This work is aligned with the topic of The Social and Emotional Conditions of Learning: The Case of Bullying in Schools by Dorothy Espelage. It is my belief that students need to feel safe in their learning environment in order to be able to reach their full academic potential. This work is to investigate if and how the conditioning of social-emotional skills is effective in reducing bullying.

This topic resonates with me because as a middle school teacher, it is my perception that bullying has been on the increase since I began teaching years ago, but it is hard to tell if it truly has changed or if that access to it has increased significantly. With that, it seems as though the skills needed for maintaining healthy and positive academic and social lives while navigating these situations have also changed both in the needed skills and where and how they are reinforced.

In a world where the educational landscape is changing and more online opportunities are available than ever before, social-emotional skills are still needed to be able to successfully navigate the experience. As bullying appears to be increasing, developing social-emotional skills can not only lower the occurrences but can also help minimize the impact of bullying. Although the in-person and online educational experiences occur in different environments, which involve different social and emotional skills, the impacts and needed interventions to foster the positive development of these skills do not differ significantly. Not surprisingly, there are struggles in executing the programs to do so, but there is plenty of evidence that supports the importance of conditioning positive and productive social and emotional skills because no matter the delivery format of education, in order for students to learn, they need to feel they are in a safe and comfortable environment.

Video 1: Committee for Children. (2016). What is SEL and Why SEL Matters? YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikehX9o1JbI&t=112s

In an educational world that is shifting to include more communication and collaboration, combined with what are traditional school values of following rules and expectations, social-emotional skills need to be developed to ensure students are capable of successfully navigating these environments. McKown and Herman (2020) define social and emotional learning as “the competencies children (and adults) use to interact effectively with others, to form and maintain positive relationships, and to participate in collective life” (p. 3). The competencies are then defined as “social and emotional skills and abilities children should know and be able to demonstrate, by grade level” (McKown & Herman, 2020, p. 11). These skills are necessary for both the face-to-face learning environments and online learning environments.

Figure 1: Lesek, M. (2019). The Importance of Social Emotional Learning in Children. Buffalo County Community Partners. https://bcchp.org/the-importance-of-social-emotional-learning-in-children/ 

As Buszdar et al (2016) indicate online learning environments, though, have both technical and non-technical differences as online learning is delivered differently, therefore, lessening student engagement and negatively impacting the quality of learning. Some of these skills are more difficult online because, with the expansion of online learning, many have reported a lack of interpersonal connection with the environment. In addition to the skills needed for in-person interactions, online students also need to navigate “technological expertise, unmet needs for human contact, lack of self-motivation, or feelings of isolation, which can deter success in online courses” (Berenson et al, 2008, p. 2). Even though the social-emotional environments are different for in-person and online learning, a connection for both learning environments is that the coping skills needed to successfully navigate these feelings are similar because, as Gabriella et al. (2021) explain, regardless of where, resilience is needed to help protect against bullying in both environments. Therefore, by building one’s confidence, ability to control emotions, build relationships, and effectively deal with conflict, these programs are attempting to develop the resilience needed to protect against bullying unfortunately, these programs do not have a 100% success rate to preventing it.

Figure 2: Gabrielli et al. (2021). School interventions for bullying-cyberbullying prevention in adolescents: insights from the UPRIGHT and CREEP projects. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. p. 4.

As Gabrielli et al. (2021) define, “traditional bullying can assume a direct form, such as hitting, making threats, and name-calling, or can occur in an indirect form, such as rumor-spreading and social exclusion” (p. 1). But Nikiforos et al. (2020) expand on its definition as “a sociocultural phenomenon with systemic nature” (p. 533) and that “bullying and cyberbullying are different but not separate…as cyberbullying is mainly expressed through language” (p. 533). Even Kalantzis and Cope (2016) state that “words and their meanings not only reflect social frames of reference; they also have social effects” (p. 86). As supported by the social cognitivist theory, it shows that environments impact learners, and include how words are used and interpreted.

In a study conducted by Cioppa et al. (2015), they stated that a significant amount of youth is victims of online bullying, with “rates for cyberbullying ranging from 10-35% in one study and as high as 75% in another” (p. 61). The lack of face-to-face social interaction seems to have an impact as according to them, “the relationship becomes more complex with the addition of anonymity, greater social dissemination, lack of supervision present on electronic media, and increased accessibility to the target” (Cioppa et al., 2015, p. 61). Although finding a pattern of behaviors, the study by Nikiforos et al. (2020) showed people who perpetrate bullying in an in-person environment are more likely to demonstrate bullying behavior in an online environment also although some who did not were more inclined to do so while online.

The effects of bullying, in both forms, are detrimental to the victims and their ability to reach their full academic potential. In the study conducted by Cioppa et al. (2015), they also found that “outcomes are very similar to that of traditional bullying…fear that often leads to avoiding school, an inability to concentrate, anxiety and depression, and increased risk of psychiatric disorders” (p. 61). Gabriella et al. (2021) add “they are also more likely to have a higher risk of self-harm and suicide, poorer internalization skills, poor academic achievement, and school absenteeism” (p. 1). Cioppa et al. (2015) indicated that cyberbullying often starts with something that happened in school, in-person therefore it is necessary to have interventions in-person to prevent online bullying.

Evidence shows that it is important to develop and support social-emotional skills at multiple levels, which include within schools and communities. There is a push to develop and support these skills as there is ample evidence that shows these programs are successful in lowering bullying rates while raising academic data. Not only do these skills help lower the rates of bullying, but they can also allow students to develop the resilience needed to minimize the impact of bullying. Polan et al. support the argument to condition these skills because (2013) “evidence also supported [their] second hypothesis that greater social and emotional skills would be associated with lower levels of bullying perpetration. In multivariate regression models, higher levels of stress management skills were associated with lower levels of instigating both physical bullying and relational aggression” (p. 601). Berenson et al. (2008) add that not only do these skills aid in social and emotional relationships but they also are associated with students’ academic success in the classroom. They add that it “can be taught, which substantiates the need for students to develop self-awareness” (p. 12). McKown and Herman (2020) state that “substantial efforts are currently underway, albeit in pockets, to use SEL assessment data to inform educational decision-making in constructive way” (p. 12).

Many schools incorporate constructivist-based programs, such as Second Step or Upright, where students are provided with different social and emotional conditions and asked to reflect on how they would respond. These skills are usually reinforced through behaviorist-based school rules and expectations, which result in positive rewards for those who respond properly and punishments for those who do not. Gabrielli et al. have gathered evidence that shows “inventions fostering both the individual and the environmental factors contributing to youth resilience and well-being shows that these assets are more likely to be effective in preventing (cyber)bullying and high-risk behaviors in school and out-of-school settings” (2021, p. 3). The study conducted by Nikiforos et al. (2020) indicated that by using language analysis in online communities, incidents of bullying can be detected and prevented. Even “the analysis of the feedback from students participating in the focus groups evidenced a positive effect of the program in the school atmosphere, improving relationships, relaxation, empathy, and tolerance, preventing teasing and conflicts, as well as improving the relationship with their teachers (Gabrielli et al., 2021, p. 7).

Figure 3: Committee for Children. (2022). Social Emotional Learning Can Help Prevent Bullying. Leading the SEL Revolution. https://www.cfchildren.org/policy-collateral/one-pagers/social-emotional-learning-can-help-prevent-bullying-2/#:~:text=SEL%20bolsters%20bullying%20prevention%20efforts,can%20promote%E2%80%94that%20discourage%20bullying&text=Teaches%20relationship%20skills%2C%20including%20peer%20support%2C%20to%20protect%20against%20bullying

Figure 4: Social Learning Infographics. (2017). Why It Is Imperative to Assess Social Emotional Learning. ELearning Infographics. https://elearninginfographics.com/assess-social-emotional-learning-infographic/

Although under the social cognitivist approach, learning can influence and be influenced by the environment (Kalantzis & Cope, 2022). Nikiforos et al. (2020) explain that “interaction among community members promotes learning, resulting in deeper understanding. It also motivates them to transform their roles and their behavior” (p. 532). Zhou and Wei (2018) believe “it is necessary to provide opportunities for learners to develop metacognitive awareness and to guide them in improving and expanding their knowledge” (p. 484). Liam et al. (2022) believe this can be achieved through “a multiliteracies pedagogy supplements the traditional literacy pedagogy and focuses on modes of meaning-making beyond language” (p. 2). According to Gabrielli et al. (2021), “evidence-based research on interventions fostering both the individual and the environmental factors contributing to youth resilience and well-being shows that these assets are more likely to be effective in preventing (cyber) bullying and high-risk behaviors in school and out-of-school settings” (p. 3). According to Zhou and Wei (2018), “researchers found it is effective to include self-regulation strategies in task design” (p. 483); further defining those as “sociocultural-interactive strategies for contexts, communications, culture and meta-social strategies for planning, organizing, monitoring, and evaluating in the sociocultural-interactive area”. (p. 483).

Figure 5: Pease, I. & Samuelson, K. (n.d.). Social Emotional Learning and Education Equity. Folsom Cordova Unified School District. https://www.fcusd.org/domain/4927

“SEL assessment data can help guide educators to build on identified student strengths and address student needs” (McKown & Herman, 2020, p. 4). With these results, educators can provide necessary personalized support, regardless of whether learning is online or in-person. As Chaturvedi et al. (2020) explain “the peer-to-peer impact in the school environment motivates individuals to work hard and learn social skills, which may not be possible in an online setting” (p. 6). Zhou and Wei (2018) use research to show “that interactions in online environments require different ways of making and maintaining contact, finding out about common interests, and developing an identity as a group” (p. 486). This may require the learner to be intrinsically motivated to seek out these connections online to support this set of skills, yet Zemblyas states “it may be possible that under some circumstances, online formats can encourage this form of emotional reflexivity in ways that face-to-face learning cannot” (p. 65) because “studies have shown that one of the great advantages of text-based asynchronous online communication is the time it allows for reflection, thoughtful interaction, and the possibility for refining before posting one’s contributions” (p. 64). This is assuming, then, that students will take the time to think about what they have typed and how their words would be construed by the reader. When positive social-emotional skills are fostered and practiced in the learning environment, Nikiforos et al. (2020) saw that:

Aggressive members, having the right to free choice, were cautious fearing non-acceptance by the community. They chose to remain silent and focused on the shared project. This led to self-sustaining and permanent behavior modification (p. 545).

Video 2: Espelage, D. (2017). Social-Emotional Learning Approaches to Bully Prevention. University of Illinois. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT5Km2RCbdk

Incorporating social-emotional learning supports in school is relatively new, and with that, there are still limitations in having effective programs to support students. According to Cioppa et al. (2015), “the shortcomings assessed by the scientific merit scores included: the inability to engage multiple systemic levels, failing to tailor the program to the specific needs of the school, and a lack of follow-up measures to ensure that positive outcomes were maintained” (p. 66). Schools often attempt to change bullying behavior through individual punishments for the bully, but as bystanders are often part of the problem, interventions need to include the entire school community rather than just trying to use punishment to prevent bullying behaviors. In addition, these programs are also created to be sent out en masse without any consideration for local or individual school-related issues that may need to be addressed in order to prevent bullying as these programs are not tailored to the specific needs of the school.

The other problem Cioppa et al. (2015) note is with intervention programs that “even though hundreds of bullying prevention programs are marketed to schools, only about 8% of programs implemented are evidence-based” (Cioppa et al., 2015, p. 62). They also explain that “not only do researchers fail to operate under a common definition of cyberbullying but there are very few evidence-based criteria for developing an intervention program” (p. 61). Without the use of evidence-based criteria, it is difficult to determine if these programs are truly effective or if they are considered effective based solely on feelings or opinions. To be able to make improvements or truly determine if these programs help reduce bullying, there need to be more research conducted.

Even though evidence shows the success of interventions, there is still a large gap in access to programs that support social-emotional skills. As McKown and Herman (2020) cite from the “recent national survey of principals, 82% reported that they would use SEL assessment to improve instruction if they knew that such assessments were available, and 32% reported that they were using SEL assessment to improve instruction” (p. 6) yet “there is a scare statewide funding of SEL” (p. 13). Chaturvedi et al. (2020) add the access issue that “for disadvantaged students, availability and access to gadgets must be ensured” (p. 6).

One of the last limitations is that there is little to no teacher training for these programs. Chaturvedi et al. (2020) add that “proper training of educators for the digital skills and improved student-teacher interaction must be conducted” yet in reality many teachers are provided a schedule of when it is his or her turn to cover the provided lesson. This also assumes the teacher has the needed skills, both emotional and technological, to deliver the interventions. Without teacher training and teacher buy-in, these programs become another initiative dropped into the school-wide curriculum that often disrupts the content the teacher is there to do daily. Therefore, the delivery and the results of these programs could be negatively impacted.

Creating safe spaces where students feel comfortable is essential for them to meet their full educational potential. “Effective learning is much more a function of the emotional response to a learning environment than the techniques and structures on which it is based” (Berenson et al., 2008, p. 3). Although not without its challenges and shortcomings, it seems possible to find interventions to help support the needed social-emotional skills to aid students through difficult situations experienced in life. “When we can rise up to the challenges in program content and evaluation, we can create a safe school that fosters healthy relationships both online and in face-to-face interactions” (Cioppa et al., 2015, p. 68).

*Berenson, R., Boyles, G., & Weaver, A. (2008, June). Emotional intelligence as a predictor of success in online learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(2), 1-17. doi:https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v912.385

*Buzdar, M. A., Ali, A., & Haq Tariq, R. U. (2016, January). Emotional intelligence as a determinant of readiness for online learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(1), 148-158. doi:https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i1.2149

*Chaturvedi, K., Vishwakarma, D. K., & Singh, N. (2020, December). COVID-19 and its impact on education, social life and mental health of students: a survey. Children and Youth Services Review, 1-6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105866

*Cioppa, V. D., O'Neil, A., & Craig, W. (2015). Learning from traditional bullying interventions: A review of research on cyberbullying and best practice. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23, 61-68.

Committee for Children. (2022). Social emotional learning can help prevent bullying. https://www.cfchildren.org/policy-collateral/one-pagers/social-emotional-learning-can-help-prevent-bullying-2/#:~:text=SEL%20bolsters%20bullying%20prevention%20efforts,can%20promote%E2%80%94that%20discourage%20bullying&text=Teaches%20relationship%20skills%2C%20including%20peer%20support%2C%20to%20protect%20against%20bullying

Committee for Children. (2016). What is SEL and why SEL matters? [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikehX9o1JbI&t=112s

Education at Illinois. (2017). Social-emotional learning approaches to bully prevention [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT5Km2RCbdk

*Gabrielli, S., Rizzi, S., Carbone, S., & Piras, E. M. (2021, November). School interventions for bullying-cyberbullying prevention in adolescents: insights from the UPRIGHT and CREEP Projects. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 3-13. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111697

Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2008-2022). New Learning: Elements of a science of education. Cambridge, UK/Champaign, IL: Cambridge University Press/Common Ground Research Networks.

Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2016). Learner differences in theory and practice. Open Review of Educational Research, 3(1), 85-132. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2016.1164616

Lesek, M. (2019). The importance of social emotional learning in children. Buffalo County Community Partners. https://bcchp.org/the-importance-of-social-emotional-learning-in-children/

Liam, V. F., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2022). A metalanguage for learning: rebalancing the cognitive with the socio-material. Frontiers in Communication, 7, 1-15. doi:http://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.830613

*McKown, C., & Herman, B. (2020, May). SEL assessment to support effective social emotional learning practices at scale. Prevention, 1-14.

*Nikiforos, S., Tzanavaris, S., & Kermanidis, K.-L. (2020, May). Virtual learning communities (VLCs) rethinking: influence on behavior modification-bullying detection through machine learning and natural language processing. Computer Education, 7(4), 531-551. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00166-5

Pease, I. & Samuelson, K. (n.d.). Social emotional learning and education equity. Folsom Cordova Unified School District. https://www.fcusd.org/domain/4927

*Polan, J., Sieving, R., & McMorris, B. (2013, July). Are young adolescents' social and emotional skills protective against involvement in violent and bullying behaviors? Health Promotion Practice, 14(10), 599-606. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839912462392

Social Learning Infographics. (2017). Why it is imperative to assess social emotional learning. ELearning Infographics. https://elearninginfographics.com/assess-social-emotional-learning-infographic/

*Zembylas, M. (2008, November). Engaging with issues of cultural diversity and discrimination through critical emotional reflexivity in online learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 59(1), 61-82.

*Zhou, Y., & Wei, M. (2018). Strategies in technology-enhanced language learning. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 471-495.