Evidence From Educational Studies

Abstract

Theoretically the issue of malleability of personality attributes by means of educational interventions leads to two questions: are the personality attributes specific enough to make modification feasible and are the educational interventions powerful enough to bring about the enduring change that we expect when we speak of learning? In this chapter we look at empirical evidence that directly speaks to the issue of malleability. We consider three types of studies: first, we look at studies from economists, secondly, we review meta-analyses based on evaluations of social emotional learning programs and thirdly we refer to studies in the tradition of educational effectiveness research.The studies by economists like Heckman and others have drawn a lot of attention but have been criticized on various grounds as well. The most relevant evidence comes from a series of meta-analyses, all of them showing effects of Social Emotional Learning (SEL) programs, of small to medium size. Notwithstanding the thoroughness of these meta-analyses the validity of the evidence is to be interrogated on several points. We found considerable ambiguity and vagueness in the definition of the interventions, often many facetted programs, as well as heterogeneity, lack of standardization and quality documentation of the SEL outcome measures. Non-experimental educational effectiveness studies show considerably lower effect sizes than reported in the meta-analyses on SEL effect-studies. In this research strand, school effects on social emotional outcomes are found to be considerably lower than on academic performance.