Social Emotional Learning (SEL)

Social Emotional Learning (SEL) has become a widely adopted framework in public schools, aiming to foster students’ emotional intelligence, interpersonal skills, and personal development. From a traditional Christian perspective, however, SEL raises significant concerns about its underlying ideologies and their compatibility with biblical teachings. This analysis integrates a Christian worldview to evaluate SEL’s impact on education and child development, emphasizing the need for discernment in navigating its influence.

Understanding Social Emotional Learning

According to the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), SEL is defined as “the process through which all young people and adults acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions.” This framework, often visualized as the “CASEL wheel,” centers on five core competencies: self-awareness (understanding one’s emotions and identity), self-management (regulating emotions and behaviors), social awareness (empathizing with others and understanding social norms), relationship skills (building healthy relationships), and responsible decision-making (making ethical choices). CASEL advocates for integrating SEL across classrooms, schools, families, and communities to create equitable learning environments that support students’ social, emotional, and academic growth.

Proponents argue that SEL equips students to handle stress, resolve conflicts, and thrive in diverse social settings, with research indicating an average 11% increase in academic performance for students in SEL programs. The framework emphasizes systemic implementation, fostering partnerships among schools, families, and communities to promote skills like empathy, emotional regulation, and collaborative problem-solving. CASEL’s 2020 update to its definition further emphasizes advancing educational equity, encouraging students to examine social norms, address inequities, and develop cultural competency, aligning SEL with broader social justice goals.

Key Concerns from a Christian Perspective

While SEL’s stated goals of enhancing emotional and academic outcomes appear commendable, its implementation often introduces ideological challenges to the historic Christian worldview. SEL often serves as a vehicle for introducing progressive concepts, such as critical social theories, into classrooms under the guise of emotional competency. These theories, which include elements of critical race theory, queer theory, and intersectionality, emphasize identity-based frameworks that prioritize subjective experiences over objective truth.

SEL can embed progressive concepts like intersectionality and fluid gender identities, encouraging students to define themselves through secular lenses of race, gender, or sexual orientation rather than as male or female individuals created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27). While SEL was originally marketed as a means to help children develop emotional intelligence—such as teaching conflict resolution and character development—it has evolved to integrate controversial social agendas, often positioning schools as the primary source of a child’s values. This shift can conflict with the Christian belief that education should align with biblical principles, prioritizing the formation of a child’s character and worldview under the authority of God and parents (Deuteronomy 6:6-7, Proverbs 22:6).

Here are four specific concerns:

1. Worldview Conflict and Ideological Underpinnings

   
   

   SEL often promotes concepts like intersectionality and fluid gender identities, encouraging students to explore their identities through lenses of race, gender, or sexual orientation, often presenting these as fluid or self-determined categories rather than as individuals who are male or female created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27). It often emphasizes subjective feelings over objective truth, steering the child's thinking toward a secular, relativistic perspective thereby undermining a child's Christ-centered understanding of their identity and purpose. For example, SEL’s integration with frameworks that assume children are sexual from birth or seek to dismantle norms aligned with biblical teachings on gender and sexuality (Matthew 19:4-6) creates a fundamental conflict with Christian doctrine.

2. Erosion of Parental Authority

   
   

   A core Christian principle is that parents are the primary stewards of their children’s education and spiritual formation (Ephesians 6:4). SEL’s systemic approach, which integrates schools, families, and community organizations, often positions schools as the central hub of a child’s life, potentially usurping parental roles. Partnerships with external organizations may introduce ideologies conflicting with Christian values, such as reproductive health services provided without parental consent. Additionally, SEL’s data collection practices, such as wellness surveys, encroach on family privacy and could enable systems that monitor and shape children’s beliefs, further undermining parental authority.

3. Integration with Comprehensive Sexuality Education

   
   

   SEL’s connection to frameworks promoting expansive views of sexuality raises significant concerns. These frameworks may include graphic content, normalize controversial practices, and teach young children that consent is the primary ethical standard for sexual activity. Such approaches, rooted in ideologies that challenge traditional norms around marriage and family, contradict Christian teachings on the sanctity of marriage and the importance of purity and modesty (Hebrews 13:4, 1 Timothy 4:12). For Christians, this exposure risks compromising children’s innocence.

   
   
   
   

4. Government Overreach and Loss of Educational Freedom

   
   

   Proposals like Educational Savings Accounts (ESAs) aim to decentralize education but carry risks of government oversight. Schools accepting such funds may face mandates to adopt SEL or similar curricula, mirroring the experience of institutions that, after accepting government funding, were pressured to implement progressive policies. From a Christian perspective, this underscores the importance of educational freedom and parental control. Government involvement in education through frameworks like SEL risks imposing secular ideologies that conflict with a biblical worldview, limiting parents’ ability to raise their children according to their faith.

   
   

Conclusion

From a traditional Christian perspective, Social Emotional Learning poses significant challenges due to its integration with progressive ideologies, erosion of parental authority, and potential to reshape children’s worldviews in ways that conflict with biblical truth. While SEL’s stated goals of fostering emotional health may appear appealing, its implementation often serves as a vehicle for secular agendas that undermine Christian values. Christians are called to be vigilant stewards of their children’s education, prioritizing biblical principles over secular frameworks. By trusting in God’s sovereignty and adhering to their God-given role, parents can navigate the challenges of SEL to raise their children in alignment with their faith.

For more on this topic:

• Read the book, The Queering of the American Child

• Watch this video: