Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Emotional Learning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Radnor audit recommends embedding social-emotional learning districtwide and sharpening executive‑functioning instruction
Summary
A district SEAL audit presented to the Radnor Township School District Curriculum Committee recommends consistent definitions and K–12 alignment, embedding social-emotional practices in academic instruction and a focused effort on executive‑functioning supports, after yearlong review and staff focus groups.
Dr. Fowler, presenting the audit findings to the Radnor Township School District Curriculum Committee on June 2, said the district completed a K–12 review of social, emotional and academic learning (SEAL) and aimed to ‘‘take a comprehensive look at it K through 12 and then … what recommendations do we have to move forward.’’
The audit team — which included Dr. Young and Dr. Kierney — told the committee the district used focus groups, existing program inventories and external research (the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, CASEL) to map current practice and identify gaps. ‘‘Districts that commit to and value social and emotional learning,’’ Dr. Young said, ‘‘focus on instructor supports, student engagement, and future‑ready skills like communication and problem solving.’’
Why it matters: The audit frames SEAL as both a set of classroom practices (for example, morning meetings, responsive classroom techniques and restorative practices) and as a set of curricular supports that should be embedded across subjects rather than taught only as a stand‑alone module. Presenters argued that a unified vocabulary and clear K–12 alignment will help middle and high schools build on what elementary teachers are already doing.
Key recommendations and specifics: The audit team recommended the district - adopt common definitions (distinguishing programs vs. practices) so staff use consistent terminology; - embed SEAL practices in core academic instruction and use MTSS tiers for targeted supports; - prioritize executive‑functioning instruction (goal setting, planning, monitoring and reflection) as a leverage point for high‑performing students; and - pilot or carefully select engagement/screener tools only when the data will clearly inform instruction.
Programs already in place include Second Step at K–8, counseling and resilience groups, therapy dogs in some schools, executive‑functioning classes at middle school, and the Radnor Academy for students who need a more flexible schedule.
Board members pressed for clarity on screeners and parent outreach during Q&A. Dr. Young described a screener as ‘‘an assessment tool’’ that can be teacher‑completed at early grades or student/teacher combined at older grades to flag students who need extra tier‑2 instruction. Presenters emphasized that any screener should be chosen to inform practice rather than create extraneous data demands.
Next steps: The audit team recommended turning findings into training for building leaders, aligning district resources and piloting targeted executive‑functioning supports. The presenters asked the board to consider timelines for rollout, further staff development and how to communicate practices to families and students.
The committee discussion closed with agreement to share the audit with building-level administration and to consider an implementation timeline this coming year.
