Social Emotional Learning (SEL) vs Religious Education
Social Emotional Learning (SEL) vs Religious Education
Recognized Definitions of SEL
“According to CASEL, the leading organization for the research and advancement of social and emotional competencies, SEL can be defined as:
‘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.’”
https://empoweringeducation.org/what-is-social-emotional-learning/
“We define social and emotional learning (SEL) as an integral part of education and human development. SEL is the process through which all young people and adults acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions.
SEL advances educational equity and excellence through authentic school-family-community partnerships to establish learning environments and experiences that feature trusting and collaborative relationships, rigorous and meaningful curriculum and instruction, and ongoing evaluation. SEL can help address various forms of inequity and empower young people and adults to co-create thriving schools and contribute to safe, healthy, and just communities.”
https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/
Recognized Definitions of Religion
[Religion is] a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
[Religion is] a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects…something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion
“Religion is a social-cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, morals, beliefs, worldviews, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organizations, that relates humanity to supernatural, transcendental, and spiritual elements; however, there is no scholarly consensus over what precisely constitutes a religion.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion
Religion in a Public Schools?
It should be obvious from the basic definitions listed above that SEL is, at its core, a modern-day expression of a religious belief system. In stating this, there is no intended implication of SEL being a “good” religion or a “bad” religion. Rather, the point being made is that regardless of one’s opinions on the merits of SEL doctrine, SEL fills the role of a school’s religious underpinnings.
https://www.educationnext.org/moral-implications-social-emotional-learning/
https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/499/
Anecdotally, SEL most closely resembles the principles of Secular Humanism, which foundationally espouses atheistic pluralism.
It should concerns us, however, that in schools where SEL is advocated, teachers, staff, and administrators are tasked with establishing and preaching a religious system, when they are not commissioned, trained, nor paid to do so. Moreover, in supporting a particular model or flavor of SEL, schools and Districts are de factor endorsing established religion, without the consent of the community.
It is also possible--and even likely--that the probing personal questions and emotion-eliciting techniques that are typical of SEL practice are a violation of State laws regulating the practice of Counseling. Even worse, a cursory review of SEL materials leads many to find alarming similarities with "grooming" techniques.
The Wrong Advisors
One constant that I have seen in the Public School District is an unhealthy reliance on external resources (i.e. "professionals") for guidance on major issues and initiatives. As you can imagine, this gives nefarious players an inroad to the District. And, once they are established as part of District "process," they are very difficult to extract. They almost always enter under pretense, utilizing ambiguous language to win-over unsuspecting Administrators, Staff, and community advocates. But eventually, their true intent is revealed. It is doubly difficult to extract them, though, if/when Administrators and Teachers embrace their philosophies.
For example, if an SEL-focused professional organization publishes an article entitled, "Disrupting the Canon: Moving Towards Anti-Racist Teaching with Text Selection and Preparation" would you think that the organization's focus was on curricular content (e.g. Math) or would you think that its focus was on social engineering? This is an actual article from Achieve the Core, one of the organizations from which the BPS curriculum selection committee receives guidance for District curricular choices. https://achievethecore.org/page/3315/disrupting-the-canon-moving-towards-anti-racist-teach ing-with-text-selection-and-preparation
As another example, if an SEL-focused professional organization were to state that its vision is "combining anti-racist ideology with culturally relevant pedagogy," would you have any idea regarding its commitment to increasing subject matter achievement for students? Probably not. Yet, this is exactly what UnBoundED, another organization on which the BPS curriculum selection committee is relying for curriculum guidance, states as it primary vision. https://www.unbounded.org/who-we-are/our-vision In fact, one of the Math Content Specialists from UnBoundED contributed to the development of a text entitled, "A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction, Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction," which states as a primary focus, "While primarily for math educators, this text advocates for a collective approach to dismantling white supremacy. " https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf Again, there is little focus on actual Math achievement, amidst a plethora of religious intent, shrouded in socio-political terminology.
Note that both of these organizations--and dozens of others just like them--are heavily funded social and political advocates who are not beholden to the thoughts and intents of local community parents. In fact, if the news media is accurate, many of these organizations perceive parents as the proverbial enemy, getting in the way of the desires and initiatives of social and political entities. In a tangible sense, these sorts of organizations defend their doctrines as vehemently as any recognized religious organization would, and they bring that indoctrination into the School District.
The Model is Upside Down.
In the early years of a District's founding, parents in the community are often highly involved in developing the culture and principles that characterize the Schools in the District. However, as time goes by, parents often relinquish their legal right to guide the affairs of the District, and instead, rely on Administrators, teachers, and other staff to carry the baton forward. That trend has lead to many of the problems that plague Public School Districts. today. Functionally absent parents and overzealous District staff create an inversion of the design intended by the State. Here is what the State of Michigan states about parental/guardian involvement.
THE REVISED SCHOOL CODE (EXCERPT) -- Act 451 of 1976
380.10 Rights of parents and legal guardians; duties of public schools.
Sec. 10.
It is the natural, fundamental right of parents and legal guardians to determine and direct the care, teaching, and education of their children. The public schools of this state serve the needs of the pupils by cooperating with the pupil's parents and legal guardians to develop the pupil's intellectual capabilities and vocational skills in a safe and positive environment.
380.1137 Powers of parents and legal guardians; policies or guidelines.
Sec. 1137.
(1) In recognition of the rights of parents and legal guardians, the board of a school district, public school academy, university school, or intermediate school district shall ensure that a parent or legal guardian responsible for the care and custody of a pupil enrolled in the school district, public school academy, university school, or intermediate school district may do all of the following:
(a) Review the curriculum, textbooks, and teaching materials of the school in which the pupil is enrolled at a reasonable time and place and in a reasonable manner.
(b) Be present, to a reasonable degree, and at reasonable times and subject to reasonable restrictions, controls, and limits, to observe instructional activity in a class or course in which the pupil is enrolled and present. As used in this subdivision, "instructional activity" does not include testing.
(2) The board of a school district, public school academy, university school, or intermediate school district may adopt reasonable policies or guidelines under this section. Those policies or guidelines shall not unreasonably prevent the exercise of the rights set forth in subsection (1) and shall not create an unreasonable obstacle to teaching or learning, or to administering or maintaining proper discipline, in a school or school program. If a board adopts policies or guidelines under this subsection, the board shall make the policies or guidelines available to the public.
History: Add. 1995, Act 289, Eff. July 1, 1996
What is the recourse?
If Public Schools demand the implementation of SEL initiatives that are infused with religous content, without legitimate parental/guardian consent, then what is the only reasonable recourse?
1. Recognize that non-moral education is a functional impossibility, since all schools have both implicit and explicit moral codes. These represent the de factor “religion” of the school, which should be established through pluaralistic community consent. SEL would be one of several possibilities of an established moral code, but it is certainly not the only method.
2. Since the State, out of necessity, funds and supports Public Schools that, nowadays, functionally espouse a preferred religion of Secular Humanism through SEL and other initiatives, the State must also give equitable support for Charter, as well as Non-Public Schools, that espouse competing religious perspectives.
3. The only socially just, equitable, and inclusive solution is for full School Choice, where State funding “follows” the student—even into Private and Charter Schools.
https://sites.google.com/view/bobsaadforschoolboard