Search

The need for social and emotional learning (SEL) has never been so clear. The growing understanding of its benefits has been made more evident by the stronger focus of state, district, and school leaders, educators, and families to leverage SEL as a strategy to promote emotional well-being, to combat systemic and interpersonal inequities, and to engage students in positive learning environments. With this urgency to use SEL practices, now is the time to ensure a focus on creating environments and experiences that promote social and emotional development and deepening understanding of the motivational factors that promote student and adult success. Motivation researchers have been studying the motivational elements – and associated interventions – that better equip youth and adults to engage in their learning environments, suggesting the importance that the two fields learn with and from each other. The introductory chapter of the volume, Motivating the SEL Field Forward Through Equity, explores the intersections and accelerators of the two fields to create optimal learning environments and experiences for all youth. Specifically, we provide a high-level overview of the two fields, including ways each field takes into account personal development in relation to context and culture. We further explore ways in which the two fields intersect, elevating the importance of understanding the role of equity and excellence in research and practice. We then focus on one approach that we believe elevates equity of voice in research – research–practice partnerships. Finally, we highlight how this volume is organized.

Social and emotional learning (SEL) has become more central to education because of demand from educators, parents, students, and business leaders alongside rigorous research showing broad, positive impacts for students and adults. However, all approaches to SEL are not equal. Systemic SEL is an approach to create equitable learning conditions that actively involve all Pre-K to Grade 12 students in learning and practicing social, emotional, and academic competencies. These conditions require aligned policies, resources, and actions at state and district levels that encourage local schools and communities to build the personal and professional capacities of adults to: implement and continuously improve evidence-based programs and practices; create an inclusive culture that fosters caring relationships and youth voice, agency, and character; and support coordinated school-family-community partnerships to enhance student development. Promoting social and emotional competencies-including the abilities to understand and manage emotions, achieve positive goals, show caring and concern for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions-are important for success at school and in life. In this article, we summarize key concepts and evidence for systemic SEL. Next, we explain interrelated Theories of Action and resources developed by the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) to implement and continuously improve systemic SEL in schools, districts, and states. We discuss research on nested, interacting settings and processes involved in systemic SEL at proximal (classrooms, schools, families, and communities) and distal (districts, states, national, and international) ecological levels. We conclude with recommendations for future SEL research, practice, and policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Classroom activities aimed at changing students’ identity-based motivation (IBM) improve student outcomes by helping students experience school as the path to their adult future identities and their difficulties along the way as signals of the importance of schoolwork. One way to scale these effects would be to have teachers deliver IBM activities. Hence, we asked if, after a brief two-day training, teacher-delivered IBM intervention could meet fidelity standards and if attaining more fidelity matters. We trained all eighth grade teachers in two middle schools (N = 211 students). We used Dane and Schneider’s (1988) five-component fidelity model and Durlak and DuPre’s (2008) empirically derived threshold and practical maximum standards for fidelity. We found that most classrooms (88%) and students (89%) received IBM intervention at-or-above threshold standard, implying that teacher-based IBM delivery is viable. Moreover, investing in improving fidelity is worthwhile; above-threshold fidelity improved core grade-point-average and reduced risk of course failure.

ImmunoGen’s newest antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) design uses the novel maytansinoid linker-payload, DM21-C that bears a peptidase/protease cleavable linker. These ADCs show good bystander killing of proximal antigen negative cells, suggesting the generation of cell-permeable catabolites. The goal of this study was to identify the catabolites generated upon incubation in antigen-positive cancer cells (both cell pellet and media), in mouse plasma, as well as in in vitro catabolic systems. Upon incubation with a cysteine-conjugated DM21-C ADC, the small molecule fraction was extracted with an organic solvent and analyzed by high resolution mass spectrometry after chromatographic separation. Through comparison to reference standards, mass spectral signal extraction of possible products, and database search of unknown peaks, the potential in vitro catabolite products of DM21-C conjugate were identified. Information on linker-payload stability in these model systems, including plasma stability, in vitro metabolism of the ADC, and catabolic products that were both retained and effluxed from cancer cells was obtained. As a result, we identified DM51 (the thiol- resulting from self-immolation of the cleaved linker-payload) as a major catabolite of the DM21-C ADC. Citation Format: Janet Lau, Paulin Salomon, Kerstin Sinkevicius, Juliet Costoplus, Megan Fuller, Raymond Xu, Stuart Hicks, Ravi Chari, Wayne Widdison, Nicholas Yoder, Thomas Keating. LC-MS based catabolite identification study of an ADC with DM21-C, a novel maytansinoid linker-payload [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 538.

Ample correlational evidence exists that perceived unfair treatment is negatively related to well-being, health, and goal striving but the underlying process is unclear. We hypothesized that effects are due in part to contextual priming of prevention focus and the negative consequences of chronic prevention-focused vigilance. Indeed, reasonable responses to unfair treatment—to avoid situations in which it occurs or if this is not possible, confront it head on—fit prevention self-regulatory focus response patterns. Results from three experiments support this notion. Priming stigmatized social category membership heightened students’ prevention (not promotion) focus (n = 117). Priming non-stigmatized social category membership (i.e., white) did not change prevention focus (n = 46). Priming prevention (not promotion) increased perceptions of unfair treatment (and aroused prevention-relevant fight or flight responses) in response to a negative ambiguous job situation among low and moderate income adults (n = 112).

People do not always take action to promote health, engaging instead in unhealthy habits and reporting fatalism about health. One important mechanism underlying these patterns involves identity-based motivation (D. Oyserman, 2007), the process by which content of social identities influences beliefs about in-group goals and strategies. Seven studies show the effect of identity-based motivation on health. Racial-ethnic minority participants view health promotion behaviors as White middle class and unhealthy behaviors as in-group defining (Studies 1 and 2). Priming race-ethnicity (and low socioeconomic status) increases health fatalism and reduces access to health knowledge (Studies 3 and 4). Perceived efficacy of health-promoting activities is undermined when racial-ethnic minority participants who identify unhealthy behavior as in-group defining are asked to consider their similarities to (middle-class) Whites (Studies 5-7).