The SEL Paradox
Some regard Social Emotional Learning (SEL) as a necessary component of modern education, while others view SEL as a Trojan Horse for a neo-Marxist political ideology. Both are correct. I had the opportunity to serve the Austin Independent School District as an SEL Specialist from 2014 to 2021. My experience showed me that social-emotional learning is vital to human development, and contemporary SEL acts as a Trojan Horse for neo-Marxist political ideology. Therefore, having objective and honest conversations about the current state of SEL and the social-emotional well-being of educators, students, and people in general has been difficult. Through my professional experience, I discovered that applying this emerging neo-Marxist ideology to one’s thinking, feelings, and behaviors impairs social-emotional well-being.
My challenge is two-fold. First, all SEL practitioners and leaders should gain awareness that contemporary SEL is advancing a political ideology that impairs social-emotional well-being. Secondly, to the “anti-SEL lobby,” human beings are naturally social and emotional creatures (currently undergoing a mental health crisis for the sake of a political ideology you are well aware of). I hope that individuals with both perspectives will forge a new path together to increase the well-being of all and preserve liberty for all.
Since 2017, I’ve spent a great deal of time trying to raise awareness of my observations, but I have been shut down and treated awfully by SEL practitioners and SEL critics alike for doing so. Before 2017, I assumed that all people favored strengthening the well-being of people and living in a liberal democracy. But for the past seven years, I’ve advocated solely for the social-emotional and psychological well-being and strengthening liberal democracies rather than dismantling them, and my encounters with the political left and the political right proved my assumptions false. Throughout this time, the mental health crisis and societal chaos and division intensify. So perhaps now is a more palatable time to discern SEL from social-emotional learning, abandon harmful practices, and move forward in a way that strengthens our shared humanity.
Confronting The Trojan Horse
After leaving a professional development training in the summer of 2017, I turned to a colleague. I shockingly said, “That was Marxist,” thinking we’d engage in conversation and our entire SEL team would engage in professional conversation about this particular professional development, but neither happened. However, a few weeks later, another friend/colleague and I intentionally sat down for this conversation. When I said, “A worldview that believes individuals are inherently oppressed or oppressors is the Marxist worldview," I was immediately shouted at, “You need counseling!” I tried to continue the conversation, but in a span of a few minutes, I excused myself because I was shouted at and told I needed counseling two more times. For the next three years, I attempted to discuss this new approach with my working group and was met with hostility, ostracized, and bullied daily. When I resigned in 2021, a coworker called me and said, “It hurts my heart to see how you’ve been treated.” I shrugged it off as an aim of the ideology and didn’t take any of it personally. From 2018-2021, I disassociated and observed my working environment like a sociological experiment while developing a framework to increase the social and emotional well-being of all people.
Since 2021, I’ve spoken freely, openly, and publicly about SEL and social-emotional well-being. There’s even a community and widespread awareness that the current state of SEL is a Trojan Horse for neo-Marxism that understands a large part of the awareness I’ve been trying to raise. However, I discovered that the #EXPELSEL lobbyists treated attempts at conversation and me, in general, more harshly than those supporting the Marxist revisionized SEL. By 2022, the public backlash to what I was calling attention to in 2018 had grown so severe that anger and disgust hijacked SEL the critics’ ability to engage in conversations about SEL, just like strong emotions had hijacked my former friends' and colleagues' ability to dialogue.
Since 2020, the SEL debate has grown so contentious that it appears that the status quo of neo-Marxist-informed Social Emotional Learning will inspire another generation of young people to continue dismantling the liberal order. I suggest we pause and reflect on current practices and their impact and intent before we continue teaching or railing against SEL. Understanding “both sides” of this debate compels me to objectively share with parents and educators so that they can make informed decisions aligned with their values.
Confronting The Social-Emotional and Psychological Crisis
Before delving into the SEL debate, it's vital to acknowledge that human beings are inherently social-emotional creatures, and their overall physical health and psychological well-being are intricately linked to their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Additionally, it’s important to point out that American society and youth are facing a significant mental health crisis, adding urgency to understand better the frameworks schools use for addressing social-emotional well-being. Research underscores the severity of the situation: since 2000, there has been a staggering 350% increase in the suicide rate among children aged 10 to 12 years old (Bridge et al., 2015). Additionally, nearly 20% of children and young people in the United States aged 3 to 17 are affected by mental, emotional, developmental, or behavioral disorders (Perou et al., 2013). Furthermore, suicidal behaviors among high school students have surged, increasing by over 40% in the decade leading up to 2019 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018). Later in this essay, I’ll show how contemporary SEL is accelerating this crisis rather than easing it.
CASEL's Influence
The other thing to understand before delving into the complexities of contemporary SEL is that a single organization influences all K-12 SEL: CASEL (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning). CASEL was founded in 1994 by a group that included Daniel Goleman, author of Social Intelligence and Emotional Intelligence, and educator-philanthropist Eileen Rockefeller Growald. Presently, more than 90 percent of schools and districts in the U.S. report a focus on developing students' SEL skills (Duchesneau, 2020). Therefore, regardless of one’s understanding or feelings about SEL, most American K-12 students and educators engage in Social Emotional Learning with CASEL or a CASEL-approved product.
At the onset of my career as an SEL Specialist, from 2014 to 2020, CASEL defined SEL as: “Social and emotional learning (SEL) is the process through which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships and make responsible decisions.” CASEL also identified and defined five SEL competencies:
Self-awareness: The ability to recognize one's emotions and thoughts and reflect on their influence on behavior, including the ability to assess strengths and limitations and possess a well-grounded sense of confidence and optimism.
Self-management: The ability to regulate one's emotions, thoughts, and behaviors effectively in different situations, including managing stress and impulses and motivating oneself to work towards and achieve goals.
Social awareness: The ability to take the perspective of and empathize with others from diverse backgrounds and cultures and understand social and ethical norms for behavior.
Relationship skills: The ability to establish and maintain healthy and rewarding relationships with diverse individuals and groups, which includes skills in communication, listening, cooperation, negotiating conflict constructively, resisting inappropriate social pressure, negotiating conflict constructively, and seeking and offering help when needed.
Responsible decision-making: The ability to make constructive and respectful choices about personal behavior and social interactions based on consideration of ethical standards, safety concerns, social norms, consequences, and the well-being of self and others.
Transforming SEL
Examining the definition of SEL and its competencies, it is easy to see why some people view SEL as necessary for public education. After all, humans are social-emotional creatures, and managing one’s emotions and maintaining healthy relationships are essential to overall happiness, success, and peaceful cooperation with others in a liberal democracy.
However, in 2018, CASEL began shifting SEL from the traditional framework of developing personally responsible citizens to a critical democracy framework that requires collectivism. This transition is illustrated in the paper Transformative Social and Emotional Learning (SEL): Toward SEL in Service of Educational Equity and Excellence. The paper represents a methodology for transforming the cultural, political, and economic traditions of neoliberal democracies rather than a methodology for increasing the social-emotional well-being of the individuals living in neoliberal democracies by introducing the concept of “Transformative SEL.” Rather than focus on individual social-emotional health and development, this paper emphasizes the role of SEL in transforming neoliberal cultural, political, and economic systems. It even goes as far as blaming health problems, unethical behavior, and climate change on American society, stating, “Despite its connection to health problems, unethical behavior, and climate change, the cultural orientation toward acquisitive individualism continues to be a dominant theme promoted within U.S. cultural institutions, including schools” (Ryan et al., 2018; Watson, 2016). “Cultural analysis suggests that issues of racism derive largely from an over-emphasis on the accumulation of wealth within American culture.” The paper further addresses education’s role in transforming neoliberalism into collectivism by advocating for a shift away from promoting personally responsible citizenship towards preparing students for critical justice-oriented citizenship. “This justice-oriented citizenship is concerned with institutional and system change efforts and aligns with critical democracy principles by promoting building personal identities with intersectionality. “We agree with Nagaoka et al. (2015) that an integrated identity is a desirable developmental outcome among young people. Understanding the nature of healthy integration requires an intersectional approach.” Jager later explains, “Programs that focus on identity development and/or systematic efforts to integrate issues of race, class, and culture into the academic content can have greater utility to the degree that they advance a notion of citizenship that is global and justice-oriented.”
In December 2020, the theoretical transition of SEL became pragmatic. CASEL rebranded SEL as “Transformative SEL'' and defined it as '' a process whereby young people and adults build strong, respectful, and lasting relationships that facilitate co-learning to critically examine root causes of inequity and to develop collaborative solutions that lead to personal, community, and societal well-being.” The transformation of SEL also redefined the five competencies.
Self-awareness: The ability to recognize one’s own biases to understand the links between one’s personal and collective history and identities and to recognize how thoughts, feelings, and actions are interconnected in and across diverse contexts.
Self-management: Appropriate expressiveness, perseverance, and being agentic in addressing personal and group-level challenges to achieve self- and collectively defined goals and objectives.
Social awareness: Involves understanding social norms for constructing behavior in diverse interpersonal and institutional settings.
Relationship skills: Communicating clearly, listening actively, cooperating, resisting selfishness and inappropriate social pressure, negotiating conflict constructively, seeking help and offering leadership when it is needed, and working collaboratively whenever possible.
Responsible decision-making: Requires the ability to critically examine ethical standards, safety concerns, and behavioral norms for risky behavior; to make realistic evaluations of benefits and consequences of various interpersonal and institutional relationships and actions; and to always make primary collective health and well-being.
Transformative SEL Is Impairing Social-Emotional Well-Being
Not only is CASEL’s Transformative SEL aimed at shifting political and economic objectives, but doing so impairs social-emotional well-being. All humans across space and time share approximately 99.9% of DNA. This means that beyond our racial, gender, preference for romantic partners, and religious and political differences, all humans share common traits, motivations, and tendencies, such as curiosity, altruism, creativity, impulsivity, selfishness, fear, cruelty, group conformity, and intolerance. Therefore, all humans are hardwired for compassion, connection, and barbarism, and understanding this duality, cultivating positive traits, and mitigating barbarism are all essential for social-emotional well-being. The Transformative SEL lens not only ignores this reality but applying this lens to one’s thinking, feelings, and behavior tends to mitigate the positive traits and cultivate the barbaric. In fact, Transformative SEL denies our humanity, compassion, and interconnectedness of all people. Therefore, if increasing the social-emotional well-being of humankind is the goal, SEL professionals must abandon CASEL and Transformative SEL in favor of an apolitical, holistic, and science-backed framework.
Transformative SEL fosters an environment that amplifies mindsets rooted in fear and judgment and cultivates the capacities for prejudice, intolerance, and cruelty while impairing the neural circuitry linked to psychological well-being.
Perpetual Oppression
Those who perceive themselves as perpetually oppressed victims and/or part of the problem, a TSEL practice, are less likely to attempt to bounce back from adversity and, over time, develop learned helplessness, thus weakening their resilience. TSEL also points to American society (and all Liberal democratic societies) as inherently racist, the cause of health and behavioral problems, and a place where groups of people are perpetually oppressed. This mindset hinders the (positive) outlook constituent of psychological well-being. Transformative Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) inadvertently undermines the generosity constituent by emphasizing systemic change and collective action over individual acts of kindness and compassion. In her critique of SEL, Deena Simmons (referenced in Howe, 2020) likened non-transformative SEL to “white supremacy with a hug.” A reasonable conclusion can be made that if individuals are not exercising the neural circuitry linked to their psychological well-being (resilience, outlook, and generosity), their mental health outcomes will be less positive than those who exercise those circuitries. Objectively speaking, TSEL shapes one’s thinking, feeling, and behavior in ways that do not exercise the neural circuitry linked to psychological well-being.
Negative Perceptions
Not only does Transformative SEL lead a person to think about themselves and the world around them in a negative light, but it also leads people to think about each other negatively. TSEL frontloads seeing individuals as part of an “other” group into one’s thinking. Social psychology demonstrates that “As soon as you place anyone outside of the circle of ‘us,’ the mind/brain automatically begins to devalue that person and justify poor treatment of him.” (Efferson, Lalive, and Feh, 2008). A study published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (Lammers et al., 2012) found that emphasizing group differences increased prejudice and reduced participant empathy. Historical atrocities such as the 1000s of years old practice of enslaving human beings, Jim Crow-era violence, the Holocaust, every single communist revolution in history, and the Rwandan genocide are all examples that demonstrate the justification of awful behavior that stems from dehumanizing “others.” There is something in humankind’s social-emotional wiring that makes us react to each other in the most awful ways when we see another/group of individuals as something inherently different (less than human) than we are. Consequently, something in humankind’s social-emotional wiring prevents us from harming others when we view them as whole, complete persons just like we are. An inconvenient truth about Transformative SEL is that it strengthens the propensity for barbarism rather than our propensity for compassion.
Empowered Humanity Theory: Human-Centered SEL
In response to the challenges posed by CASEL’s Transformative SEL, I developed a framework, Empowered Humanity Theory (EHT), for cultivating social-emotional and psychological well-being. While Transformative SEL is formed in political thought and a social mechanism for transforming liberal democracies, EHT is formed in neuroscience, psychology, and evolutionary biology and enhances humankind’s social-emotional and psychological well-being. The “Theory” is that cultivating three specific attitudes and habitually engaging in 3 Pathways of Practice is the key to “empowerment” and that when EHT is adopted en masse, humankind will be empowered and dignified in the profound ways our ancestors sought.
The Three Attitudes
Developing a Value-Centered Identity: This means using one's chosen values as a guiding compass rather than relying on assigned racial, gender, or other stereotypes to define oneself. Shaping a personal identity on chosen values rather than a stereotyped group identity significantly enhances social-emotional well-being. When individuals embrace personal core values, they experience greater psychological resilience, authenticity, and overall well-being (Hofmann et al., 2016; Park et al., 2010; Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). This personalized approach allows for a more stable and intrinsic sense of self, fostering self-acceptance and reducing the stress associated with conforming to external stereotypes. It also encourages personal growth by recognizing that our values change over time. In contrast, establishing a fixed identity based on stereotyped group characteristics can impair social-emotional well-being by promoting inauthenticity and reinforcing human differences, leading to increased anxiety and conflict. Embracing chosen core values over assigned intersectional stereotypes promotes psychological resilience, authenticity, and well-being.
Cultivating a Dignity Lens: This emphasizes the intrinsic worth and value of every individual across our shared humanity. This EHT attitude highlights shared humanity rather than human differences and diminishes the propensity for prejudice, aggression, and cruelty by fostering empathy, understanding, and cooperation (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006; Van Bavel et al., 2012). This attitude encourages mutual understanding and reduces the psychological stress associated with intergroup conflict. Conversely, focusing on human differences impairs social-emotional well-being by perpetuating bias and conflict, exacerbating intergroup tensions by cultivating the innate human capacities for prejudice, aggression, and cruelty.
Prioritizing Mindsets of Inquiry and Compassion: Prioritizing these over fear and judgment disrupts ruminating thinking, recognizes potential false narratives, and is essential for building deeper and mutual understandings. Research shows that fear-based thinking increases stress, while inquiry and compassion promote curiosity, empathy, and problem-solving, leading to greater resilience and happiness (Phelps et al., 2006; Klimecki et al., 2013, 2014). Mindsets rooted in fear and judgment can impair social-emotional well-being by creating mistrust and hostility, which hinder personal growth and social connection. Conversely, embracing curiosity and empathy encourages open-mindedness and understanding, reducing anxiety and fostering positive relationships. Individuals and communities can achieve greater psychological resilience and overall well-being by prioritizing inquiry and compassion.
Keeping these three attitudes at the forefront of daily activities and interactions promotes positive social-emotional outcomes, especially when circumstances and people become challenging. Regularly asking, “Is my thinking, feeling, and behavior aligned with my values?” “Am I treating myself and others with dignity?” Replacing fear and judgment-based thinking with inquiry and compassion when warranted is a simple way to cultivate EHT’s three attitudes. The three attitudes are also strengthened by frequently, intentionally, and habitually engaging in the 3 Pathways of Practice.
The 3 Pathways of Practice
Practices that build awareness and equanimity:
These practices are essential to mental and emotional well-being. Awareness involves the conscious perception and acknowledgment of one's thoughts, emotions, and surroundings, while equanimity refers to maintaining mental calmness and evenness of temper, especially in difficult situations. Examples of these practices include mindfulness meditation, which encourages present-moment awareness and reduces stress, and cognitive reappraisal, which involves reinterpreting negative thoughts to reduce their emotional impact. Research has shown that mindfulness meditation can enhance emotional regulation, improve attention, and increase overall psychological well-being (Goyal et al., 2014). Cognitive reappraisal has been linked to lower levels of anxiety and depression and greater life satisfaction (Gross, 2002). Engaging in these practices helps individuals develop a more balanced and resilient mindset, allowing them to navigate life's challenges with greater ease and stability.
Practices that celebrate our common humanity:
These practices focus on recognizing and embracing shared experiences and the inherent dignity of all people. These practices foster a sense of connection and empathy, transcending individual differences and promoting unity. Examples include storytelling, active listening, and noticing aspects of oneself in others. Storytelling allows individuals to share personal experiences and perspectives, fostering empathy and understanding. Active listening involves fully concentrating, understanding, and responding thoughtfully to others, strengthening interpersonal connections. Research shows that storytelling can increase empathy and reduce prejudice by humanizing diverse experiences (Green, 2006). Active listening has been linked to improved relationship satisfaction and emotional intelligence (Weger, Castle Bell, Minei, & Robinson, 2014). Noticing aspects of oneself in others, often through reflective practices, can enhance a sense of shared humanity and reduce feelings of isolation.
Practices that build kindness and compassion for self and others:
These practices are essential for fostering a nurturing and empathetic environment. These practices include self-compassion exercises, loving-kindness meditation, and random acts of kindness. Self-compassion exercises involve treating oneself with the same kindness and understanding as one would offer to a friend, which has been shown to reduce self-criticism and improve emotional resilience (Neff, 2003). Loving-kindness meditation is where individuals send thoughts of goodwill and warmth to themselves and others, enhancing feelings of connection and reducing negative emotions (Hofmann et al., 2011). Random acts of kindness, such as helping a stranger or offering a compliment, can boost mood and promote positive social interactions (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005). These practices improve individual well-being and build a more compassionate and supportive community.
Routinely engaging in the 3 Pathways of Practice significantly strengthens the four constituents of well-being identified by Ritchie Davidson. Practices that build awareness and equanimity, such as mindfulness meditation, enhance resilience, improve emotional regulation, and increase attentional abilities by activating brain regions associated with cognitive flexibility and attentional control (Davidson, 2010; Tang et al., 2007). Additionally, mindfulness reduces rumination and fosters a positive outlook, leading to greater emotional well-being (Garland et al., 2010). Practices that celebrate our common humanity, like gratitude exercises and compassion meditation, increase positive emotions, life satisfaction, and resilience while promoting prosocial behavior and a sense of interconnectedness (Emmons & McCullough, 2003; Fredrickson et al., 2008). Lastly, practices that build kindness and compassion for self and others, such as self-compassion exercises and acts of kindness, enhance social connections, reduce stress, and foster positive self-regard, activating brain regions linked to reward and positive affect (Neff & Germer, 2013; Post et al., 2015). These science-backed practices enhance overall well-being, leading to greater happiness and fulfillment.
A Fork In The Road
The addition of Empowered Humanity Theory into the context of Social Emotional Learning brings clarity to the discussion of whether or not SEL is necessary for modern education or a Trojan Horse for a neo-Marxist political and economic agenda. First, humans are social and emotional creatures at our core. Therefore, positive social-emotional development is important to the K-12 experience and has lifelong impacts on physical and psychological well-being. So, it would behoove society to incorporate cultivating positive social-emotional development into the K-12 process. However, since K-12 SEL is monopolized by CASEL and its Transformative SEL (its current state) is indeed a Trojan Horse for a political and economic transformation of liberal democracies that is impairing the social-emotional well-being of youth and practitioners.
While CASEL utilizes SEL to drive American culture towards global political and economic collectivism, governmental and non-governmental organizations are reshaping liberal democratic societies' political and economic systems worldwide. CASEL is a partner with these organizations/aspirations. Formed in the neuroscience of social-emotional and psychological well-being, EHT is an SEL framework that develops self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, positive relationships, and responsible decision-making to strengthen free societies rather than dismantle them.
I advocate for critically and honestly evaluating all SEL practices, curriculum, and professional development. Parents, educators, and policymakers must ensure that SEL benefits all students, free from political or ideological bias. The current Transformative SEL framework, as promoted by CASEL, aims to address social inequities by fostering a collectivist mindset and encouraging students to examine the root causes of inequity critically. While well-intentioned, this approach can inadvertently foster divisive mindsets, emphasizing group identities and perceived oppression over individual development and shared humanity. This emphasis on identity politics can lead to increased prejudice, reduced empathy, and impaired social-emotional well-being, as it encourages individuals to see themselves and others primarily through the lens of race, gender, and other social categories. The “root causes of inequities,” according to TSEL and CASEL, is capitalism/liberalism. I contend that replacing political and economic systems will not eliminate or curb awful human behavior or depraved human conditions and that abandoning human-centered solutions for political-centered solutions will not bring peace and prosperity to humankind.
Forging A New Path Ahead
In contrast, the Empowered Humanity Theory (EHT) offers a science-based, inclusive alternative that enhances social-emotional and psychological well-being through universal human traits and values. EHT promotes the development of a Value-Centered Identity, encouraging individuals to define themselves by their chosen values rather than assigned stereotypes. This approach fosters authenticity, resilience, and personal growth. By cultivating a Dignity Lens, EHT emphasizes every individual's intrinsic worth and value, fostering empathy, understanding, and cooperation across diverse backgrounds. Prioritizing Mindsets of Inquiry and Compassion over fear and judgment helps individuals build deeper mutual understandings and reduces stress, promoting curiosity, empathy, and positive social connections.
Imagine a classroom where each child feels valued for their unique qualities, not boxed into categories that limit their potential. Picture a school environment where empathy and kindness are nurtured, where students are taught to see the shared humanity in everyone they meet. Now, think of the long-term impact on society if we raised a generation of resilient, compassionate individuals equipped to face life's challenges with grace and optimism. This is the promise of Empowered Humanity Theory.
These two frameworks present distinct approaches to social-emotional learning. Transformative SEL addresses systemic issues and promotes social justice through a collectivist lens that denies the individual. At the same time, EHT values the individual by focusing on individual psychological well-being and universal human values. It is crucial for parents, educators, and policymakers to critically evaluate these frameworks and choose the one that aligns with their goals and values for the development of children and young people.
In this pivotal moment, our choices will shape our children's and society's future. Will we continue down a path that may deepen divisions and hinder emotional growth, or will we embrace a framework that fosters unity, resilience, and genuine well-being? The decision is in our hands. By choosing Empowered Humanity Theory, a framework for an empowering and dignified life, we commit to nurturing a brighter, more compassionate, and liberated future for all.
Bibliography
Bridge, J. A., Asti, L., Horowitz, L. M., Greenhouse, J. B., Fontanella, C. A., Sheftall, A. H., Kelleher, K. J., & Campo, J. V. (2015). Suicide trends among elementary school-aged children in the United States from 1993 to 2012. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(7), 673-677. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.0465
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Youth Risk Behavior Survey Data Summary & Trends Report: 2007-2017. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/pdf/trendsreport.pdf
Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108(3), 593-623. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593
Davidson, R. J. (2010). Empirical explorations of mindfulness: Conceptual and methodological conundrums. Emotion, 10(1), 8-11. doi:10.1037/a0018480
Duchesneau, N. (2020). The state of SEL: Are social and emotional learning interventions effective? Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/education-plus-development/2020/07/07/the-state-of-sel-are-social-and-emotional-learning-interventions-effective/
Efferson, C., Lalive, R., & Feh, T. (2008). The coevolution of cultural groups and ingroup favoritism. Science, 321(5897), 1844-1849. doi:10.1126/science.1155805
Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 377-389. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.2.377
Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: Positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1045-1062. doi:10.1037/a0013262
Garland, E. L., Gaylord, S. A., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2010). Positive reappraisal mediates the stress-reductive effects of mindfulness: An upward spiral process. Mindfulness, 2(1), 59-67. doi:10.1007/s12671-010-0037-3
Goyal, M., Singh, S., Sibinga, E. M. S., Gould, N. F., Rowland-Seymour, A., Sharma, R., ... & Haythornthwaite, J. A. (2014). Meditation programs for psychological stress and well-being: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(3), 357-368. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.13018
Green, M. C. (2006). Narratives and cancer communication. Journal of Communication, 56(S1), S163-S183. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00288.x
Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39(3), 281-291. doi:10.1017/S0048577201393198
Hofmann, S. G., Grossman, P., & Hinton, D. E. (2011). Loving-kindness and compassion meditation: Potential for psychological interventions. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(7), 1126-1132. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.003
Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A., & Oh, D. (2016). The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and depression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(2), 169-183. doi:10.1037/a0018555
Howe, K. (2020). Deena Simmons on Transformative SEL and White Supremacy with a Hug. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/deena-simmons-transformative-sel-and-white-supremacy-hug
Klimecki, O. M., Leiberg, S., Lamm, C., & Singer, T. (2013). Functional neural plasticity and associated changes in positive affect after compassion training. Cerebral Cortex, 23(7), 1552-1561. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs142
Klimecki, O. M., Mayer, S. V., Jusyte, A., Scheeff, J., & Schönenberg, M. (2014). Empathy promotes altruistic behavior in economic interactions. Scientific Reports, 4, 5680. doi:10.1038/srep05680
Lammers, J., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2012). Looking through the eyes of the powerful: The effect of power on metastereotyping and the functional self. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 213-219. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.07.014
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 111-131. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.111
Neff, K. D. (2003). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and Identity, 2(2), 85-101. doi:10.1080/15298860309032
Neff, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A pilot study and randomized controlled trial of the mindful self-compassion program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(1), 28-44. doi:10.1002/jclp.21923
Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2010). Strengths of character and well-being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(5), 603-619. doi:10.1521/jscp.23.5.603.50748
Perou, R., Bitsko, R. H., Blumberg, S. J., Pastor, P., Ghandour, R. M., Gfroerer, J. C., ... & Huang, L. N. (2013). Mental health surveillance among children--United States, 2005-2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surveillance Summaries, 62(2), 1-35. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su6202a1.htm
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751-783. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
Phelps, E. A., Ling, S., & Carrasco, M. (2006). Emotion facilitates perception and potentiates the perceptual benefits of attention. Psychological Science, 17(4), 292-299. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01701.x
Post, S. G., Ng, E., Fischel, J. E., Bennett, M., Bingenheimer, J. B., & Altruism and Health Collaborative Research Group. (2015). Routine activities and altruistic social interest in health and well-being: A study of active older adults. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(4), 1-15. doi:10.1007/s10902-014-9532-2
Ryan, W., & Watson, R. (2016). Transformative SEL: Toward SEL in Service of Educational Equity and Excellence. Retrieved from https://casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Transformative_SEL.pdf
Tang, Y. Y., Ma, Y., Wang, J., Fan, Y., Feng, S., Lu, Q., ... & Posner, M. I. (2007). Short-term meditation training improves attention and self-regulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(43), 17152-17156. doi:10.1073/pnas.0707678104
Van Bavel, J. J., Packer, D. J., Haas, I. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (2012). The neural substrates of in-group bias: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1131-1139. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02214.x
Weger, H., Castle Bell, G., Minei, E. M., & Robinson, M. C. (2014). The relative effectiveness of active listening in initial interactions. International Journal of Listening, 28(1), 13-31. doi:10.1080/10904018.2013.813234