Can social and emotional learning improve children’s academic progress? Findings from a randomised controlled trial of the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) curriculum

Abstract

Despite the significant evidence base demonstrating the positive impact of the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) curriculum on children's social-emotional and mental health outcomes, there has been very little research on its efficacy in improving academic attainment. More generally, the relationship between implementation variability and PATHS intervention outcomes has been underexplored. A cluster-randomised controlled trial with two arms: intervention (PATHS-23 schools) and control (usual practice-22 schools) was implemented to assess the impact of PATHS on English and Mathematics for children in years 5 (aged 9-10 years, n = 1705 pupils) and 6 (aged 10-11 years, n = 1631 pupils) in English primary schools. Two-level hierarchical linear models (school, child) were used to assess both primary 'intention-to-treat' effects and secondary 'subgroup' effects (for children eligible for free school meals). Additionally, the moderating role of implementation variability was assessed in 31 year 5 (n = 712 pupils) and 32 year 6 (n = 732 pupils) classes across the 23 intervention schools, with fidelity, dosage, quality/responsiveness and reach data generated via classroom-level structured lesson observations. Intention-to-treat and subgroup analyses revealed no significant positive effect of PATHS on children's academic attainment. Cluster analyses of observational data revealed four distinct implementation profiles, differentiated primarily by dosage levels. However, these profiles were not significantly associated with differential academic outcomes. In light of our findings and their likely generalisability, it is not possible to recommend PATHS as an effective intervention for improving the academic attainment of children in English primary schools. Trial registration: ISRCTN85087674

The effectiveness of Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies program: A meta-analysis

“…In contrast, other implementation features, such as quality, were difficult to extract due to limited information in most experimental studies. This distinguishing feature of dosage was partially supported by Hennessey and Humphrey (2020), who explained that distinct implementation profiles mainly differed in the levels of dosage irrespective of fidelity, quality, responsiveness and reach. Therefore, dosage is an excellent distinguishing feature of implementation, and its moderation effect on the outcomes of PATHS is supported in the current review.…”

“…Social emotional learning is often considered to be supplementary in schools (e.g., Murray et al, 2014;Gaspar et al, 2018;Seabra-Santos et al, 2018). Even if some schools do conduct curriculum-based social emotional learning programs, it is difficult to guarantee the dosage of courses (Bierman et al, 2008;Hamre et al, 2012;Berry et al, 2016;Humphrey et al, 2016;Hennessey and Humphrey, 2020). However, social emotional skills are at least as important as cognitive skills in predicting personal achievement in the future (Heckman et al, 2006).…”

When is universal SEL effective under authentic conditions? Using LPA to examine program implementation in elementary classrooms

“…As Durlak (2016) noted, though, implementation components can interact with one another, and despite evidence suggesting better implementation is associated with more promising program outcomes, there is a lack of systematic investigation of how patterns of implementation factors relate to different program outcomes. While traditional variable-centered analyses (e.g., Analysis of Variance, correlation, and regression) have been widely used in many implementation studies, these methods may be insufficient for examining inter-relationships among multiple implementation measures (Laursen and Hoff, 2006;Hennessey and Humphrey, 2020). Furthermore, variable-centered approaches assume that the population is homogeneous in terms of how predictors impact outcomes (Laursen and Hoff, 2006;Cheng et al, 2021).…”

“…Acknowledging the multi-faceted and multiplicative nature of implementation, the likely dynamic interplay between implementation aspects, and the lack of clarity about what matters most for schoolbased SEL, recent studies have identified person-centered profiles of implementation using multiple indicators and investigated their association with student outcomes. We located two studies that Hennessey and Humphrey (2020) also identified four profiles of implementation for PATHS (Greenberg and Kusche, 1993) based on adherence, quality, dosage, reach, and engagement. The analysis sample was composed of 45 schools that implemented the program for children 9-11 years of age.…”

“…Given the limited number of studies that have utilized personcentered methods to examine universal SEL implementation patterns, it is difficult to synthesize their results. The two aforementioned studies (Low et al, 2016;Hennessey and Humphrey, 2020) differed in the methods of assessing implementation (teacher-report vs. observerreport), outcomes of the implementation (SEL competency vs. academic achievement), and covariates included in the prediction models. These factors may at least partially explain why the two studies yielded different profiles of implementation and patterns of association between profile membership and student outcomes.…”