In a recent spirited Commentary, Chester E. Finn Jr. took aim at the "faux psychology" undergirding the social-emotional-learning movement. Education Week received a host of letters in response to Finn’s June 21 essay, "The Dirt-Encrusted Roots of Social-Emotional Learning." While most readers jumped to the defense of teaching students about emotions, relationships, and problem-solving, others encouraged a more cautious approach to the trend.
As the person who developed the conceptual framework for what is now one of the most popular social-emotional-learning curricula in the world (Second Step), I made the decision 32 years ago not to include self-esteem training in that research-grounded program. Here’s why: There’s no evidence it’s directly teachable. If it were, every 4-year-old who ever watched Mr. Rogers would be brimming over with it. Social-emotional learning is not self-esteem rebranded, nor is it a hoax, as Chester E. Finn Jr. suggests. It is only a partial truth. Anything that is partial but presented as the whole is, by its very nature, false...