Running head: SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

Action Research: Social and Emotional Impact and its impact on Class
Discussions
Emily Stacy
University of New England
September 13, 2016

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

Action Research: Social and Emotional Learning and its Impact

on Student Participation in Class Discussions
Social and Emotional Learning consists of many things. It
includes the way in which teachers interact with students in a way that
takes into consideration their emotions and their lives outside of
school. It also consists of building strong, positive relationships with
students in order to boost student confidence and achievement. There
are ways to implement social and emotional learning into the
classroom and into academic lessons, for instance, teaching students
about the brain and ways to manage their anxiety. Social and
emotional learning can also include trust-building activities where
students feel more connected and able to trust their classmates. These
activities include asking students to share how certain words make
them feel. They also include sharing exercises and games that create a
bond with other students. It helps them feel empathy for others and
helps students to understand each other and recognize similarities.
Student choice is another form of social and emotional learning.
Allowing students to set their own classroom rules is critical to making
students feel as though their voice is heard, and that they are in a safe
environment. Setting classroom norms with students helps to create
rules that mean something to students and rules they are more likely
to abide by because they can take ownership of them.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

This study takes place at Sacopee Valley High School in a twelfth

grade social studies classroom. The school district is in Maine and is
small, public, and sixty-nine percent of students have free or reduced
lunch. The course title is Senior Seminar and included as part of this
class is the goal to become a clear and effective communicator and an
integrative and informed thinker. To meet these goals, one of the
assessments of the course are Socratic Seminars where students
discuss their responses to questions on a given discussion topic. The
selection group is a class of twenty-one students in a mixed ability
classroom. This group includes seven students with an Individualized
Education Plan. The researcher is the classroom teacher with no
educational technicians in the room. This is her sixth year of teaching,
but only her third year of teaching this course. In the past two years,
the researcher has had students participate in Socratic Seminars as a
form of class discussions but noticed that it is difficult to get 100%
participation from students. After attending several conferences over
the past year on social and emotional learning, the researcher believes
there are many benefits to implementing trust-building activities, and
setting classroom norms with students.
Problem Statement
Although Senior Seminar benefits from having mixed-ability
grouping, students often do not trust each other enough to participate
in discussions. Based on a survey and interviews with support staff,

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

many students feel as though they will be judged by others for

participating in discussions because of their views. In an interview with
this researcher, the Wilson Reading Instructor for Sacopee Valley High
School reported that her students felt as though if they spoke in
Socratic Discussions they would be judged by students who they feel
as smarter than they are (C. Kilgore, Personal Interview). Additionally,
in the first Socratic Seminar of the year, of the 21 students in the class,
only16 spoke during the discussion. Five people spoke almost two or
three times as much as the 11 other people who spoke. Not only is not
every student speaking in these discussions Three students spoke only
once or twice in the Socratic discussion.. In a survey of students in this
class, only six students expressed that they felt totally comfortable
sharing their point of view with the class. Five students expressed they
did not feel comfortable at all expressing their opinions to the class.
During the survey when students were asked to write why they did not
speak more in class discussions, five students reported that they felt
like their opinion would be laughed at or not taken seriously.
Research Questions
Due to the strong impact social and emotional learning can have
on students, the researcher hopes to learn the ways in which including
social and emotional learning, including trust building activities and
setting classroom norms, can have a positive impact on the number of
students who participate in Socratic Seminars. Additionally, the

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

researcher hopes to learn the impact of social and emotional learning

in the number of times students participate in Socratic Seminars
resulting from the trust building activities, and setting classroom
norms.
Hypothesis
Following five weeks of implementing trust-building activities and
setting classroom norms, all students will show an increase in the
number of times they participate in class discussions in the form of
Socratic Seminar compared to the first Socratic Seminar they
participated in before implementation.
Methodology
Socratic seminars are an assessment tool that allows students to
express their beliefs and opinions and discuss those opinions with their
classmates. Students are often very nervous to speak in front of their
classmates about their ideas and thoughts. Some students speak a lot,
while others are too nervous to say anything at all. Through
participating in trust-building activities and creating classroom norms,
the researcher hopes student participation will improve. This is a mixed
method study. Students will be interviewed, a reading teacher will be
interviewed, and data will be recorded to show improvement or lack of
improvement of each student. This was chosen to get a full range of
how students are feeling as a class and if it is leading to more
participation.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

Research Design
The researcher wants to compare how many times students
speak during Socratic Seminar after implementation of social and
emotional learning, compared to the first Socratic Seminar in the class.
She also wants to determine how many students are able to meet the
standard with a 3 or exceed it with a 4. The researcher will
implement trust-building activities with the entire class in one large
group, create classroom norms, and work in talking with students at an
individual level to build a relationship. Students in the selection group
will work on these activities directly with the teacher and the entire
class. This will be a mixed-method action research study because the
researcher will be using direct observation and a quantitative method.
The quantitative measure will be counting how many times a student
speaks during a Socratic Seminar. Direct observation and interviews
will be used during and after the study.
Data Collection
The researcher will keep track of how many times a student
speaks during this discussion by marking a point by their name on a
grading sheet. She will then add up the amount of points each student
has and compare each score to the first Socratic Seminar. Using those
numbers, she will count the number of students who met the standard
with a 3 or higher to see if there are more people involved at a higher
level in the conversation. Student behavior will also be observed

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

during the Socratic Seminar. The number of times students use their
phone, have a side conversation, or have their head down will be
recorded in note form. This will indicate the level of interest these
students have in the conversation. In addition, the researcher will also
conduct a short interview with each student in the class to determine
how they felt the Socratic Seminar went and how comfortable they feel
with other students in the class. Lastly, an interview will take place
between the Wilson Reading Teacher and the researcher to see if there
has been any change in the way her two students feel in the class.
According to the researchers colleague who also has students
participate in Socratic Seminars and has been trained in social and
emotional learning, the data collection plan is solid and will be useful in
determining the answers to the research questions. She suggested
having another teacher in the room to also score the students and
make the data more valid. However, due to unavailability another
teacher was not able to participate in this grading.
Instruments
Socratic Seminar is a tool that will be used to measure most of
the data from the action research study. Students are graded on a
scale according to how many times they participate in the seminar. The
grading scale is dependent on the highest number of points a student
earns in a seminar, and it is scaled from there in ranges. Each
students name is written on a piece of paper and the teacher marks a

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

point each times a student participates. At the end of the seminar,

they are given a grade based on the range. At the end of the seminar,
they are given a score of a 1 (does not meet standard), 2 (partially
meets standard), 3 (meets standard), or a 4 (exceeds standard). The
data will be displayed in a spreadsheet with the students previous
score and their score after implementation with any notes taken during
the Socratic seminar.
Student interviews will be done individually during an individual
activity in class after the Socratic Seminar takes place. Students will be
asked to rank on a scale of one to ten how comfortable they feel
speaking in front of their classmates, what they think the benefits or
negatives are of the trust building activities and the class rules, and
how they feel in the classroom. Responses will be recorded.
In addition to the student interviews, the Wilson Reading teacher
will be interviewed and asked if her students have reported any
feelings toward the atmosphere in the classroom and if they feel more
comfortable participating in class discussions.
Table 1.
Triangulation Matrix
Data Source
Research Question
3

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

1.Number of
students who
participate?

Spreadsheet

Student Interview

2.Number of times
Spreadsheet
Teacher Interview
each student
participates?

Student Interview

Data Analysis Plan

The researcher plans to analyze the data by creating a chart with
the comparison for each student in terms of the Socratic Seminar. They
receive a number of points in the Socratics and in a spreadsheet the
researcher plans to display the comparison for each student based on
the fist Socratic Seminar and the last Socratic Seminar. This
spreadsheet data displays their score (1-4) and how many times each
student spoke.
In terms of the interview questions, the researcher plans to do a
narrative description of the interview questions asked to the students
and the Wilson Reading teacher.
Sample Selection
The selection group is a class of twenty-one seniors in a mixed
ability classroom. This group includes seven students with an
Individualized Education Plan. There are no educational technicians in
the room. This group was chosen for the study because while it has
seven students with an IEP, there are also 5 students in the class who
are in the top ten of their senior class. There are students who range

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

10

from the alternative education classroom and are not usually in a

regular education classroom to the possible valedictorian of the senior
class and many ability levels in between.
Results
Social and emotional learning techniques, such as trust-building
activities and setting classroom norms, were used to increase student
participation in Socratic seminars. Socratic seminars are class
discussions in which students are awarded points for voicing their
thoughts and opinions. Students have voiced they feel shy about
speaking in front of the class and in order for them to gain more
confidence they participated in trust-building activities and created
classroom norms as a class. Data was collected from the first Socratic
seminar the students participated in and the Socratic seminar that
took place after implementation. Students were also interviewed about
their comfort level in front of the class and the Wilson reading teacher
was interviewed, who works with several students in the class who
have an IEP.
Findings
The data from the Socratic seminar from before implementation
of my study and the comparison data from after implementation of the
trust-building activities and classroom norms can be seen in Table 1.
The students were all given a number and are only identifiable to the
researcher, which can be seen in the first column. The second column

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

11

is the score (1-4) that the students received on their first Socratic
seminar. The third column is the number of times the student spoke
during the discussion. Columns four and five are the comparative data
from the Socratic Seminar that took place after implementation.
Table 1
Summary of student Socratic Seminar results

Student
Socratic Before
total points

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

# of total points

1
1
2
2
3
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
4
4
3
4
4
2

1
1
2
3
4
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
6
7
4
5
6
3

Socratic After

4
1
1
3
3
1
4
1
1
3
1
1
4
4
1
4
4
2

#of

15
2
3
9
6
1
19
2
1
5
1
2
12
15
2
19
19
4

Students were given a score of a one through four based on how

many times they spoke during the seminar. The scores were given
based on four ranges of points. The points were recorded by the
researcher by hand during the seminars.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

12

Each student was interviewed after the Socratic seminar to gain

perspective on how each student felt in terms of comfort and
confidence in front of the class. The survey can be seen in Appendix A.
In response to question one of the survey, five students ranked their
comfort level at a 10, one student ranked their comfort at a 9, four
students ranked their comfort level at a 7, two students ranked their
comfort level at a 6, one student at a 5, one student at a 4, two
students at a 2, and 2 students at a 1.
In response to questions two in the student survey, students
reported benefits being that trust-building activities were fun, they
were different than the normal school work, they helped you learn
more about people in your class, and they helped you see similarities
between them and their classmates. The advantages of the classroom
norms reported were that they felt like they had a say in the classroom
and that they felt like people would follow them. Disadvantages were
that class norms took time in class to set up and not everyone agreed
on everyone. Disadvantages of the class norms reported were that
students did always feel comfortable participating in them because it
involved speaking in front of the class at times.
Question three asked students how they felt in the classroom.
Students reported feeling shy, comfortable, anxious about speaking in
front of people, and welcomed.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

13

In an interview with the Wilson Reading teacher, she reported her

students still feeling shy to speak in front of the class and fear that
their opinions are not smart enough.
Discussion
Table one compares the results between the first Socratic
seminar and the last. This shows that most students increased their
scores from before implementation to after. Out of eighteen students,
eight increased their scores, eight stayed the same, and two students
went down in their scores. One student went from a one to a three, and
one student went from a one to a four. One student also went from a 3
down to a one. Four students who did not speak at all in the first
Socratic seminar, spoke at least one time. Every student in the class
participated in the seminar.
According to student interviews, over half of the class ranked
their comfort level above a five. One student reported feeling
comfortable and said her level of comfort was a ten, but scored a one
in the Socratic seminar. However, the students who scored a three or a
four in the seminar reported having a comfort level of a six or higher.
This could mean that either the trust-building activities or classroom
norms worked to increase student comfort to speak in front of people.
Students who scored higher in the Socratic seminar tended to
see more advantages in the trust-building activities than negatives.
Students who reported that they liked the activities because it helped

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

14

them learn more about the students in their class scored a three or a
four in the Socratic seminar. The student that said that it took up class
time scored highly in the Socratic seminar. This might mean that the
student is motivated by grades so they participated because they have
confidence and they wanted a good grade. For this student, the trustbuilding and norms probably did not make a difference. It shows that
not every student saw the value in the activities.
The students who reported feeling welcomed and/or comfortable
in the class, scored a three or a four in the Socratic seminars. Another
student who scored a four in the Socratic seminar reported feeling
nervous to speak in front of students in the class. Although this is out
of the ordinary, the student may still feel nervous but have more
confidence to complete the assessment than they did previously.
In terms of the interview with the Wilson Reading teacher, the
students felt more comfortable than they did previously. However, they
still feel a lot of hesitation to speak. It was a good sign that they spoke
for the first time in a class discussion and is a huge step in their
learning. These students have been absent more than others and still
improved. This could be a sign that it might not be the activities but
rather a natural progression in terms of comfort as the class is in
session.
The data confirms the hypothesis that trust-building activities
and creating classroom norms increases the amount of students who

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

15

participate in Socratic seminars and it increases the number of times

each student participates.
Limitations
There are a few factors that may have impacted this study. First,
there were two students who missed at least four class periods while
this intervention was taking place. These were also the two students
who were not present when the classroom norms were created. These
students did participate in the seminar but their increase in score may
not have been a direct impact of the strategies.
Another limitation was interruptions in the school days. During
implementation, there were several class periods that were shortened
because of assemblies or early release days. Also, Veterans Day and a
teacher workshop day took time away from the study.
Lastly, It was important to look mostly look at the scores because
the discussion lasted longer during the second seminar than it did the
first. The length of the discussions were different because the first one
took place on a day with a shorter class period. However, the Socratics
can still be compared because of the one through four rating. That is
based on comparatively how many times students speak in the
seminar.
Summary and Further Research
The findings conclude that student participation went up after
implementation of trust-building activities and creating classroom

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

16

norms. However, it is difficult to tell with this data if it was the

classroom norms, the trust-building activities, or the combination of
the two that increased student participation. It is also difficult to tell if
it is the implementation of these strategies or the natural progression
of the class that made students more comfortable.
More students participated in the second Socratic seminar than
did the first seminar. In the second seminar, each student spoke. Also,
the students who scored highly on the Socratic seminar reported
feeling comfortable in front of the class with the exception of a few
students. Students also reported mostly positive things about the trustbuilding activities and classroom norms.
Further research may include not implementing classroom norms
and trust-building activities at different times to determine which one
is more effective. This might mean beginning the school year creating
classroom norms and start implementing trust-building activities halfway through the year to see if participation increases. It would also be
interesting to have data simply based on a natural progression of
comfort without the trust-building activities and norms. This could be
done at the start of a school year and then implementation of these
strategies could start during the second semester to see if there are
any changes.
This data will be useful when talking to colleagues and staff
about the impacts of social and emotional learning and the impact it

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

17

can have. Other classes could try implementing this strategy and their
classrooms to see if the data is similar.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

Appendix A
Student Interview
Social and Emotional Learning
Rank on a scale of one to ten how comfortable you feel speaking in
front of their classmates.
What do you think the benefits or negatives are of the trust building
activities and the class rules?
How do you feel in the classroom?

18

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

19

References
Brackett, M. A., Kremenitzer, J. P., & Maurer, M. (2011). Creating
emotionally literate
classrooms: An introduction to the RULER approach to social and
emotional
learning. Port Chester, NY: Dude Pub.
Bridgeland, J., Buce, M., & Hariharan, A. (2013). The Missing Piece: A
National
Teacher Survey on How Social and Emotional Learning Can
Empower Children and Transform Schools. A Report for CASEL.
Executive Summary (Rep.). Washington D.C. Retrieved
September 18, 2016, from ERIC Document Reproduction Service.
(ED553369).
Esquith, R. (2007, March). Build trust, Banish fear. Scholastic, 116(6), 13.
RetrievedSeptember 22, 2016,
http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/instructor/subscribe.asp
elterbran, V. R., & Strahler, B. R. (2013). Children as global citizens: A
Socratic
approach to teaching character. Childhood Education, 89(5),
310-314.
doi:10.1080/00094056.2013.830902

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

20

Jones, S. M., Bailey, R., & Jacob, R. (2014). Social-emotional learning is

essential to
classroom management. Phi Delta Kappan, 96(2), 19-24.
doi:10.1177/0031721714553405
Iizuka, C. A., Barrett, P. M., Gillies, R., Cook, C. R., & Marinovic, W.
(2014). A
Combined intervention targeting both teachers and students
social-emotional
skills: Preliminary evaluation of students outcomes. Australian
Journal of
Guidance and Counselling, 24(02), 152-166.
doi:10.1017/jgc.2014.12
Souers, K., & Hall, P. A. (2016). Fostering resilient learners: Strategies
for creating a
trauma-sensitive classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Torrente, C., Nathanson, L., Rivers, S., & Bracket, M. (2015). Testing
causal impacts of
a school-based SEL intervention using instrumental variable
techniques.
Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1-6. Retrieved
September 18, 2016, http://www.sree.org.
Waajid, B., Garner, P., & Owen, J. (2013, November). Infusing social
emotional

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

21

learning into the teacher education curriculum. International

Journal of
Emotional Education, 5(2), 31-48. Retrieved September 18, 2016,
(EJ1085617).
Yoder, N. (2014, February). Self-assessing social and emotional
instruction and
competencies: A tool for teachers. American Institutes for
Research, 1-22.
Retrieved September 18, 2016, (ED553369).

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING

22