The Pushback Against Social Emotional Learning. Where it's Coming from and How it Hurts Children (Part 2 with Stephanie Krauss) (Ep. 16)

Courageous Conversations About Our Schools

Send us a text

In part 2 of this episode, host Ken Futernick continues his conversation with author Stephanie Krauss about Social Emotional Learning (SEL) and her new book, Whole Child, Whole Life. They explore the growing pushback from conservative policy organizations, like the American Enterprise Institute, and from parent rights advocates like Stephanie McWilliams who says, “Social Emotional Learning is the latest craze that is taking over our education across our country. It is a program that schools are adopting to shift the school culture and educate what they call the whole child…They assume the role of parents essentially by using brainwashing techniques and role playing to teach children how to think and feel about life.”Krauss concedes that teachers are not always adequately prepared to promote Social Emotional Learning. “In my own children's lives, even though I have been involved nationally in social emotional learning for years, I have been pretty disappointed with some of the SEL I programs that they've experienced,” she says. Futernick says the fact that SEL is not always practiced well can be true of any educational practice - teaching children how to read or to do mathematics. But, he says, this alone is not a reason to construct an indictment of teachers or of the subjects they are attempting to teach.In trying to get at the source of the resistance to SEL, Krauss is reminded of the book, Switch, whose authors argue that lack of clarity about an idea often leads to confusion. That confusion can then lead to contempt. Krauss speculates that confusion about SEL could be the cause of the contempt that Stephanie McWilliams and others have for this educational approach. Futernick raises the possibility of a more sinister explanation - that misinformation and confusion about SEL may not be due to poor messaging from educators, but instead of the work of what journalist Amanda Ripley calls “conflict entrepreneurs” - people who manufacture crises in local communities, who deliberately instill fear and pit groups against one another for political or financial gain.Krauss does not dismiss this more disturbing possibility. “[I]f I was a bad guy and I was looking at a long game, a multi-generational strategy, one of the best ways to take down and break down the democracy or a neighborhood or nation would be to really mess up its kids,” she says. “And in this moment, our kids need social and emotional support more than they ever have before. And if we allow confusion and contempt to get in the way of providing those supports and removing those supports from the places where they spend the most of their time, we are engaging in life-threatening practices. And so before we do that, it's worth the risk and the discomfort of coming together to figure out what we actually mean when we talk about social emotional development.”