This chapter examines the diverse policies and practices schools employ to foster social and emotional learning among students and highlights avenues for enhancing social and emotional education. The chapter starts with teachers’ approaches to promoting social and emotional learning in classrooms, their perspectives on online and remote teaching, and their preparedness for social and emotional education. Next, the chapter looks at schools’ organisation of social and emotional education and student engagement in extra-curricular activities. Finally, the presence of a shared mindset among school staff about the value of social and emotional education and teachers’ role in it is examined.
Nurturing Social and Emotional Learning Across the Globe
Findings from the OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills 2023
Abstract
Policy insights
Results from the Survey on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES) 2019 and 2023 suggest the following key tasks related to policies and practices to better promote social and emotional learning in school:
Enhance teacher feedback, particularly on students’ strengths: Students aged 10 and 15 who received more feedback from teachers reported higher social and emotional skills. However, teacher feedback needs to be enhanced, especially in developing students’ strengths. This is particularly important for 15-year-olds and girls. For example, on average, only one out of four 15-year-old students receive regular feedback on their strengths in half of all participating countries and subnational entities (hereafter, “sites”). Teachers of 15-year-olds in Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates) and Jinan (People’s Republic of China, hereafter “China”) provide more feedback than the other sites. Evidence-based guidance and tools can be used to ensure all students regularly receive constructive and holistic feedback.
Increase the opportunities teachers dedicate to social and emotional learning: In most sites, teachers focus on task performance skills. At the same time, they provided the fewest opportunities for students to learn how to regulate their emotions and engage with others. Only in Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia) and Peru, did over 80% of teachers provide ample learning opportunities in these areas. The results call for a particular focus on lower secondary education and the teaching of emotional regulation, so as to increase students’ learning opportunities in class (e.g. through teacher training and the design of teaching resources).
Leverage the potential of digital technologies for social and emotional learning: Most teachers perceived online and remote teaching as a challenge rather than an opportunity for social and emotional learning, especially for developing social skills. Moreover, supporting student learning through digital technology was the task that teachers felt least capable of performing among all teaching tasks. Peru was the only education system where most teachers saw opportunities rather than challenges in all domains of social and emotional learning. Teachers’ digital confidence was high in Dubai (United Arab Emirates) and Kudus (Indonesia). To leverage the potential of digital technologies, education systems need to ensure that software and digital technologies are tuned towards socio-emotional learning and that teachers receive sufficient training and support to use them effectively.
Boost teacher preparedness: Tasks related to teachers' social and emotional teaching were among the tasks that teachers, particularly in lower secondary, felt least capable of. A greater emphasis on relevant topics in teacher training and providing high-quality teaching resources can boost teacher preparedness. However, many teachers, especially in secondary, had no training on key topics related to social and emotional learning. Only one out of two teachers of 15-year-olds drew to a large extent on official resources, on average, while one out of three teachers used informal resources. Teachers in Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Jinan (China) and Kudus (Indonesia) benefitted from more training and teachers in Bulgaria, Delhi (India), Peru, and Ukraine used more official resources than teachers in other sites.
Support students’ engagement in extra-curricular activities: Engagement in extra-curricular activities was positively related to all social and emotional skills in both age groups. However, only one out of three (or less) 15-year-olds engage regularly in different extra-curricular activities. In most sites, even fewer disadvantaged students and girls did so. Offering a variety of guided extra-curricular activities at low or no cost at school may allow students to benefit from this extra socio-emotional boost, whereas elsewhere, it may not be available or affordable. In Bulgaria, Delhi (India) and Kudus (Indonesia), all or almost all students benefit from extra-curricular offers at school.
Create structures that promote social and emotional learning in school: The formal integration of teaching social and emotional skills into general practices and teaching across subjects is very common across sites. Teaching social and emotional learning across subjects is almost universal in Helsinki (Finland), Kudus (Indonesia) and Spain. Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Peru, Sobral (Brazil) and Spain offer social and emotional education as a separate subject for over half of all 15-year-olds.
Cultivate a shared mindset about social and emotional education, and ensure alignment with school approach: Chile, Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia), and Peru demonstrated a stronger alignment between their approach to social and emotional education and the staff’s mindset than other education systems. However, between four and eight in ten students across education systems attended schools where not all teachers and principals agreed that these skills could be taught. A joint acknowledgement of the wide-ranging impact of social and emotional skills was even less common. A shared mindset about teachers’ responsibility was quite common in Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Helsinki (Finland) and Kudus (Indonesia) and on the teachability of social and emotional skills in Emilia-Romagna and Turin (Italy), Helsinki (Finland) and Spain. Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Peru, Sobral (Brazil) and Spain offer social and emotional education as a separate subject for over half of all 15-year-olds; a relatively widespread shared mindset and a stronger teacher preparedness in some of these sites suggest a move towards a more transversal approach. Lastly, the fact that school staff in most sites agree about parents’ responsibility in socio-emotional learning suggests a good foundation for strengthening family-school partnerships. This is needed, as two out of ten students were in schools that did not provide feedback or advice to parents or guardians about their children's social and emotional skills. Notably, almost all students in Jinan (China), Kudus (Indonesia), and Ukraine were in schools that provided such feedback.
Schools function as microcosms of society, making them ideal environments for social and emotional learning (Ulferts, 2023[1]). In schools, students encounter diverse ways of thinking, living and communicating. These institutions provide opportunities for students to experience success, form relationships and friendships, and learn that personal achievements often depend on others. Daily, students navigate complex social situations and manage pressure, frustration and occasionally, failure and rejection.
To fully leverage schools’ potential as nurturing environments for students' social and emotional growth, policies and practices need to be implemented across various areas of school life and operations. These initiatives should be well-integrated and aligned to ensure effectiveness (European Commission, 2021[2]; Jones and Bouffard, 2012[3]; Chatterjee Singh and Duraiappah, 2020[4]). To this end, this chapter analyses the SSES data from 2023 (and 2019, where available), focusing on policies and practices in key areas, and identifies opportunities for improving social and emotional education across surveyed sites. These include policies and practices related to:
promoting social and emotional learning in classrooms
preparing teachers to be champions of social and emotional teaching
creating structures that promote social and emotional learning and teaching
cultivating a shared mindset about the value and approach to social and emotional education
The SSES 2019 and 2023 data show that education systems in different regions of the world face common challenges in implementing social and emotional education in schools, e.g. successfully integrating social and emotional learning in lower secondary education. However, there are important variations in how social and emotional learning is promoted in classrooms and organised in schools, as well as in terms of teacher preparation and awareness among school staff about the role of schools in promoting these skills across the different sites. Overall, results indicate that the key levers for improving social and emotional education quality and equity vary across different education systems. This suggests that sites can learn valuable lessons from each other in various aspects of implementation.
Teachers play a crucial role in creating school and classroom environments that nurture students’ social and emotional growth (Ulferts, 2023[1]). They implement the written curriculum and provide opportunities for students to collaborate, debate, express creativity, and experience joy and pride in learning. Additionally, they guide students to consider others’ perspectives and needs, while mentoring them on conflict resolution in social settings. Research unsurprisingly confirms that teachers’ classroom practices significantly impact students’ social and emotional growth (Steponavičius, Gress-Wright and Linzarini, 2023[5]; Durlak et al., 2011[6]).
This section presents findings on how to enhance social and emotional learning in classrooms through improving the feedback teachers provide to students and expanding opportunities for social and emotional skill development. More effort is also needed to ensure that the opportunities digital technology offers for promoting social and emotional learning are fully leveraged, rather than becoming a risk to their development.
Students who receive more teacher feedback report higher social and emotional skills
Teacher feedback is an essential part of learning. Receiving feedback, even on areas for improvement, is not demotivating if it is done well; it can fuel learning and motivate students to keep trying (EEF, 2021[7]). Regular feedback is, however, not just important for cognitive growth; it is also important socio-emotionally (Schwab, Markus and Hassani, 2022[8]; Ma, Xiao and Hau, 2022[9]).
The SSES 2023 asked students to report on the frequency of teacher feedback. Figure 2.1 shows the average strength of the relationship between teacher feedback and students’ social and emotional skills for each of the skills assessed on average across sites (see also Table A2.3 as listed in Annex 2.A and on line via the StatLink). It also shows the range of the relationship strength (minimum and maximum) across sites.
Teacher feedback was associated with higher social and emotional skills. Teacher feedback seems to have had an influence on all skills in both age groups in most sites, as seen in Figure 2.1. On average and in all sites, 10-year-olds and 15-year-olds who received more teacher feedback reported being more creative, motivated to excel, optimistic, sociable and trusting. Teacher feedback showed less consistent and strong relationships to skills required for regulating emotions such as emotional control and stress resistance as well as self-control and responsibility (see Table A2.3). A potential explanation is that the type of feedback provided by teachers in many sites is less suitable for promoting skills in these areas.
Standardised regression coefficients of 15-year-old students' individual skills on the teacher feedback index, average across sites
Notes: All coefficients for the average relationship across sites are statistically significant with a threshold p < 0.05. Models control for gender, socio-economic and migrant status. See Annex A for information about how the teacher feedback index was calculated.
Social and emotional skills are listed by the size of the effect on the teacher feedback index.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.3.
In most systems, teacher feedback seems to foster academic motivation; in a few, it also builds empathy
Important differences in the relationship between teacher feedback and social and emotional skills emerged not only between skills but also across sites. For example, Figure 2.2 shows how the strength of the relationship between teacher feedback, and students’ empathy and achievement motivation, varies by site.
The figure indicates that the advantage of receiving more teacher feedback, in terms of empathy and achievement motivation, is weaker—though still significant—in Helsinki (Finland), Spain and Turin (Italy), compared to other sites. In contrast, the relationship is relatively strong in Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Gunma (Japan), Jinan (China), Kudus (Indonesia) and Peru.
The figure also illustrates that in most sites, the relationship tends to be stronger for achievement motivation. One potential reason may be that teacher feedback focuses more on academic achievement than on prosocial behaviour like empathy. Gunma (Japan) is the only system where teacher feedback seems to instil both achievement motivation and empathy equally well, as it relates strongly to both skills.
Standardised regression coefficients of 15-year-old students' empathy and achievement motivation on the teacher feedback index, across sites
Notes: All coefficients are significant at a threshold of p < 0.05. Models control for gender, socio-economic and migrant status. See Annex A for information about how the teacher feedback index was calculated.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.3.
Teacher feedback focuses more on students’ areas of improvement than their strengths
While feedback generally matters, the type of feedback also matters. It is important to strike a balance between pointing to areas for improvement and areas of strength, such as particular achievements and learning progress (Lüdtke and Köller, 2002[10]; OECD, 2005[11]; Pekrun et al., 2014[12]).
The SSES 2023 measured different types of teacher feedback by asking students how often something happens at school (from never to every lesson or almost every lesson). Student reports show that feedback frequently focuses on students’ weaknesses rather than their strengths (Figure 2.3). While on average across sites, four out of ten 15-year-olds reported that their teachers provide them with feedback on ways to improve performance (42%) and areas in which they could improve (39%) in many lessons or every – or almost every – lesson, fewer than three out of ten reported frequently receiving feedback on their strengths (27%; see also Table A2.1). A substantial share of students (14% to 15%) on average across sites never or almost never receive feedback from their teachers, particularly on their strengths (24%). On average and in most sites, all types of teacher feedback were related to social and emotional skills, but in particular, teacher feedback on strength (Tables A2.4, A2.5, and A2.6).
Percentage of 15-year-old students who reported receiving the following types of feedback in many lessons or every or almost every lesson
Notes: Sites are listed in descending order of the percentage of students who reported that their teachers provided feedback on their strengths in every or almost every lesson.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.1.
Figure 2.3 indicates that the frequency of teacher feedback could be improved across all sites, but particularly in Bulgaria, Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland), Turin (Italy), Sobral (Brazil) and Spain. According to student reports, twice as many 15-year-olds in Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), and Jinan (China) receive regular feedback (42% to 65%, depending on the type of feedback) compared to those in Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland), and Turin (Italy), where only 11% to 26% of students receive regular feedback.
In almost all sites, regular teacher feedback on students’ strengths was less common than on their weaknesses. Helsinki (Finland) presents a unique case. Students there reported receiving relatively balanced feedback, including on their strengths. However, the overall feedback frequency was lower, with less than one-quarter of students reporting regular feedback across different types, ranging from 22% to 24%.
Education systems, especially in Bulgaria, Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland), Turin (Italy), Sobral (Brazil) and Spain, need to train and support teachers in providing regular, holistic and constructive feedback. Several evidence-based tools and guidance are available to assist in this process (EEF, 2021[7]; EEF, 2021[13]; Vincent-Lancrin et al., 2019[14]; Yeh, 2017[15]). These resources include explanations of how feedback impacts students’ academic and socio-emotional learning, lesson plans that incorporate regular feedback, didactical techniques to ensure consistent feedback and rubrics for providing formative feedback.
Ten-year-old students and boys receive more feedback
On average, and in most sites with available data, 10-year-olds received regular feedback more often than 15-year-olds (see Table A2.1). On average, 38% of 10-year-olds reported receiving regular feedback on their strengths, compared to only 28% of 15-year-olds. As students get older, they tend to work more independently. However, adolescence is a critical phase marked by significant biological, psychological, and social changes, often resulting in temporary fluctuations in social and emotional skills and a plateau in self-esteem development (OECD, 2024[16]; OECD, 2021[17]; Orth, Erol and Luciano, 2018[18]). Additionally, for many students, this phase marks the transition into the labour market. Therefore, providing sufficient feedback and encouragement is crucial to help them navigate these challenges successfully.
On average, and across most sites and both age groups, girls reported receiving less feedback than boys (see Table A2.2). In some sites, disadvantaged and low-performing students received more feedback, potentially indicating targeted teacher support and differentiated instruction. This approach aims to provide struggling students with extra support needed to catch up (OECD, 2016[19]; 2012[20]). For instance, in Bulgaria, Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland) and Spain, 15-year-old low-performing students received more feedback than top-performing students. This was also the case for 10-year-old low-performing students in Helsinki (Finland) and Sobral (Brazil). However, the opposite was true in Jinan (China) and Ukraine, where 15-year-old top performers reported more frequent feedback than their low-performing peers.
Regarding socio-economic status, disadvantaged 15-year-olds reported more feedback on average compared to their advantaged peers in Bulgaria, Chile, and Peru. Conversely, in Jinan (China), disadvantaged students in both age groups reported less teacher feedback than their advantaged peers.
In most sites, there were no gender or socio-economic differences in the strength of relationships between teacher feedback and social and emotional skills (Tables A2.7 and A2.8). This suggests that receiving frequent feedback from teachers is equally important for all students - girls and boys, advantaged and disadvantaged alike - to thrive socio-emotionally.
Secondary teachers provide fewer opportunities for developing students’ skills than primary teachers
Providing students with opportunities to probe and enrich their social and emotional skills is key to effective social and emotional education (Jones and Bouffard, 2012[3]; Gedikoglu, 2021[21]).
In the SSES 2023, teachers were asked how often they include opportunities for students to develop different social and emotional skills in their lessons (from never to every lesson). On average, across sites, most teachers of 15-year-old students reported providing opportunities for developing these skills in most or every lesson (see Table A2.24).
However, teachers seem to focus on certain skills more than others. For example, teachers primarily focus on developing task performance skills, providing fewer opportunities for learning how to regulate emotions. While 83% of 15-year-olds’ teachers reported creating many opportunities in class to develop task performance skills, on average, only 71% of teachers did so for skills for emotional regulation and engaging with others.
Over 80% of teachers provided learning opportunities for developing task performance skills in most or every lesson in over half of all sites (see Table A2.24), while only in Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia) and Peru, 80% of teachers did so for emotional regulation and engaging with others. These findings may partly be explained by the fact that some education systems do not target these skills, particularly in lower secondary (see Figure 1.2 in Chapter 1). However, skills to regulate emotions and engaging with others have been linked to positive outcomes, such as better health behaviours, well-being and entrepreneurial aspirations (OECD, 2024[16]).
SSES 2023 data suggests that teachers of 15-year-olds provide fewer opportunities for developing students’ social and emotional skills in class than teachers of 10-year-olds. This was the case for skills in all domains except for open-mindedness (being curious, creative and tolerant of different cultures) on average and in at least half of all sites.
Figure 2.4 shows the percentage of teachers of 10-year-olds and 15-year-olds who reported including opportunities to develop skills in different domains, in most or every lesson, for each site with available data for both age groups (see also Table A2.24). The figure shows the opportunity gaps between the age cohorts that were particularly large: emotional regulation (between 3 and 13 percentage points), engaging with others (between 4 and 11 percentage points) and collaboration (between 3 and 11 percentage points). Interestingly, 15-year-old students reported lower skill levels for some of these skills (i.e. trust, optimism and energy) than 10-year-olds (OECD, 2024[16]). Only Ukrainian teachers showed no significant difference between age groups in all these skills. Interestingly, the skill differences between 10- and 15-year-old students in Ukraine were also smaller compared to many other sites (OECD, 2024[16]).
Percentage of teachers of 10- and 15-year-olds who reported to include opportunities for students to develop emotional regulation, engaging with others and collaboration in most or every lesson
Notes: Teachers were asked how often they promote skills or characteristics in their target class like “being assertive, sociable, and enthusiastic around other people” (engaging with others), "being cooperative, trusting, and understanding of other people" (collaboration) and "controlling one's emotions, staying optimistic, and coping with stress" (Emotional regulation). Only age differences that are statistically significant with a threshold of p < 0.05 are noted by bars. Sites are listed in alphabetical order.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.24.
While teachers of 15-year-olds in Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia), and Peru reported providing relatively holistic learning experiences, in other sites, there is a greater need for teacher training to focus on enhancing pedagogical skills, lesson planning, and fostering social-emotional learning, particularly for lower secondary teachers. This training should prioritise domains of students' development that are less well covered, such as emotional regulation or engaging with others, as key components. School leaders must also provide structures that encourage holistic discussions on students' social and emotional development, ensuring consistent support across the school environment.
This should be supplemented by resources such as structured lesson plans, assessment rubrics, and access to collaborative platforms for sharing best practices (Paniagua and Istance, 2018[22]; OECD, 2021[23]; Vincent-Lancrin et al., 2019[14]). These resources should complement—not replace—comprehensive teacher training, ensuring teachers are well-prepared to address diverse student needs effectively. To avoid curriculum overload, training and additional support for teachers should emphasise how to integrate social and emotional learning into the teaching of subject matter, making it a natural part of classroom instruction.
Most teachers perceive challenges in online/remote social-emotional skill development, especially in Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland) and Turin (Italy)
Nowadays, a substantial share of students’ learning and social interactions happens on line and through the use of digital technologies (OECD, 2023[24]). Digital technologies bring new risks but also opportunities for children’s social and emotional learning and well-being (OECD, 2023[24]; Burns and Gottschalk, 2020[25]; OECD, 2021[26]; OECD, 2023[24]). Teachers play a crucial role in shaping and guiding students’ online and digital experiences (OECD, 2023[27]; Ulferts, 2021[28]). Therefore, the impact of the digitalisation of students’ lives will also depend on teachers’ preparedness and competence for this task.
However, according to SSES 2023, the use of information and communication technology (ICT) for teaching was not included in any training for 12% of teachers of 15-year-olds (see Table A2.23 and Figure 2.7 further below). Only 38% had had training in the use of ICT for teaching in the previous 12 months.
Data from the SSES 2023 also revealed that supporting student learning through digital technology is the task teachers felt least capable of performing. Around one-third of teachers felt they could not do this at all or, at best, moderately, ranging from over 80% in Bulgaria, Spain and Ukraine responding in this way to 10% or less in Dubai (United Arab Emirates) and Kudus (Indonesia) (see Table A2.26).
Some 40% of all teachers of 15-year-olds, on average, had taught students on line or remotely during the previous year (see Table A2.27), ranging from 11% and 12% in Chile and Helsinki (Finland) to 89% and 92% in Ukraine and Jinan (China). Teachers of 10-year-olds had less recent online or remote teaching experience, on average and in most of the sites with available data.
In the SSES 2023, teachers with recent experiences in online and remote teaching were asked if, in their opinion, the development of social and emotional skills was hindered or fostered by online or remote teaching. Teachers of 15-year-olds in most sites responded by seeing more challenges than opportunities for students’ social and emotional growth through online or remote teaching, particularly for skills relating to social interactions. On average, 65% of teachers felt that skills for engaging with others were hindered a bit or a lot by online or remote teaching (see left panel in Figure 2.5 and Table A2.28). In comparison, 51% of teachers felt that task performance skills were hindered a bit or a lot by online or remote teaching.
One-third and less of teachers with recent online or remote teaching experience perceived online and remote teaching as able to foster students’ social and emotional skills.
More teachers of 15-year-olds saw opportunities to foster skills related to achievement. For example, one out of three teachers felt that task performance skills could be fostered on line and remotely. Conversely, on average, only one out of four teachers saw opportunities for promoting skills related to social interactions on line or remotely (i.e. skills for collaboration and engaging with others).
On average, teachers of 15-year-olds in Bogotá (Colombia), Kudus (Indonesia) and Peru had the most positive views on digital opportunities to promote social and emotional skills, while teachers’ views in Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland) and Turin (Italy) were the most negative ones across sites (see Table A2.28). For example, over 80% of teachers in Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland), and Turin (Italy) believed that online/remote teaching hindered students' ability to engage with others, while less than 10% felt that these skills could be fostered through such teaching methods.
Percentage of teachers of 15-year-olds who perceived that the following skills were hindered or fostered because of online or remote teaching
Notes: Teachers were asked about the extent to which the development of different skills or characteristics were hindered or fostered due to online or remote teaching, including “being assertive, sociable, and enthusiastic around other people” (engaging with others) and "being persistent, responsible, and self-disciplined" (task performance). These items were answered by teachers who reported recent online/remote teaching experience. Sites are listed in descending order of the percentages of teachers who perceived that engaging with others skills were hindered because of online or remote teaching.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.28.
In contrast, in Bogotá (Colombia), Kudus (Indonesia), and Peru, only 38% to 59% of teachers were sceptical, while 35% to 54% held positive views on fostering these skills through online or remote teaching. Peru’s education system was the only site where a majority of teachers saw opportunities rather than challenges to social and emotional learning in all areas during online and remote teaching.
Teachers’ views on social and emotional learning in online/remote settings have likely been influenced by their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. These views may reflect not only their experiences with remote/online teaching but also their observations of the pandemic's overall impact on students’ social and emotional skills (OECD, 2023[24]). Teachers' predominantly negative view of digital technology may also stem from the fact that it is often not well-suited, nor effectively used, to support students' social and emotional development. Regardless of the specific experiences informing these beliefs, it can be assumed that teachers’ attitudes toward online teaching play a crucial role in their decisions to integrate digital tools into their teaching methods (Ulferts, 2021[28]).
Comparing age cohorts revealed that teachers of 15-year-olds perceived more negative impacts of online and remote teaching on students’ social and emotional development than those teaching 10-year-olds (see Table A2.28). These differences in perception between teachers of the two age groups were evident across half of the sites. On average, the disparities were particularly noticeable in skills related to emotional regulation, engaging with others and achievement motivation.
To leverage the opportunities for social and emotional learning through digital technologies (OECD, 2021[26]; 2023[27]), education systems need to ensure that software and digital technologies are tuned towards incorporating socio-emotional learning into academic learning. Partnerships between schools and education technology (EdTech) companies, as well as usability studies with students and teachers, are essential building blocks for ensuring the design of apt technology. Moreover, experts and teaching professionals (expert teachers, teacher educators, researchers and implementors of social and emotional learning programmes) should be involved in the design process (Ulferts, 2023[1]). Education systems also need to provide schools with access to such technology, as well as training and support for teachers, to ensure its effective use.
The design and implementation of effective learning opportunities, guidance and feedback requires a sophisticated set of skills and knowledge of teachers (Ulferts, 2023[1]; Jones et al., 2018[29]; Ulferts, 2021[28]). Teachers also need to feel capable of delivering high-quality instruction and support in classrooms and helping students grow both academically and socio-emotionally (Schonert-Reichl, 2017[30]; Tschannen-Moran, Hoy and Hoy, 1998[31]). To develop such skills, teachers need sufficient training in important areas of social and emotional education.
Results from the SSES 2023 presented in this section show that efforts to provide teachers with the skill set and confidence needed to deliver effective social and emotional education need to intensify.
Teachers of 15-year-olds felt less capable of developing and understanding students’ social and emotional skills than teachers of 10-year-olds
When asked about their ability to perform various teaching tasks, most teachers of 15-year-olds (between 68% to 76%) reported feeling capable to a moderate or large extent (see Table A2.26).
Teachers in Bulgaria, Spain, and Ukraine stood out because only two out of ten or fewer felt capable of understanding students’ feelings and emotions or helping students develop social and emotional skills. In contrast, in almost all other sites, more than eight out of ten teachers reported feeling confident in these social and emotional teaching tasks.
Despite such variations, a common pattern emerged: In most sites, fewer teachers felt capable of handling tasks related to social and emotional learning compared to other teaching responsibilities. Moreover, teachers of 15-year-olds felt less capable in social and emotional teaching than those of 10-year-olds in most sites with available data (see Table A2.26).
Figure 2.6 shows the percentage of teachers who reported feeling capable of understanding students’ feelings and emotions, as well as helping students develop social and emotional skills, for both age groups (see also Table A2.26).
Percentage of teachers of 15-year-olds and teachers of 10-year-olds who reported they were capable of the following tasks to a moderate or large extent
Notes: Only age differences that are statistically significant with a threshold of p < 0.05 are noted by bars.
Sites are listed in alphabetical order.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.26.
On average, while 20% of teachers of 10-year-olds did not feel sufficiently able to help students develop social and emotional skills, this proportion increased to 25% among teachers of 15-year-olds. Significant differences were observed in Bogotá (Colombia), Helsinki (Finland) and Kudus (Indonesia).
Similarly, 19% of teachers of 10-year-olds felt insufficiently capable of understanding students’ feelings and emotions, compared to 23% of teachers of 15-year-olds. Significant differences in this aspect were noted in Bogotá (Colombia), Helsinki (Finland) and Sobral (Brazil).
Social and emotional education is underrepresented in teacher training, with a significant gap compared to subjects and pedagogy training in some education systems
Teacher training can boost teacher efficacy and is crucial for ensuring high-quality instruction and support, and, thus, student learning (OECD, 2020[32]). For training to be impactful, it must address the various tasks that teaching encompasses, especially those where teachers express a greater need and feel less capable (Ulferts, 2023[1]; 2021[28]).
The SSES 2023 data reveal a lack of social and emotional topics in teacher training, which is particularly concerning given teachers' reported low confidence in this area. The SSES questionnaire asked teachers about the topics included in their teacher education, in-service training programmes, training for other professional qualifications, and professional development activities.
Figure 2.7 shows the percentage of teachers of 15-year-olds with and without training in different topics related to social and emotional teaching on average across sites (see also Table A2.23). The share ranged from 16% to 40%, depending on the topic. For example, 29% of teachers of 15-year-olds had no training in incorporating social and emotional learning in the classroom. Another 40% of teachers lacked training in monitoring students’ social and emotional skills on a regular basis.
Regular monitoring and formative assessment of students’ skills are key for student progress and the improvement of social and emotional education in schools (OECD, 2005[11]; 2020[33]; European Commission, 2021[2]). To design suitable lessons and provide effective support, teachers need a clear understanding of their students' current social and emotional skill levels. This knowledge is crucial for guiding students' growth into socially and emotionally competent individuals.
Lack of training in social and emotional education was most notable in Chile, Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland), and Spain, Turin (Italy).
Across the surveyed sites, an average of 28% to 37% of teachers reported participating in professional development activities related to social and emotional education within the past 12 months (see Figure 2.7 and Table A2.23). Among the topics covered in these recent professional development activities, identifying and combatting bullying received the most coverage, while monitoring students’ social and emotional skill development was the least.
Teachers of 15-year-olds were less likely than those of 10-year-olds to have received training on various topics related to social and emotional education (see Table A2.23). The most significant and consistent difference was in training for regular monitoring of students’ social and emotional skills: 34% of 15-year-olds’ teachers lacked training in this area, compared to only 25% of 10-year-olds’ teachers on average. Significant differences also emerged in most sites for other key areas (see Table A2.23).
Percentage of teachers of 15-year-olds with and without training in topics related to social and emotional education and the use of information and communication technology, average across sites
Notes: Recent professional development activities refer to activities during the last 12 months. The reported percentage encompasses two groups of teachers: those who received recent professional development on these topics and those who had covered these topics in earlier training sessions. Type of trainings are listed in descending order of the percentages of teachers with recent training.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.23.
Figure 2.8 shows the percentage of teachers of 15-year-olds without training in incorporating social and emotional learning in the classroom, as well as in classroom praxis, pedagogy and content of taught subjects in each of the sites (see also Table A2.23). Overall, fewer teachers in Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Jinan (China) and Kudus (Indonesia) lacked training in the incorporation of social and emotional learning into teaching than teachers in other sites (less than 15% of teachers) as well as on related topics (see Table A2.23). In Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland) and Turin (Italy) over 45% of teachers had no training on the topic.
Figure 2.8 also shows that the gap in training for social and emotional teaching is not solely due to a general lack of teacher training. For example, 13% of teachers lack training in classroom praxis, pedagogy and content of taught subjects in Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Peru and Spain. However, only 22% of Peruvian teachers reported a lack of training in incorporating social and emotional learning into teaching compared to over 40% in Emilia-Romagna (Italy) and Spain.
Percentage of 15-year-olds’ teachers without training in the following topics
Notes: Only differences that are statistically significant with a threshold of p < 0.05 are noted by site names. Sites are listed in ascending order of the difference in the percentages without training in the two topics.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.23.
Many teachers rely on unregulated materials for lesson planning, while in half of the education systems, teachers extensively use official resources
Actionable tools and resources may help teachers plan and implement social and emotional education more effectively. However, the growing emphasis on social and emotional education has led to a proliferation of programmes and tools, and these resources vary in quality and cost. Teachers often lack the time and expertise to effectively evaluate them. Providing certified resources could help teachers make informed choices about which tools to use in their classrooms.
However, across the surveyed sites, on average, only about half of the teachers reported extensively using official resources (e.g. curricular guidelines, frameworks or teaching material published by ministries or local authority) to integrate social and emotional learning into their teaching, as shown in Figure 2.9 (see also Table A2.25). One-third of teachers of 15-year-olds drew heavily on unofficial resources, most of whom drew on information from the web and social media (22%) (see Table A2.24).
A greater emphasis on relevant topics in teacher training is necessary to enhance teacher preparedness for social and emotional education, particularly in Chile, Spain, Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland), and Turin (Italy). Many effective programmes for fostering social and emotional learning in schools include teacher training components, which can serve as models for improving teacher preparation in this area (Oliveira et al., 2021[34]; Laura et al., 2016[35]; OECD, 2015[36]).
In Bogotá (Colombia), Helsinki (Finland), Kudus (Indonesia), and Sobral (Brazil), the focus should be on supporting secondary teachers to catch up to the level of efficacy demonstrated by primary teachers.
Additionally, providing high-quality, actionable resources, such as lesson plans, assessment tools, and explanations of social and emotional skills, can help teachers improve their instruction and lesson planning. These resources may be particularly valuable in areas where teachers feel less confident, and training is lacking. Teachers in Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland), and Turin (Italy) could particularly benefit from such resources.
Offering official, certified resources can also help prevent teachers from relying on potentially ineffective materials that may contain myths and misconceptions. For example, Chile is offering a Comprehensive Learning Diagnosis (DIA) assessment tool as an official resource for teachers and schools (see Box 2.1).
Awareness campaigns and training are needed to prevent the spread of misconceptions and the use of ineffective materials. This is especially important in Bulgaria, Delhi (India), Peru, and Ukraine, where many teachers rely heavily on unofficial resources.
Figure 2.9 illustrates significant variations across sites in the resources teachers use to integrate social and emotional teaching into their lessons. The use of official resources varies dramatically: fewer than one in four teachers reported extensive use in Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland) and Turin (Italy), while in Bulgaria, Delhi (India), Peru and Ukraine, the rate was three times higher (see Table A2.25). In particular, teachers in Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland), and Turin (Italy) demonstrated low usage of both official and unofficial resources compared to other sites. Similarly, the use of unofficial resources shows marked differences: only one in five teachers or fewer used such resources extensively in Gunma (Japan), Helsinki (Finland) and Spain, compared to more than double that rate in Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia), Peru and Sobral (Brazil).
Percentage of teachers of 15-year-olds who reported drawing to a large extent on official and unofficial resources in their lesson planning
Notes: Official resources include official curricula, curricular guidelines or frameworks / original sources (e.g. constitutions and human rights declarations) / teaching material directly published by the Ministry of Education or by the local education authority. Unofficial resources include teaching/learning materials published by commercial companies / television or print media (e.g. newspapers, magazines, etc.) / web-based sources of information (e.g. wikis, newspapers on line) and social media / documents published by NGOs, international associations, public institutions, academic institutions. Sites are listed in descending order of the percentages of teachers who reported to draw to a large extent on official resources in their lesson planning.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.25.
The DIA is a voluntary assessment tool developed by the Education Quality Agency (Agencia de Calidad de la Educación) in Chile. The approach aims to complement the national assessment system with a more holistic evaluation of student learning. It supports students' comprehensive development by providing timely information and guidance on both academic and socio-emotional learning. Key features of the DIA are explained below.
Three evaluation periods
Diagnosis at the beginning of the academic year: Provides information on students' previous academic and socio-emotional learning to help plan the new school year.
Mid-year monitoring: Tracks academic achievements and key aspects of school environments that promote a holistic development, enabling adjustments to teaching strategies.
End-of-year assessment: Assesses progress to inform planning for the following year.
Multi-method approach
Includes tests, questionnaires and socio-emotional activities that are administered on paper or digitally through a web platform.
Socio-emotional learning is evaluated by teachers through activities with 1st through 3rd graders, while 4th through 12th graders fill in a questionnaire.
Online reports are generated at the grade and school level.
A focus on socio-emotional learning
Three areas of socio-emotional learning are covered: intrapersonal (self-awareness, emotional self-regulation, responsible decision-making); interpersonal (awareness of others, empathy, collaboration and communication); and collective (inclusiveness, prosocial behaviour, democratic commitment)
Questionnaires are used to evaluate students' skills and their perceptions on school’s implementation of social and emotional learning.
Implementation support
An immediate release of results makes it possible to identify and address strengths and areas needing improvement at each course level in a timely manner.
To encourage schools to use the data collected to improve cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes, administration and analysis guides, as well as strategies and actions for addressing difficulties detected, are provided and explained in workshops and webinars.
Multi-level data use
Principals and teachers use the data to guide and monitor their school improvement strategy.
Aggregated information is provided to the Ministry of Education and local education services to help understand broader trends without imposing classifications or consequences on schools.
Source: Agencia de Calidad de la Educación (2023[37]), Marco de Evaluación de los Aprendizajes Socioemocionales
Most education systems today, including those that participated in the SSES 2023, aim to develop students’ social and emotional skills (see Figure 1.2 in Chapter 1) (OECD, 2021[23]). However, goals are not always attained (OECD, 2020[38]). To successfully attain these goals, schools need to create structures that promote social and emotional education and ensure that their beliefs and practices align with these goals.
Results from the SSES 2023 – and partially SSES 2019 – suggest that most students attend schools that adopt a whole-school approach that embeds social and emotional education in general practices and teaching across all subjects. While this aligns with current research, these findings underline the importance of improving teacher support and preparation, as such an approach largely builds on teachers as champions of social and emotional education.
Most schools integrate social and emotional skills into general teaching and practice, but in some education systems, over half of students learn them in separate subjects
The SSES 2023 asked school principals how students' social and emotional skills are promoted and taught at their schools. For some of the questions, data from 2019 were also available. The responses show that sites differ in their areas of strength in creating structures that promote social and emotional skills more holistically in school (see Box 2.2).
Figure 2.10 shows the organisation of social and emotional education in Bulgaria, Dubai (United Arab Emirates) and Helsinki (Finland) – three sites that differ in their areas of strength in creating structures that promote social and emotional skills more holistically in school. The figure shows the percentages of students in schools where principals reported different ways of organising social and emotional education.
Percentage of 15-year-old students in schools whose principals reported that schools promoted and taught social and emotional skills in the following ways in Bulgaria, Dubai (United Arab Emirates) and Helsinki (Finland)
Notes: Sites were selected because they differed in how they organised social and emotional education in their schools.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Tables A2.22 and A2.21.
In Bulgaria, principals from virtually all schools attended by 15-year-old students reported that extra-curricular activities outside the classroom are used to promote social and emotional skills (Table A2.21). At the same time, social and emotional education is less integrated across all subjects or offered as a separate subject (only for 76% and 30% of 15-year-olds, respectively) than in other sites (Table A2.22).
Conversely, extra-curricular activities are only offered at schools attended by 51% of 15-year-olds in Helsinki (Finland), but social and emotional education is integrated into all subjects taught at school for almost all students (98%) (Tables A2.21 and A2.22). Trend data also shows that the integration into general practices and disciplinary rules has increased between 2019 and 2023 in both age groups, suggesting a shift towards an even more holistic approach to social and emotional education in Helsinki (Finland) (Table A.2.30). At the same time, schools offered fewer extra-curricular activities to promote social and emotional skills among 10-year-old students.
In comparison, Dubai’s (United Arab Emirates) social and emotional education provides separate subjects specifically focused on the promotion of social and emotional skills to the majority of its 15-year-old students (62%), while the integration into all subjects is only happening for a minority of students (7%), according to principals.
The presence of a shared mindset about teachers’ responsibility for promoting social and emotional education among school staff in Dubai (United Arab Emirates) was as common as in Helsinki (Finland) (see Table A2.20), and teacher training was stronger than in most sites (see Table A2.23). This suggests a move towards a more transversal approach, which could help avoid curriculum overload and provide a more tangible approach to social and emotional education.
Figure 2.10 also shows that feedback and advice to parents on students’ social and emotional development is provided at over 90% of schools 15-year-olds attend in Bulgaria and Dubai (United Arab Emirates). On the other hand, only 61% of students were in such schools in Helsinki (Finland), though school staff of all schools agreed on the role of parents in students’ social and emotional learning (see Table A2.20).
On average, 86% of 15-year-old students attended schools across surveyed sites whose principals reported that developing these skills is one of the objectives included in the school educational plan (see Figure 2.11 and Table A2.21). This suggests that most schools strive to follow established national or local curricula and frameworks. In Delhi (India), Jinan (China) and Sobral (Brazil), all or almost all students attended such schools.
According to their principals, most surveyed schools integrate social and emotional education into existing general practices and teaching across subjects rather than providing specific programmes, classes or activities targeting these skills. This aligns with the whole-school approach to social and emotional education that systematically integrates social and emotional education into schools’ daily life, culture and operations (Chatterjee Singh and Duraiappah, 2020[4]; Steponavičius, Gress-Wright and Linzarini, 2023[5]; Jones and Bouffard, 2012[3]). Skills are not just taught in class but are considered the result of daily interactions and experiences of students as members of the school community.
While a variety of well-evaluated social and emotional programmes exist, these have been increasingly criticised as they do not offer a sustainable and universal approach to social and emotional education (Laura et al., 2016[35]; Jones and Bouffard, 2012[3]). Often, these programmes are implemented on a relatively small scale with few students and for a limited period.
On average, around 86% of students are in schools where the general school practices aim specifically at developing social and emotional skills. The school's disciplinary rules (i.e. guidelines and regulations to promote appropriate behaviour and maintain an orderly, respectful, and safe learning environment) are used for 84% of 15-year-olds to promote these skills (see Figure 2.11 and Table A2.21)
Percentage of 15-year-old students in schools whose principals reported that schools promoted and taught social and emotional skills in the following ways, average across sites
Notes: Apart from activities marked with an asterisk (*), which were only assessed at the sites surveyed in 2023, the average results cover sites that participated in the survey in both 2019 and 2023. Consequently, averages are not directly comparable.
Items are listed in descending order of the percentages of 15-year-old students attending schools whose principals reported the following items. Source: OECD, SSES Databases (2019, 2023) Tables A2.22 and A2.21.
In line with the whole-school approach, the teaching of social and emotional skills was mostly integrated into all subjects taught in school, on average and in most sites participating in the SSES 2023 (see Figure 2.11 and Table A2.21). This is the case for 83% of 15-year-olds on average and for over 95% of students in Helsinki (Finland), Kudus (Indonesia) and Spain (Table A2.22). Research has shown that social and emotional skills can effectively be taught in various subjects (Vincent-Lancrin et al., 2019[14]; Paniagua and Istance, 2018[22]; Durlak, Mahoney and Boyle, 2022[39]). Conversely, on average, 38% of students attended schools where social and emotional education is taught as a separate subject (see Table A2.22). In Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Peru, Sobral (Brazil) and Spain, over half of all 15-year-olds are in schools that provide separate subjects on social and emotional education. Trend data for Bogotá (Colombia) also suggest a shift away from a holistic approach at secondary schools, as the integration of socio-emotional education into schools’ general practices and disciplinary rules has decreased between 2019 and 2023 (see Table A2.30).
Research has shown that social and emotional skills can effectively be taught in various subjects (Vincent-Lancrin et al., 2019[14]; Paniagua and Istance, 2018[22]; Durlak, Mahoney and Boyle, 2022[39]). Transversal integration can help students experience the positive outcomes that social and emotional competences can have in different subjects and may help improve the learning climate in schools. However, this requires all teaching staff's preparedness and constant attention to students’ social and emotional skills. Results presented in the previous and following sections show that many sites need to invest in teacher training, support and shared mindset and a better alignment of school structures, practices and beliefs.
In addition to teaching across subjects, many schools use extra-curricular activities (e.g. sports clubs, drama clubs, gardening clubs) outside the classroom to promote these skills, and feedback and advice to parents or guardians about their children's social and emotional skills (for 82% of 15-year-olds, on average) (Figure 2.11 and Table A2.21). In Bulgaria, Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia) all or almost all students benefit from extra-curricular offers and in Jinan (China), Kudus (Indonesia) and Ukraine nearly all students were in schools that provided such feedback.
Research shows that stronger parental involvement and extra-curricular activities helps student learning in social and emotional learning (OECD, 2023[24]; Laura et al., 2016[35]; European Commission, 2018[40]). However, parental involvement has decreased in many education systems around the world from pre- to post-COVID (OECD, 2023[24]). Trend data from the SSES suggest that parental involvement has remained stable in Helsinki (Finland), but schools in Bogotá (Colombia) involved parents and guardians less in students’ socio-emotional learning in 2023 than in 2019 (see Table A2.30). The fact that school staff in most sites agree about parents’ responsibility in socio-emotional learning suggests a good foundation for strengthening family-school partnerships in this regard (see Between one and eight in ten students across education systems attend schools where staff lack agreement on the teachability of social and emotional skills).
Results from SSES demonstrated that education systems have diverse strengths in creating structures that promote social and emotional learning at school, suggesting potential for peer learning among participating sites.
The findings underscore the importance of regular, comprehensive assessments that cover students' skills and key elements of effective social and emotional education, including school structures and practices, teacher training and beliefs. Such assessments help ensure the alignment of these various elements (EEF, 2021[41]; European Commission, 2021[2]). They also identify necessary changes in either structures to better promote socio-emotional learning in schools or in teacher support, training and awareness to make these structures work.
The joint analysis of different indicators here revealed that stronger investments are needed in teacher preparation and support, as well as in cultivating a shared mindset about the value of social and emotional education and teachers’ role in it. This is particularly important to make the predominantly transversal teaching of socio-emotional skills work effectively in many sites (see Cultivating a shared mindset about the value and approaches to social and emotional education).
Conversely, in other sites, such as Bogotá (Colombia), Delhi (India), Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Peru, Sobral (Brazil) and Spain social and emotional skills are taught as a separate subject for over half of all 15-year-olds. However, a shared mindset is relatively widespread and teacher preparedness is stronger in some of these sites. In these cases, a shift towards a more transversal approach seems feasible, which could help avoid curriculum overload and provide a more integrated approach to social and emotional education. Additionally, the widespread agreement among school staff in most sites about parents’ responsibility in socio-emotional learning suggests a good foundation for strengthening family-school partnerships in this area.
Students engaging in extra-curricular activities report higher social and emotional skills
As Figure 2.11 showed, principals reported that extra-curriculars are offered at most schools on average across sites. Data from the SSES show that students participating in extra-curricular activities have higher social and emotional skills, underscoring the importance of these offers (OECD, 2021[17]).
Figure 2.12 shows the strength of the relationship between engagement in extra-curricular activities and students’ social and emotional skills on average across sites (see also Table A2.11). It also shows the range of strength of the relationship across sites. On average and in most sites, participation in extra-curricular activities was positively related to all social and emotional skills of both 15-year-old and 10-year-old students (Figure 2.12; Table A2.11). This finding is in line with research showing that extra-curricular activities are an effective means of skill promotion (Durlak, Weissberg and Pachan, 2010[42]; Marsh and Kleitman, 2002[43]).
Standardised regression coefficients of 15-year-old students' individual skills on the index of extra-curricular activities, average across sites
Notes: All coefficients are statistically significant with a threshold of p < 0.05. Models control for gender, socio-economic and migrant status. See Annex A for information about how the extra-curricular activities index was calculated. Social and emotional skills are listed by the size of the effect on the participation in extra-curricular activities index.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.11.
Notably, positive relationships emerged in all sites between engagement in extra-curricular activities and 10-year-olds’ and 15-year olds' skills in engaging with others (assertiveness and sociability) and open-mindedness (creativity and curiosity) (Figure 2.12; Table A2.11).
Less consistent relationships emerged in terms of emotional control, which was only related in 8 of the 15 sites for 15-year-olds and some sites for 10-year-olds (Table A2.11). Most extra-curricular activities may not adequately challenge or develop students' emotional control skills.
Most 15-year-olds regularly participate in arts activities, while fewer engage in environmental protection, sports or volunteering
Considering their link to social and emotional skills, it is unfortunate that relatively few students reported engaging regularly in extra-curricular activities inside or outside of school. When students were asked how often they participate in several extra-curricular activities (no participation at all or from once a month to more than once a week), one-third or fewer of 15-year-olds reported participating in various extracurricular activities at least once a month, on average across sites (see Figure 2.13 and Table A2.9). The only exception was arts activities, in which 53% of students reported to engage regularly.
Percentage of 15-year-old students participating at least once a month in these types of activities/clubs, average across sites
Notes: Activities are listed in descending order of the percentages of students in schools that offer the activity.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.9.
The data show that only 27% of 15-year-old students, on average, across sites, reported participating at least once a month in sports teams or sporting activities (see Table A2.9). Interestingly, the share is twice as high in Delhi (India). Boosting students’ engagement in sports appears crucial because one-third of 15-year-olds do not regularly exercise (OECD, 2024[16]).
Considering that environmental threats and declining civic engagement across countries are some of the biggest challenges of our times (OECD, 2022[44]), increasing participation in related extra-curricular activities seems particularly worth investing in: 29% and 30% of 15-year-old students are engaged in environmental protection activities and volunteering or service activities (Figure 2.13 and Table A2.9). In Kudus (Indonesia) and Peru, almost half of all 15-year-old students and in Delhi (India), 72% of 15-year-olds engaged regularly in environmental protection activities. In Delhi, as well as in India, more generally, eco clubs are used to foster a deep-seated environmental consciousness and drive action at the grassroots level to support national efforts towards sustainability (see Box 2.3).
Eco clubs are integral to environmental education initiatives in India, primarily driven by the National Green Corps (NGC) and similar programmes. Their primary goal is to educate students about environmental issues and promote sustainability. Through these clubs, students engage in hands-on activities, such as tree planting, waste management, recycling, water conservation and energy-saving practices, which help raise awareness and develop essential skills like observation, analysis and problem solving related to environmental challenges. The primary objective is to instil a sense of responsibility towards the environment and encourage students to adopt eco-friendly habits.
Each eco club comprises 50-60 students and is supervised by one or two teachers in charge. A key feature of these clubs is the involvement of students as leader volunteers, often on a rotational basis. This setup seeks to empower students to take on leadership roles in environmental stewardship, allowing them to develop skills in project management, teamwork, and community engagement.
Eco clubs conduct a variety of activities, including environmental audits, tree planting and waste management, and they often participate in broader campaigns and community outreach efforts. These clubs organise events like poster-making competitions, debates, and awareness campaigns to educate the school and local community about environmental issues such as pollution, climate change, and biodiversity conservation. Both government and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) provide training, resources and financial assistance to support these activities. With a network of over 100 000 eco clubs across the country, the initiative reaches millions of students annually. Around 2 000 eco clubs have been established in various schools and colleges in Delhi alone.
Source: Sarabhai, Kartikeya V. and Sweta R. Purohit, Sweta R (2023[45]), Seeds of Change: State of the Education Report for India 2023; Education to Address Climate Change, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387156; Department of Environment Government of NCT of Delhi, (2024[46]), “Eco Clubs in Schools and Colleges”, https://environment.delhi.gov.in/environment/eco-clubs-schools-and-colleges.
Older students, disadvantaged students, and girls engage less in extra-curricular activities
Advantaged students were more engaged in extra-curricular activities than disadvantaged students for both age groups on average and in most sites. Only in Peru were disadvantaged 15-year-old students more engaged, which is also the site with the smallest socio-economic gap in terms of students’ social and emotional skills (OECD, 2024[16]). Equally important, 15-year-old girls were less engaged in extra-curricular activities than boys, on average and in six sites, though participation patterns by gender may vary for the different types of activities (see Table A2.10). Only girls in Ukraine participated, on average, more than boys in extra-curricular activities.
SSES 2023 data show that socio-economically disadvantaged students report lower levels of all skills than advantaged students, and girls report lower emotional regulation skills, energy, trust and sociability than boys (OECD, 2024[16]). For most sites and skills, there were no gender or socio-economic differences in the strength of relationships between engagement in extra-curricular activities and social and emotional skills (Tables A2.12 and A2.13). This shows that extra-curricular engagement is important for all students' socio-emotional growth – both girls and boys, advantaged and disadvantaged, alike. Disadvantaged students’ and girls’ lower participation in extra-curricular activities could partially explain some of these differences. Therefore, facilitating disadvantaged students’ and girls’ access to such activities and encouraging them to participate could be a key lever for increasing equality in skill acquisition.
Further results from the SSES 2019 and 2023 suggest that facilitating access to extra-curricular activities and encouragement to participate or continue participation in extra-curricular activities could also help reduce the dip in skills observed between the ages of 10 and 15 (OECD, 2024[16]). Students 15 years of age were less engaged in extra-curricular activities in all six sites with available data than 10-year-olds (Table A2.9). Differences emerged for all studied activities, with differences ranging from 1 to 25 percentage points.
Figure 2.14 shows the percentage of students participating in sports and environmental protection activities by age group (see also Table A2.9).
Percentage of 10- and 15-year-old students engaging in sports and environmental protection activities
Notes: Only statistically significant differences with a threshold of p < 0.05 are noted by site names.
Sites are listed in descending order of 15-year-old students’ engagement in sports activities.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.9.
For these two activities, differences were particularly stark: 53% of 10-year-olds versus only 28% of 15-year-olds with available data participated in sports, and 54% of 10-year-olds versus 31% of 15-year-olds participated in environmental protection activities (Figure 2.14, Table A2.9). As discussed earlier, widespread participation in these activities beyond primary education seems particularly important. Overall, the differences in the two age cohorts’ participation in the different activities were larger in Bogotá (Colombia) and Kudus (Indonesia) and smaller – though still significant – in Jinan (China) and Sobral (Brazil) for many activities.
Education systems need to ensure that students can access a broad range of extra-curricular activities to boost their socio-emotional learning. Students also need to be encouraged to keep engaging in such activities as they grow older. Efforts to facilitate access and continuous engagement should particularly target girls and disadvantaged students.
The way extra-curricular activities are organised may differ across sites. Such activities may be organised inside or outside of schools, and their organisation may vary across sites. Such activities may also be more or less structured; for example, students may take part in classes or clubs that are supervised and guided, or students may engage in these activities independently without supervision (Feldman and Matjasko, 2005[47]).
Where parental associations, community youth, religious or other organisations offer a variety of extra-curricular activities, especially if at low costs and in disadvantaged communities, students – including those at a disadvantage – may benefit from this extra boost of social and emotional skills outside schools and homes.
Elsewhere, schools may step in to provide this extra boost outside of classes. Integrating extra-curricular activities in school structures seems like a convenient way of engaging students in such activities (OECD, 2020[33]). Offering extra-curricular activities in schools for free, which is, for example, the case for most of those school-based activities in Sobral’s (Brazil) public schools, may grant access to students who may otherwise not be able to afford such activities. It may also help to encourage less motivated students to engage in extra-curricular activities or to keep engaging. Additionally, schools can provide guidance during such activities, which allows students to get the most out of their engagement.
In most education systems, schools implement a whole-school approach where teachers across subjects are perceived as the primary drivers of social and emotional education (Figure 2.11, see also Table A2.21). Making this approach work requires joint efforts and a shared mindset among school staff regarding the value and approach to social and emotional education.
Results presented in this section suggest that efforts to cultivate a joint mindset need to intensify across sites to ensure that all school staff acknowledge the teachability and wide-ranging impact of socio-emotional skills and the role of teachers in their promotion.
A minority of students attend schools where staff agree on the impact of social and emotional skills on employability and educational equity
The SSES 2019 and SSES 2023, as well as further research, show that social and emotional skills relate to a range of important key life outcomes, including academic achievement, lower bullying, and higher career aspirations and prospects. They may also help increase equity in education (OECD, 2024[16]; 2021[17]); see also (Steponavičius, Gress-Wright and Linzarini, 2023[5]; OECD, 2023[24]). The emphasis that an education system puts on social and emotional education in practice will depend, among other things, on the extent to which teachers and principals are aware of the impact of developing social and emotional skills (Schonert-Reichl, 2017[30]; Laura et al., 2016[35]; Jones and Bouffard, 2012[3]) on students’ lives.
In the SSES 2023, principals and teachers were asked how much they agree that social and emotional skills impact different outcomes (from strongly disagree to strongly agree). The share of students in schools where the principal and all teachers (strongly) agreed that students’ social and emotional skills impact key outcomes varies substantially depending on the outcome considered (see Table A2.16).
Figure 2.15 displays the percentage of 15-year-old students in schools where all teachers and the principal agreed (i.e. schools with a shared mindset) that social and emotional skills impact increasing youth employment, economic success and social equality for each site (see also Table A2.16). Only 19% of 15-year-olds attended schools with a shared mindset on the impact of social and emotional skills on social equality.
The figure also shows that only 21% of 15-year-olds attended schools with a shared mindset on the impact of social and emotional skills on youth employment and economic success. Overall, results show that most 15-year-old students were not attending schools where all teachers and principals were aware of the wide-ranging impact of social and emotional skills (Table A2.16).
Schools in all sites would benefit from raising awareness about the evidence on the impact of social and emotional skills, but schools in some sites would benefit more than others (see Table A2.16). For example, in Emilia-Romagna and Turin (Italy), Gunma (Japan), Sobral (Brazil) and Ukraine, 5% of 15-year-olds or less were in schools with a shared mindset about the importance of these skills for social equality. However, even in Peru, where the share is the highest, less than half of all students are in schools where all staff agreed on the importance of these skills for increased social equality.
Awareness campaigns are particularly relevant in lower secondary because the shared awareness of school staff about social and emotional skills’ impact was lower in secondary as compared to primary education for a range of outcomes, including active citizenship, well-being, capacity to cope with challenges, academic outcomes and social equality (see Table A2.16).
Percentage of 15-year-old students in schools where all teachers and the principal (strongly) agree that social and emotional skills have an impact on increasing youth employment, economic success and social equality
Notes: See Annex A for information about how the indices on a shared mindset was calculated.
Sites are listed in descending order of the percentages of students in schools where all teachers and principals agreed or strongly agreed that social and emotional skills impact youth employment and economic success.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.16.
Between one and eight in ten students across education systems attend schools where staff lack agreement on the teachability of social and emotional skills
The SSES 2023 examined teachers’ and principals’ opinions about who should be responsible for developing students’ social and emotional skills. Overall, the results indicate that the majority of school principals and teachers believe that the development of social and emotional skills of students is a joint responsibility of different players, which requires the involvement of teachers, parents and guardians, students themselves, and civil society (see Tables A2.18 and A2.19) (Schonert-Reichl, 2017[30]; OECD, 2021[17]; OECD, 2015[36]).
Nonetheless, results also show that these beliefs are often not shared among all school staff. Figure 2.16 shows the average percentage of 15-year-old students across sites in schools where all teachers and the principal agree (i.e. schools with a shared mindset) that the listed actors should be responsible for developing social and emotional skills (see also Table A2.20). The figure also shows how this percentage varies across sites.
Percentage of 15-year-old students in school where all teachers and the principal agree that the following actors should be responsible for developing social and emotional skills and that these skills can be taught, average across sites
Notes: When interpreting results about the shared mindset in schools, it is important to consider the variation across sites in terms of the number of schools and teachers represented from each site (see Table A2.29 fixed number to change). See Annex A for information about how the indices on a shared mindset was calculated.
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Table A2.20.
Only two out of five students were enrolled in schools where all teachers and the principals shared the belief that teachers, in general, should be responsible for students’ social and emotional development (42% of students). In contrast, over four out of five 15-year-olds attended schools with a shared mindset about the responsibility of parents and guardians (84% of 15-year-olds).
A shared mindset of teachers’ responsibility in students’ social and emotional development was more prominent in primary education; a difference as large as 19 percentage points to secondary education emerged. These findings point to misalignments between the structures that schools use to promote social and emotional learning and staff’s beliefs (further discussed below).
Further results show that disagreement about teachers’ responsibility for social and emotional learning is more common among teachers than principals, particularly lower secondary teachers (see Tables A2.18 and A2.19). Participating sites must ramp up efforts to raise awareness among teachers about their critical role in students' social and emotional learning. Particularly in Sobral (Brazil), Gunma (Japan) and Ukraine, where over 20% of teachers did not think teachers should be responsible for this task, despite a strong cross-subject integration in some of these sites (see Tables A2.19 and A2.22).
A finding of particular concern is that 42% of 15-year-old student attended a school without a shared mindset among school staff that social and emotional skills can be taught (i.e. where principals and all teachers disagreed that these skills cannot be taught; see Figure 2.16 and Table A2.20).
While agreement of staff about teachability was quite common in schools in Chile, Emilia-Romagna and Turin (Italy), Helsinki (Finland) and Spain, with close to or over 80% of students attending such schools, it was far less common in other sites, with less than 40% of students attending such schools in Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia) and Sobral (Brazil) (Table A2.20).
Delhi (India) and Kudus (Indonesia) were the two sites where more teachers and principals expressed scepticism about the teachability of these skills. Over 15% of teachers agreed that no one should be responsible, as these skills cannot be taught, and over 12% of students attended schools whose principals did not believe in the teachability of social and emotional skills (Tables A2.18 and A2.19). Interestingly, Delhi (India) and Kudus (Indonesia) were also the two sites where the highest share of teachers reported having received training in social and emotional teaching (see Table A2.23). A deeper understanding of the provided training's content and implementation is needed.
SSES 2023 data show that less than half of all 15-year-old students were in schools where all teachers and the principal share a mindset about the responsibility of students themselves, and one-quarter of students were in schools where staff share the belief that civil society organisations and clubs have a responsibility in the social and emotional development of students (Figure 2.16, Table A2.20).
A shared agreement among school staff about the responsibility of the broader community in students’ social and emotional development would be a promising starting point for fruitful partnerships. Research shows that students acquire social and emotional skills also outside their schools and homes and that students who engage in volunteering and sports, activities, organisations and youth clubs have higher social and emotional skills (Durlak, Mahoney and Boyle, 2022[39]; Marsh and Kleitman, 2002[43]; OECD, 2021[17]).
Chile, Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia), and Peru demonstrated a stronger alignment between their approach to social and emotional education and the staff’s mindset
A transversal approach to social and emotional education, where teaching is integrated across subjects, requires that school staff share a belief in the benefits of investing in social and emotional learning. A shared belief in its impact on academic outcomes can be particularly motivating for teachers to incorporate it into their subject teaching.
However, Figure 2.17 shows the percentage of students in schools where social and emotional education is integrated into subject teaching, alongside the percentage of students in schools where all teachers and the principal agree that social and emotional learning positively impacts academic outcomes. The figure reveals that the integration of social and emotional teaching across subjects is common for the majority of 15-year-olds in all education systems except Dubai (United Arab Emirates), ranging from 72% in Gunma (Japan) to 99% in Kudus (Indonesia) (see Most schools integrate social and emotional skills into general teaching and practice, but in some education systems, over half of students learn them in separate subjects).
Percentage of 15-year-old students in school whose principals reported that social and emotional skills are integrated across all subjects and those attending schools where all teachers and principal agreed that these skills improve academic outcomes, across sites
Notes: See Annex A for information about how the indices on a shared mindset were calculated. When interpreting results about the shared mindset in schools, it is important to consider the variation across sites in terms of the number of schools and teachers represented from each site (see Table A2.29).
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Tables A2.22 and A2.16.
Nevertheless, only in Chile, Delhi (India), Kudus (Indonesia), and Peru was there alignment between the approach to social and emotional education and the staff's mindset, as most students attended schools where all staff agreed that social and emotional skills impact academic learning. The smallest gap between students in schools with a transversal approach and those where staff shared this belief was in Peru, with a difference of just 9 percentage points. In contrast, Dubai (United Arab Emirates) was the only system where a shared belief in the academic benefits of social and emotional skills was more widespread (75% of students) than the transversal approach to teaching these skills (7% of students) (see Box 2.2).
While most systems need to promote research on the academic benefits of social and emotional education within subject teaching, the results indicate significant potential for Dubai to move towards a more transversal approach, where these skills are currently taught mainly as a separate subject. Further findings show that teachers in schools where principals reported using a transversal approach were not more likely to believe in the positive impact of social and emotional skills in any of the education systems (see Table A2.17). Therefore, systems and schools must invest in updating teachers' knowledge with recent research evidence.
Education systems need to address different beliefs when working with schools
Figure 2.18 highlights that education systems need to focus on different beliefs when working with schools. It shows the percentage of 15-year-old students in schools with a shared mindset about teachers’ responsibility for social and emotional education and the percentage in schools with a shared belief in the academic benefits of social and emotional skills.
The figure indicates that systems with a shared belief in the academic benefits of social and emotional education tend to have a stronger consensus on the role of teachers in fostering these skills. However, convincing staff of the academic impact alone is not sufficient. In only eight systems was there a positive correlation between teachers' belief in the impact of social and emotional skills and their belief that teachers should be responsible for developing these skills (see Table A2.17). No such relationship was found in Chile, Bogotá (Colombia), Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland), Jinan (China), Kudus (Indonesia) or Peru.
Figure 2.18 shows that Peru and Chile need to focus particularly on cultivating a shared sense of responsibility for social and emotional education among school staff. While the belief in academic benefits is relatively widespread, many students attend schools where not all staff feel teachers should be responsible for teaching these skills. Therefore, additional support is needed to encourage teachers to take up this responsibility.
The results also highlight potential in Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to adopt a more transversal approach. Similar to Delhi (India) and Kudus (Indonesia), where most schools follow such an approach, the majority of school staff in Dubai (United Arab Emirates) not only believe in the academic benefits of social and emotional education but also feel that teachers should be responsible for developing these skills.
Furthermore, the figure shows that Emilia-Romagna (Italy), Helsinki (Finland), Jinan (China), and Turin (Italy) need to focus on updating knowledge about the positive benefits of social and emotional learning. Meanwhile, schools, decision-makers, and policymakers in Bogotá (Colombia), Bulgaria, Gunma (Japan), Sobral (Brazil), Spain, and Ukraine must address both the belief in the positive impact of promoting social and emotional skills and the fundamental role that teachers play in fostering these skills.
Percentage of 15-year-old students in schools where staff agreed that teachers should be responsible for developing social and emotional skills and those attending schools whose staff agreed that these skills improve academic outcomes, across sites
Notes: Sites with a significant relationship at a threshold of p < 0.05 between teacher responsibility of developing social and emotional skills and shared mindset of the impact of social and emotional skills on academic outcomes are coloured, sites with non-significant relationship are outlined. See Annex A for information about how the indices on a shared mindset were calculated. When interpreting results about the shared mindset in schools, it is important to consider the variation across sites in terms of the number of schools and teachers represented from each site (see Table A2.29).
Source: OECD, SSES 2023 Database Tables A2.20 and A2.16.
Overall, increasing awareness of teachers’ responsibility still seems to be a task for most sites. In addition, an increase in teacher support is needed. Data from the SSES 2023 suggest that a substantial share of teachers lack preparedness for the challenging task of integrating social and emotional teaching in their work (see Preparing teachers to be champions of social and emotional teaching). Insufficient preparedness can explain why some teachers reject responsibility for students’ social and emotional growth. Indonesia’s wide-ranging Emancipated Learning reform described in Box 2.4 is a promising example that combines a greater emphasis on social and emotional education with strengthened support and empowerment of teachers.
The Merdeka Belajar (Emancipated Learning) reform, rolled out progressively since 2020, aims to enhance educational outcomes by shifting focus to foundational learning and cultivating a joyful, empowering school environment. The reform ranges from early childhood to tertiary education, covering both secular and religious schools. It grants more autonomy and flexibility to schools and teachers and seeks to empower students with agency, as well as engage the entire school community, in line with the country’s traditional social concept of mutual collective responsibility (gotong royong). Focusing on social-emotional education and character building are central elements, aiming at well-rounded, happy individuals equipped for the future. The reform is built on two main sets of policies: an overhaul of the curriculum and assessment and enhancing instructional capacity.
The new Kurikulum Merdeka (Emancipation Curriculum)
The overall curriculum content is reduced by focusing on foundational skills, such as literacy and numeracy, to allow for deeper learning.
Project-based learning (Projek Penguatan Profil Pelajar Pancasila) was introduced to engage students in collaborative projects that address real-world problems, fostering critical thinking, creativity and responsibility.
The curriculum allows schools and teachers more flexibility and autonomy to adapt the curriculum to their context, promoting a more student-centred approach.
More holistic and formative assessments
A Minimum Competency Assessment (AKM) evaluates numeracy and literacy and incorporates questions requiring higher-order thinking.
A character survey gauges students' social and emotional learning and adherence to the Pancasila philosophy, Indonesia's official state ideology.
A learning environment survey assesses factors contributing to the quality of learning in schools.
Digital tools facilitate the use of assessment data, such as the Education Scorecard (Rapor Pendidikan), which is a platform that enables the dissemination of results at different levels of aggregation.
Enhancing instructional capacity
Schools are encouraged to form professional learning communities where teachers can share practices, reflect and learn from each other.
The Master Teacher Programme (Pendidikan Guru Penggerak) aims to develop teacher leaders who can guide their peers in adopting new teaching methods that emphasise student agency, well-being and moral growth.
The Emancipated Teaching Platform (Merdeka Mengajar) provides resources, lesson plans and spaces for teachers to collaborate and share knowledge.
Note: There are two types of schools in Indonesia. Secular schools under the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology (MoECRT) enrol about 85% of primary and secondary students. Religious schools (madrasah) under the Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA) enrol the remaining 15% of students.
Source: OECD (2024[48]), “Transforming education in Indonesia: Examining the landscape of current reforms”, https://doi.org/10.1787/9ff8d407-en.
Action for impact: Cultivate a shared mindset among school staff
Overall, most sites should work on cultivating a shared mindset among school staff to ensure that social and emotional teaching is implemented across subjects and practices in schools. For others (e.g. Dubai [United Arab Emirates]), adjusting schools’ structures to promote social and emotional skills may be worthwhile considering. Results show that many education systems must ramp up efforts to raise awareness among teachers, especially lower secondary education, about their critical role in students' social and emotional learning. Awareness campaigns, along with more support (e.g. training, tools and resources), and establishing social and emotional education as a key topic in regular exchanges among school staff could help all teachers feel ownership of social and emotional education.
Initiatives aimed at increasing awareness about the teachability of social and emotional skills need to target both principals and teachers, particularly in some sites. Investing in cultivating a shared agreement among school staff about the responsibility of the broader community in students’ social and emotional development could be a promising starting point for fruitful partnerships with the world outside school. While some sites more than others must raise awareness of the teachability and responsibility of different actors in students’ socio-emotional development, campaigns, professional exchanges and trainings are needed in all sites, particularly in lower secondary education, to elevate school staff’ awareness of the wide-ranging impact of social and emotional skills.
Following the discussion in Chapter 1 on the importance of social and emotional education, the skills targeted by each education system, Chapter 2 has identified key areas for improving social and emotional education in school for each system. These include improving the promotion of social and emotional learning in both traditional and virtual classrooms, and better preparing and supporting teachers for this task. The SSES results discussed in the chapter also show that many systems need to invest in creating structures to support social and emotional education, encouraging extra-curricular activities, and cultivating a shared mindset on the value of these skills. The next chapter will expand on how the wider school environment provides support, ensures safety, and contributes to students' social and emotional development.
Online tables for each chapter can be accessed via the StatLink.
References
[37] Agencia de Calidad de la Educación (2023), Marco de Evaluación de los Aprendizajes Socioemocionales, https://diagnosticointegral.agenciaeducacion.cl/documentos/Marco_Evaluacion_Socioemocional.pdf.
[25] Burns, T. and F. Gottschalk (eds.) (2020), Education in the Digital Age: Healthy and Happy Children, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1209166a-en.
[4] Chatterjee Singh, N. and A. Duraiappah (eds.) (2020), Rethinking Learning: A Review of Social and Emotional Learning for Education Systems, UNESCO MGIEP, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373890.
[46] Department of Environment Government of NCT of Delhi (2024), Eco Clubs in Schools and Colleges, https://environment.delhi.gov.in/environment/eco-clubs-schools-and-colleges.
[39] Durlak, J., J. Mahoney and A. Boyle (2022), “What we know, and what we need to find out about universal, school-based social and emotional learning programs for children and adolescents: A review of meta-analyses and directions for future research”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 148/11-12, pp. 765-782, https://doi.org/10.1037/BUL0000383.
[6] Durlak, J. et al. (2011), “The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions”, Child Development, Vol. 82/1, pp. 405-432, https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-8624.2010.01564.X.
[42] Durlak, J., R. Weissberg and M. Pachan (2010), “A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents”, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 45/3-4, pp. 294-309, https://doi.org/10.1007/S10464-010-9300-6/TABLES/4.
[7] EEF (2021), Feedback, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/feedback (accessed on 20 June 2024).
[41] EEF (2021), Improving Social and Emotional Learning in Primary Schools - Guidance Report, https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/production/eef-guidance-reports/primary-sel/EEF_Social_and_Emotional_Learning.pdf?v=1723498336.
[13] EEF (2021), Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning - Guidance Report, Education Endowment Foundation, https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/production/eef-guidance-reports/feedback/Teacher_Feedback_to_Improve_Pupil_Learning.pdf?v=1722527173.
[2] European Commission (2021), A Formative, Whole-School Approach to the Assessment of Social and Emotional Education in the EU: Analytical Report, Publications Office of the European Union, https://doi.org/10.2766/506737.
[40] European Commission (2018), Strengthening Social and Emotional Education as a Core Curricular Area Across the EU: A Review of the International Evidence: Analytical Report, Publications Office of the European Union, https://doi.org/10.2766/664439.
[47] Feldman, A. and J. Matjasko (2005), “The role of school-based extracurricular activities in adolescent development: A comprehensive review and future directions”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 75/2, pp. 159-210, https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002159.
[21] Gedikoglu, M. (2021), Social and Emotional Learning: An Evidence Review and Synthesis of Key Issues, Education Policy Institute, https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/social-and-emotional-learning/.
[29] Jones, S. et al. (2018), “Preparing for Effective SEL Implementation”, https://wallacefoundation.org/report/preparing-effective-sel-implementation (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[3] Jones, S. and S. Bouffard (2012), “Social and emotional learning in schools: From programs to strategies and commentaries”, Social Policy Report, Vol. 26/4, pp. 1-33, https://doi.org/10.1002/J.2379-3988.2012.TB00073.X.
[35] Laura, M. et al. (2016), Taking Stock of Programs to Develop Socioemotional Skills A Systematic Review of Program Evidence Human Development, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://hdl.handle.net/10986/24737.
[10] Lüdtke, O. and O. Köller (2002), “Individuelle Bezugsnormorientierung und soziale Vergleiche im Mathematikunterricht”, Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, Vol. 34/3, pp. 156-166, https://doi.org/10.1026//0049-8637.34.3.156.
[9] Ma, L., L. Xiao and K. Hau (2022), “Teacher feedback, disciplinary climate, student self-concept, and reading achievement: A multilevel moderated mediation model”, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 79, p. 101602, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2022.101602.
[43] Marsh, H. and S. Kleitman (2002), “Extracurricular school activities: The good, the bad, and the nonlinear”, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 72/4, pp. 464-515, https://doi.org/10.17763/HAER.72.4.051388703V7V7736.
[16] OECD (2024), Social and Emotional Skills for Better Lives: Findings from the OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/35ca7b7c-en.
[48] OECD (2024), “Transforming education in Indonesia: Examining the landscape of current reforms”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 88, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9ff8d407-en.
[27] OECD (2023), OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7fbfff45-en.
[24] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en.
[44] OECD (2022), Trends Shaping Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22187049.
[17] OECD (2021), Beyond Academic Learning: First Results from the Survey of Social and Emotional Skills, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/92a11084-en.
[23] OECD (2021), Embedding Values and Attitudes in Curriculum: Shaping a Better Future, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/aee2adcd-en.
[26] OECD (2021), OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/589b283f-en.
[38] OECD (2020), “Curriculum (re)design A series of thematic reports from the OECD Education 2030 project”, Overview brochure, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/2-1-curriculum-design/brochure-thematic-reports-on-curriculum-redesign.pdf (accessed on 21 June 2024).
[33] OECD (2020), PISA 2018 Results (Volume V): Effective Policies, Successful Schools, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ca768d40-en.
[32] OECD (2020), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/19cf08df-en.
[19] OECD (2016), Low-Performing Students: Why They Fall Behind and How To Help Them Succeed, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264250246-en.
[36] OECD (2015), Skills for Social Progress: The Power of Social and Emotional Skills, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264226159-en.
[20] OECD (2012), Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264130852-en.
[11] OECD (2005), Formative Assessment: Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264007413-en (accessed on 20 June 2024).
[34] Oliveira, S. et al. (2021), “Impacts of social and emotional learning interventions for teachers on teachers’ outcomes: A systematic review with meta-analysis”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 12, p. 677217, https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2021.677217/BIBTEX.
[18] Orth, U., R. Erol and E. Luciano (2018), “Development of self-esteem from age 4 to 94 Years: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 144/10, pp. 1045-1080, https://doi.org/10.1037/BUL0000161.
[22] Paniagua, A. and D. Istance (2018), Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments: The Importance of Innovative Pedagogies, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085374-en.
[12] Pekrun, R. et al. (2014), “The power of anticipated feedback: Effects on students’ achievement goals and achievement emotions”, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 29, pp. 115-124, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2013.09.002.
[45] Sarabhai, K. and S. Purohit (2023), Seeds of Change: State of the Education Report for India 2023; Education to Address Climate Change, UNESCO, New Delhi, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387156.
[30] Schonert-Reichl, K. (2017), “Social and emotional learning and teachers”, The Future of Children, Vol. 27/1, pp. 137-155, https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2017.0007.
[8] Schwab, S., S. Markus and S. Hassani (2022), “Teachers’ feedback in the context of students’ social acceptance, students’ well-being in school and students’ emotions”, Educational Studies, https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2021.2023475.
[5] Steponavičius, M., C. Gress-Wright and A. Linzarini (2023), “Social and emotional skills: Latest evidence on teachability and impact on life outcomes”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 304, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ba34f086-en.
[31] Tschannen-Moran, M., A. Hoy and W. Hoy (1998), “Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 68/2, pp. 202-248, https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002202.
[1] Ulferts, H. (2023), “Schools as hubs for social and emotional learning – Are schools and teachers ready?”, OECD Education Spotlights, Vol. 4, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f6d12db7-en (accessed on 6 June 2023).
[28] Ulferts, H. (ed.) (2021), Teaching as a Knowledge Profession: Studying Pedagogical Knowledge across Education Systems, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e823ef6e-en.
[14] Vincent-Lancrin, S. et al. (2019), Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking: What it Means in School, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/62212c37-en.
[15] Yeh, S. (2017), Solving the Achievement Gap, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58767-1.