in this kind of thinking more than others—but we all do it.

 

Thinking, Fast and Slow, a book by Daniel Kahneman, a professor emeritus of psychology and public affairs at Princeton University and the winner of the 2002 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, offers a fascinating look into what drives this way of thinking.

 

“The confidence that individuals have in their beliefs depends mostly on the quality of the story they can tell about what they see, even if they see little,” Kahneman writes in the book. “We often fail to allow for the possibility that evidence that should be critical to our judgment is missing—what we see is all there is.”

_ _ _ _ _

   The article continues, eventually introducing the social psychological concept of “fundamental attribution error.”

That leads us to a concept in social psychology called “fundamental attribution error.” It is why people mistakenly assign the root cause of an observed behavior to the person’s character or personality, rather than something about their circumstances or a mix of their personality and circumstances. That explains the widespread use of personal attacks by extremists on social media or why people of opposing viewpoints can’t debate an issue without flinging personal insults at each other. . .

 

Herein lies the problem: When we engage in fundamental attribution error that focuses too heavily on a person’s character or personality—without engaging in “slow” thinking to consider their situations or circumstances—it is much easier to get frustrated and angry with that person. And that’s when the pointless name-calling starts at school board meetings and on Twitter, Facebook, and other social media.

 

[CLICK HERE for the Entire Article]

_ _ _ _ _

   In the end, one of the ways to traverse the Black-White staff divide in schools today (if it exists) is to have the conversations and experiences that help everyone to set the norms that reinforce an ongoing “consideration of each other’s situations or circumstances” during professional and personal interactions. . . so that relationships built on trust and understanding can evolve.

   While this is easy to say and more challenging to do, School Leadership Teams need to continuously discuss, survey, assess, and plan formal and informal activities so that all staff “get to know each other” on multiple—including racial, religious, cultural, and generational—levels.

   Grade-level (or departmental) teams, cross-grade level (or trans-disciplinary) teams, and individual staff members need to similarly take the steps necessary to “cross both professional and personal bridges”. . . getting to know each other as colleagues, community-members, and as just plain “folk.”

   This is yet another challenge for most educators during their already-overloaded days and weeks. But these personal relationships can make these days and weeks easier—especially when racially uncomfortable, inequitable, inappropriate, or biased interactions or events (inside or outside the school) occur.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A Personal Finale

   As referenced earlier in this Blog, my good friend Dr. Deborah Crockett, the first African-American President of the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) and the Founder of NASP’s Minority Scholarship Program back in 1991, and I were together on Larry Jacob’s Education Talk Radio this past week.

   While the topic was Recruiting Minorities to Education and Mental Health Professions, I wanted to use the program to emphasize three things:

·       As states continue to politicize racial differences in ways that are insensitive to Black history, culture, and lived experiences, the recruitment and retention of Black educators and mental health service providers—even into professional training programs—will suffer. 

Said a different way: Why would you go somewhere where you are not wanted, respected, valued, and comfortable?

·       That the recruitment and, especially, retention process of Black educators and mental health professionals will succeed on the strength of Black and White educators' ability to talk with each other. . . especially when—as above—racially inequitable, biased, inappropriate, or uncomfortable interactions or events (inside or outside the school) occur.

·       Without putting either of us on a pedestal, I wanted the way that Deb and I communicated and interacted on the radio program to provide a model of Black-White respect and collegiality.

_ _ _ _ _

      To be sure, Deb and my mutual respect and collegiality is anchored by a personal relationship that is grounded in:

·       Our shared personal and professional experiences

·       Our willingness to recognize our racial (and gender) differences, and to question and learn from each other when we “know that we don’t know”

·       Our ability to discuss the underlying reasons for the success of our cross-racial relationship, and to sensitively “call each other out” when our implicit biases cause interactions that are inadvertently inappropriate

·       Our trust in each other—recognizing that neither of us would do anything to consciously or willingly hurt each other, and that many of our interactions are not race-related, they now are “Howie and Deb”-related

_ _ _ _ _

   I believe that these characteristics come across in our interview (see the YouTube version below).

   In addition, note that Deb, Larry, and I talk discuss some ideas on how to recruit and keep minorities in education—both in the classroom and as mental health support professionals. . . especially school psychologists.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   Clearly, there are many layers and strategies needed to bridge the professional and personal gaps between Black and White educators. While some schools have few or no gaps in this area, given the political climate of the past few years, the ongoing existence of academic gaps for students of color, and their disproportionate treatment relative to school discipline, any existing successes require critical and ongoing attention.

   As noted, a great deal of research has concluded that formal professional development, in-service, or “self-awareness” workshops or programs—focused on multi-cultural history, awareness, sensitivity, or “culturally-competent” interactions—in and of themselves—have not successfully eliminated implicit bias and its effects on the day-to-day interactions between Black and White (and other) educators.

   This Blog has emphasized that, ultimately, any effective approaches or strategies need to be complemented and driven by the personal relationships between Black and White educators.

   While needing both formal and informal sustained interactions, until Black and White educators can talk “as friends,” racially inequitable, biased, uncomfortable, or inappropriate interactions or events (inside or outside the school) will likely be unresolved, increasing the potential to negatively impact school climate, building and grade-level staff interactions, and the quality of instruction and student support.

_ _ _ _ 

   As always, I appreciate everyone who reads this bi-monthly Blog and thinks about the issues or recommendations that we share.

   I again wish all of you a “Happy New Year” on both a personal and professional level.

   We have five to six more months to positively impact our students, staff and colleagues, schools, and other educational settings. While many districts are already planning for the future (i.e., the 2023 – 2024 school year), we still need to understand that the “future is now.”

   If I can help you map out your future—for example, in the areas of (a) school improvement, (b) social-emotional learning/positive behavioral discipline and classroom management systems, and (c) multi-tiered (special education) services and supports—feel free to contact me to begin this process.

Best,

Howie

 

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]