Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Contemporary Educational Psychology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cedpsych

An empirical basis for linking social and emotional learning to academic T

performance☆
⁎
Margarita Panayiotou , Neil Humphrey, Michael Wigelsworth
Manchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, United Kingdom

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: There is general agreement about the benefits of school-based social and emotional learning (SEL) interventions
Social and emotional learning in relation to children and young people’s social-emotional competence, mental health, and academic
Social and emotional competence achievement. However, we know little about the theorized mechanisms through which SEL leads to improved
Academic attainment academic outcomes. The current study is the first to present an integrative model (derived from the SEL logic
Logic model
model) using a 3-wave (annual assessment, T1, T2, T3) longitudinal sample of 1626 (51% boys, n = 832) 9–12-
year-old students (M = 9.17, SD = .31 at baseline) attending 45 elementary schools in England, drawn from a
major randomized trial of a universal SEL intervention (the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies curri-
culum; PATHS). Using structural equation modeling that accounted for within-time covariance, data clustering,
gender and prior academic attainment, we examined the temporal relations between social-emotional compe-
tence (T1), school connectedness (T2), mental health difficulties (T2), and academic attainment (T3). It was
hypothesized that social-emotional competence would directly and indirectly influence academic attainment
through school connectedness and mental health difficulties. Our analyses also examined whether these hy-
pothesized relations varied as a function of intervention exposure (PATHS versus usual provision). The theorized
model was partially supported. Social-emotional competence at T1 exerted a significant influence on school
connectedness and mental health difficulties at T2. However, the latter was the only significant predictor and
mediator of academic attainment at T3 after controlling for gender and prior academic performance. Students
with greater social-emotional competence at T1 were reported to experience fewer mental health difficulties at
T2, and this in turn predicted higher academic attainment at T3. Intervention exposure did not markedly in-
fluence the magnitude or statistical significance of these identified pathways. Collectively, these findings in-
dicate some possible revisions to our current understanding regarding the role of social-emotional competence in
promoting academic attainment, as its contribution appears to lay primarily in buffering the adverse effects of
mental health difficulties.

1. Introduction relationship skills (e.g., communication, relationship building), and

Schools are central sites for the promotion of students’ wellbeing
(Domitrovich, Durlak, Staley, & Weissberg, 2017; Vostanis, Humphrey,
Fitzgerald, Deighton, & Wolpert, 2013) and are, by their nature, a
primary developmental context in which many concerns arise and can
be effectively addressed (Greenberg, 2010). Thus, in addition to
knowledge and academic skills, they are increasingly encouraged to
provide explicit support to help develop students’ social-emotional
competence (Farrington et al., 2012; McCombs, 2004), such as their
self-awareness (e.g., identifying and recognizing emotions, self-effi-
cacy), self-management (e.g., impulse control and stress management,
help seeking), social awareness (e.g., empathy, respect for others),
responsible decision-making (e.g., problem solving, personal, social,
and ethical responsibility; Collaborative for Academic, Social, and
Emotional Learning [CASEL], 2003). Universal social and emotional
learning (SEL) programs provide a framework for preventing mala-
daptive outcomes by promoting such skills (CASEL, 2003; Zins & Elias,
2007). Through the implementation of SEL, schools can provide all
students with opportunities to acquire and further develop social-
emotional skills in a supportive and caring environment (Elias et al.,
1997) by engaging in positive activities in and out of the classroom
(Zins & Elias, 2007).
A key driver of the growth of SEL has been the claimed links to a
range of favorable outcomes. Meta-analyses find that SEL interventions

☆
This research was part of a research project funded by the National Institute for Health Research (Ref: 10/3006/01).
⁎
Corresponding author at: Manchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
E-mail address: margarita.panayiotou@manchester.ac.uk (M. Panayiotou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.009

Available online 17 January 2019

0361-476X/ © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).
M. Panayiotou et al.
can provide practically meaningful short- (Durlak, Weissberg,
Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011; Payton et al., 2008; Sklad,
Diekstra, Ritter, Ben, & Gravesteijn, 2012; Wigelsworth, Lendrum,
et al., 2016) and long-term (Taylor, Oberle, Durlak, & Weissberg, 2017)
improvements in social-emotional skills, mental health, and academic
performance. However, while such efforts are useful in describing
program effects, they do not assess the key mechanisms through which
SEL is theorized to lead to change (Rimm-Kaufman & Hulleman, 2015).
The current study aims to address this critical gap in the knowledge
base.
Learning is a social process, and schools are social places. This basic
reasoning is built upon in the SEL logic model (CASEL, 2003). The
starting point of SEL, articulated by Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, and
Walberg (2004), suggests intervention core components trigger change
in proximal outcomes, which in turn lead to improvements in distal
outcomes (Rimm-Kaufman & Hulleman, 2015). It is here where some
proposed mechanisms that inform the current study are based. SEL
programs focus on developing social-emotional competence in the
context of a safe, caring, and well-managed school and classroom en-
vironment. Improved academic attainment is theorized to directly and
indirectly eventuate from intermediate changes in school attachment,
and risky behavior and positive development. To date, however, there
have been few efforts to model these theorized mechanisms, and pub-
lished studies have been limited in terms of methodology (e.g., lack of
longitudinal data, as in Banerjee, Weare, & Farr, 2014), focus, or both
(e.g., partial examination of theorised mechanisms, as in Reyes,
Brackett, Rivers, White, & Salovey, 2012).
In the current study we draw evidence from theory and the broader
literature to empirically verify proposed direct and indirect links to
academic attainment via secondary analysis of a large longitudinal
dataset. The SEL logic model noted above is our starting point, from
which we build a conceptual model (Fig. 1) that incorporates the wider
body of theory and evidence (e.g., Eisenberg, Valiente, and Eggum
(2010) heuristic model of self-regulation and school readiness) in order
to make predictions about how social-emotional competence can con-
tribute to later academic success. The context for this analysis is the
latter years of middle childhood (e.g., 9–11), corresponding to the final
years of elementary education in England. This is a significant period in
which developmental and contextual changes occur that lay the foun-
dations for successful early adolescent adjustment (Huston & Ripke,
2006). For example, middle childhood sees cognitive advances that
heighten children’s ability to reflect on their successes and failures, and
an expansion of their social worlds, with wider and more complex peer
relationships that take increasing prominence in their lives (Eccles,
1999). Alongside this, the end of this period provides opportunities for
the consolidation of self-regulation and other social-emotional skills
Fig. 1. The proposed conceptual logic model.
194
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
that have typically advanced rapidly up in the preceding years (Murray,
Rosanbalm, Christopoulos, & Hamoudi, 2015). More generally, middle
childhood is characterized by the continued drive to achieve compe-
tence, independence, and relatedness.
In terms of the developmental context, there is a considerable in-
crease in emphasis from teachers and parents on the cognitive, social
and behavioral capabilities required for positive adaptation in the
school context, and the cultural capital attributed to them, as they are
prepared for the major transition to adolescence and secondary edu-
cation (Panayiotou & Humphrey, 2017). In this sense, the end of middle
childhood provides an ideal setting in which to empirically validate the
proposed mechanisms through which social-emotional skills can con-
tribute to later academic achievement. We note from the outset, how-
ever, that the focus on a particular developmental period also delimits
natural parameters in terms of the domains of interest (e.g., school
connectedness in middle childhood has a particular meaning that is
different than in early childhood or adolescence). Thus, it is imperative
that this work is replicated at earlier and later stages of development
and education.
1.1. Direct and indirect pathways to academic attainment
1.1.1. Social-emotional competence and academic attainment (path A)
Despite some inconsistencies in the literature (e.g., Duncan et al.,
2007; Romano, Babchishin, Pagani, & Kohen, 2010), there is sound
evidence for the association between social-emotional competence and
future academic outcomes in both elementary (Duckworth & Schoon,
2010; McKown, Russo-Ponsaran, Allen, Johnson, & Warren-Khot, 2016;
Welsh, Parke, Widaman, & O'Neil, 2001) and secondary (Davis, Solberg,
de Baca, & Gore, 2014; Márquez, Martín, & Brackett, 2006; Wentzel,
1991) school contexts. This is also the case for children considered to be
‘at risk’ (Izard et al., 2001; Lafavor, 2017) and/or from disadvantaged
backgrounds (Elias & Haynes, 2008). In theory, more emotionally
competent students may achieve greater academic outcomes because
they are better at initiating, sustaining, and regulating their motivation
for goal-directed learning compared to those with poor emotional skills
(Valiente et al., 2011). Emotion knowledge may also foster effective
learning interactions in the classroom, thereby promoting academic
achievement (Leerkes, Paradise, O'Brien, Calkins, & Lange, 2008;
Rhoades, Warren, Domitrovich, & Greenberg, 2011). Valiente,
Swanson, and Eisenberg (2012) offer further theoretical insights, pro-
posing moderated (by effortful control) and indirect (via cognitive and
motivational processes and interpersonal resources) effects of students’
emotions/emotionality on their future academic functioning.
M. Panayiotou et al.
1.1.2. Indirect effects through school connectedness (path B)
In their SEL model, CASEL propose that SEL programs—through
their instruction of social-emotional competence in a positive learning
environment— can “…produce significant improvements in school-re-
lated attitudes…” (2008, p. 5) and “…increase children’s sense of
connection or attachment to school” (2003, p. 3). While they theorize
that this is built through emotional security and safety, and strong re-
lationships, their various definitions of school connection have led to
the inconsistent measurement of the term. SEL researchers generally
tend to focus on specific constructs (e.g., school engagement; Ross &
Tolan, 2017), or use the umbrella term of “school attitudes”, which
include various concepts such as that of school attachment and con-
nection (Durlak et al., 2011; Taylor et al., 2017; Zins et al., 2004). In the
extant literature, school connectedness is variously referred to as be-
longing, engagement, bonding, and attachment. Despite the lack of
consensus on the conceptualization and measurement of school con-
nectedness, these various definitions highly correlate to student out-
comes and are considered to assess affective (students’ feelings about
the school, teachers, and/or peers), cognitive (e.g., students’ percep-
tions and beliefs related to self, school, teachers, and other students,
friendships, fair and effective discipline) and behavioral (e.g., academic
engagement, participation in extracurricular activities) dimensions
(Jimerson, Campos, & Greif, 2003; Libbey, 2004).
From a developmental perspective, social-emotional compe-
tence—and in particular (emotional) self-regulation—sets the stage for
engagement in learning activities and adjustment to social task de-
mands in the classroom context (Blair & Raver, 2015). In doing so, it
drives children’s feelings of school connectedness because of the fun-
damental influence it has on their relationships with teachers and peers
(Eisenberg et al., 2010). Offering empirical support to this proposition,
a recent meta-analysis found that social-emotional skills are significant
predictors of school belonging in secondary school students (Allen,
Vella-Brodrick, & Waters, 2017). The link between social-emotional
competence and school connectedness is particularly important as,
consistent with the SEL logic model, the latter is positively associated
with adaptive outcomes (e.g., optimism, high grades) and negatively
correlated with outcomes of mental health difficulties, social rejection,
and school problems (Anderman, 2002; Kia-Keating & Ellis, 2007).
Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, and Castro (2007) argue that emotionally
competent children likely feel more comfortable in the school en-
vironment due to their ability to control their emotions and because
they likely receive good support from teachers and peers. On the other
hand, those with poor emotional skills are at risk for emotional distress
and frustration, which can lead to disengagement. This presents an
important association, as school disengagement was shown to be re-
lated to reduced motivation for school-related activities and social in-
clusion, both of which were shown to be predictive of academic per-
formance (LeCroy & Krysik, 2008; Wang & Holcombe, 2010) and
healthy development (Bond et al., 2007; Catalano, Haggerty, Oesterle,
Fleming, & Hawkins, 2004; Henry & Slater, 2007; Li & Lerner, 2011).
Building on this line of theory, school connectedness has been
identified as a significant mediator in the literature, such as between
school climate and conduct problems (Loukas, Suzuki, & Horton, 2006),
and emotion regulation and depressive symptoms (Zhao & Zhao, 2015).
Trouble with teachers was also found to mediate the relationship be-
tween social skills and grades by Meier, DiPerna, and Oster (2006),
though these findings are limited by the cross-sectional nature of the
study. Related constructs, such as school liking, were also shown to
mediate the relationship between emotional skills and academic com-
petence (e.g., Valiente et al., 2007).
1.1.3. Indirect effects through positive development (path C)
CASEL (2003) proposed that socially and emotionally competent
students are more likely to report positive development, lower emo-
tional distress and less risky behaviors, such as substance abuse, vio-
lence, and risky sexual activity. There is some evidence that poor social-
195
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
emotional competence largely accounts for young people’s later de-
velopmental functioning and mental health (Caldarelle, Christensen,
Kramer, & Kronmiller, 2009; Jones, Greenberg, & Crowley, 2015;
Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Trentacosta & Fine, 2010). It is theorized
that children who enter school with poor social-emotional skills are
more likely to get in trouble with teachers, be rejected by peers, and are
thus at greater risk of educational and social disengagement, which may
set the precedent for problematic transitions in later developmental
stages and adult life (Masten & Coatsworth, 1998). Studies following
children from birth (Moffitt et al., 2011) and kindergarten (Jones et al.,
2015) to adulthood find that early social-emotional competence pre-
dicts outcomes of employment, personal finances, criminal activity,
substance use, and physical and mental health. Eisenberg and collea-
gues’ (2010) heuristic model proposes that emotional self-regulation
(that is, the processes used to modify one’s own emotional state and
accompanying behavioral expressions; Eisenberg & Sulik, 2012) is a
particularly significant aspect of social-emotional competence in the
above noted longitudinal associations.
Taken together, theory and research document that social and
emotional skills can be crucial in the promotion of positive develop-
ment and prevention of risk in young people (Guerra & Bradshaw,
2008), the latter of which has been shown to play a significant role in
academic attainment. Evidence from longitudinal studies suggests that
externalizing (Patalay, Fink, Fonagy, & Deighton, 2016; Riglin,
Frederickson, Shelton, & Rice, 2013) and emotional problems (see
Riglin, Petrides, Frederickson, & Rice, 2014 for a meta-analysis) have a
negative influence on future academic attainment. McLeod and Kaiser
(2004) found that emotional and behavioral problems in early years
strongly diminish the probability of receiving a high school degree. This
line of research concurs with the “adjustment erosion” hypothesis,
which suggests that mental health difficulties can lead to later academic
failure by disrupting interpersonal relationships and classroom parti-
cipation (Moilanen, Shaw, & Maxwell, 2010).
Although evidence on the mediating role of behavioral problems has
been inconsistent (Graziano, Reavis, Keane, & Calkins, 2007; McKown
et al., 2016; Stepp, Pardini, Loeber, & Morris, 2011) some have found
support for this theorized mechanism. In a longitudinal study by
Montroy, Bowles, Skibbe, and Foster (2014) self-regulation predicted
literacy growth which was mediated by teacher-rated behavior pro-
blems. In a sample of disadvantaged children, kindergarten attention
skills were shown to mediate the relationship between preschool
emotion knowledge and first grade academic competence (Rhoades
et al., 2011). Similarly, though based on cross-sectional data, self-reg-
ulatory self-efficacy (i.e., beliefs in one’s capability to employ self-reg-
ulation strategies) was shown to have indirect effects on achievement
through delinquency in a sample of adolescents (Carroll et al., 2009).
1.2. The current study
The primary aim of the current study was to explore the temporal
relationships between social-emotional competence, school con-
nectedness, mental health difficulties, and academic attainment, which
has been notably absent from the literature (Durlak et al., 2011). While
current evidence can tell us if SEL leads to improvements in academic
outcomes, our understanding of how and why is considerably less well
developed. A more focused effort came from McKown et al. (2016) who
examined the indirect impact of social-emotional competence on aca-
demic attainment through problem behavior and socially-skilled be-
havior. Despite their promising findings, the intermediate impact of
school connectedness was overlooked and given the lack of power
analysis, the degree of bias in their findings—due to the small sample
size used—is unclear. Similarly, a study by Brock, Nishida, Chiong,
Grimm, and Rimm-Kaufman (2008) examined the temporal relations
between classroom environment and social and academic outcomes,
but without accounting for possible intermediate mechanisms as pro-
posed by CASEL (2003). More recently, Ross and Tolan (2017)
M. Panayiotou et al.
developed a five-factor latent model to represent the multicomponent
construct of social and emotional competence, which was shown to
significantly predict other SEL logic model components such as school
engagement, grades, risky behaviors, delinquency, and depressive
symptoms, in a sample of adolescents. Although it presents an im-
portant contribution to the conceptualization and measurement of so-
cial-emotional competence, this study does not establish the mechan-
isms through which social-emotional competence impacts future
outcomes.
In relation to the above, the statistical exploration of mediation
pathways between the SEL outcomes has been limited. Other than a few
exceptions (Flook, Repetti, & Ullman, 2005; Loukas et al., 2006;
Montroy et al., 2014; Reyes et al., 2012) available SEL evidence stems
largely from experimental or cross-sectional designs, which are limited
in their capacity to provide causal inferences regarding theorized me-
chanisms of change. In addition, much of the current evidence is based
on small sample sizes and only on a limited number of outcomes (e.g.,
Ashdown & Bernard, 2012; Denham, Bassett, Zinsser, & Wyatt, 2014).
Notably, the majority of SEL studies focus on behavioral outcomes and
relatively few address the impact of SEL on academic achievement
(around 2–10% of the studies; Durlak et al., 2011; Payton et al., 2008;
Taylor et al., 2017).
More important, there is no study to the authors’ knowledge that
has examined the temporal relations that underpin the SEL logic model.
The analysis presented in the current study represents an adapted, more
focused approximation of this model (Fig. 1). For example, whereas
distal outcomes of the SEL logic model are very broad (e.g., caring,
capable responsible students, better academic performance and more
effective workers), our analysis focuses specifically on academic at-
tainment. While the focus on specific constructs is primarily due to
pragmatic considerations (this is, after all, a secondary analysis,
meaning that we were restricted in our choice of variables), it is also
advantageous given the developmental context of the study. For ex-
ample, a specific focus on mental health, as opposed to more general
aspects of risky behavior and positive development implied in the logic
model, is appropriate given the increased prevalence of mental health
difficulties in the transition from middle childhood to early adolescence
(Green, McGinnity, Meltzer, Ford, & Goodman, 2005).
The nature of the dataset utilized in the current study afforded a
further opportunity to advance the evidence base. As described below,
data were drawn from a major randomized trial of the Promoting
Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) curriculum (Greenberg &
Kusche, 1993). This enabled us to also examine the extent to which SEL
intervention exposure influenced the magnitude and/or statistical sig-
nificance of identified pathways in our model. To date this has not been
systematically and robustly examined. So, for example, while Brock
et al. (2008) examined longitudinal relations between children’s social-
emotional skills, school connectedness and academic achievement in
the context of exposure to the Responsive Classroom intervention, this
study lacked a control group. Thus, a secondary aim of the current
study was to examine whether the various pathways noted above varied
as a function of intervention exposure.
In sum, we set out to build upon current research and address im-
portant limitations in an effort to bridge the gap between SEL theory
and evidence using a large longitudinal dataset. On the basis of the
preceding theory and evidence, the following predictions were made
(see Fig. 1). We hypothesized that social-emotional competence at Time
1 (T1) would predict later academic attainment at Time 3 (T3) (Hy-
pothesis 1 – Path A), in addition to predicting greater school con-
nectedness (Hypothesis 2) and fewer mental health difficulties (Hy-
pothesis 3) at Time 2 (T2). Furthermore, we predicted that greater
school connectedness (Hypothesis 4) and fewer mental health difficul-
ties (Hypothesis 5) at T2 would predict better academic attainment at
T3. We hypothesized a significant (inverse) within-time association
between school connectedness and mental health difficulties at T2
(Hypothesis 6). In terms of mediation effects, we expected that students
196
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
reporting higher social-emotional competence at T1 would experience
greater school connectedness and fewer mental health difficulties the
following year (T2), which would in turn predict improved academic
performance a year later (T3). Thus, we anticipated that school con-
nectedness (Hypothesis 7 – Path B) and mental health difficulties
(Hypothesis 8 – Path C) at T2 would act as mediators in the relationship
between social-emotional competence at T1 and academic attainment
at T3. Finally, we anticipated that the above noted pathways could vary
as a function of intervention exposure (Hypothesis 9), based on the
logic that systematic instruction in social and emotional competence via
an evidence-based SEL intervention (PATHS) could, for example,
strengthen prospective developmental pathways to school connected-
ness, mental health difficulties, and academic attainment. However,
given the lack of prior evidence on which to base more precise pre-
dictions, this final hypothesis was left open-ended and the analysis
pertaining to it was considered largely exploratory in nature.
2. Method
2.1. Design and power
The current study utilized a secondary analysis of data in a long-
itudinal latent variable design to determine the significance and mag-
nitude of the conceptually derived relationships between each element
of our adapted SEL logic model. Annual waves of measurement starting
in the summer of 2012 were used to capture base (T1), proximal (T2),
and distal (T3) variables. Data were drawn from a cluster randomized
trial focusing on the efficacy of the PATHS curriculum, funded by the
National Institute for Health Research (Ref: 10/3006/01). Specifically,
data were drawn from the cohort of students that were in Grade 5 (aged
10–11) at T3, the school year in which national Standardized
Assessment Tests are taken.
A Monte Carlo simulation with WLSMV and 500 replications was
carried out for a sample size of 1600 prior to the exploration of the SEL
logic model to determine power for the model’s key parameters (as
suggested by Muthén and Muthén (2002)). Different seed values were
used to ensure the stability of findings. Minimal attrition (5%) was used
for T1 and KS2 variables and a conservative 20% was used for T2
variables, consistent with SEL intervention studies (Taylor et al., 2017).
Population values for each parameter were chosen as an approximation
of previous research and were to set to explain about 75% of the var-
iance in academic attainment, consistent with studies controlling for
prior attainment (e.g., Wigelsworth, Qualter, & Humphrey, 2016). We
therefore set prior academic attainment to explain the majority of the
variance with a standardized beta coefficient of .65 (e.g., Elias &
Haynes, 2008; Wang & Holcombe, 2010) followed by school con-
nectedness with β = .25 (e.g., LeCroy & Krysik, 2008), social-emotional
competence with β = .20 (Wang & Holcombe, 2010), mental health
difficulties with β = −.15 (McKown et al., 2016) and gender with
β = .10 (e.g., Reyes et al., 2012). All variables were set to have a var-
iance of 1 and a mean of 0, therefore the residual variances of indicators
were estimated as 1-λ2 and as 1-R2 for the latent variables, where
R2 = β12 * ψx1 + β22 * ψx2 + 2 * β1 * β2 * Cov(x1, x2). The proposed
logic model was shown to meet all priori criteria for N = 1600, with
small population parameter and SE bias and satisfactory coverage and
power for the key parameters (power = .90–1.00), except for the effect
of gender on social-emotional competence (set at β = .05;
power = .46). Therefore, based on the Monte Carlo findings and gen-
eral recommendations (> 5:q ratio; Kline, 2016) the study’s sample size
was deemed satisfactory for the proposed analysis.
2.2. Participants
The sample comprised 1626 students (51.2% boys, n = 832) from
45 state-maintained elementary schools in northwest England, 23 of
which were randomized to implement PATHS (nstudent = 846) and 22 to
M. Panayiotou et al.
continue their usual provision (UP; nstudent = 780). Students had a
mean age of 9.17 (SD = .31) at T1 (Grade 3), 10.17 (SD = .31) at T2
(Grade 4), and 11.17 (SD = .31) at T3 (Grade 5). The two groups did
not differ in terms of age (t (1619) = −1.20, p = .23), gender (χ2
(1) = .15, p = .70), EAL (χ2 (1) = .51, p = .48) and ethnic composition
(χ2 (1) = 1.91, p = .28). They differed, however, in terms of FSM
eligibility (χ2 (1) = 4.70, p < .05) and reported SEN (χ2 (1) = 6.17,
p < .05), with the PATHS group having more FSM eligible students
(n = 266, 32.2% vs. n = 204, 27.2%) and slightly fewer students with
SEN (n = 165, 20% vs. n = 189, 25.2%) than UP. Differences were,
however, trivial in terms of effect size (FSM Cramer’s V = .06; SEN
Cramer’s V = .06).
In comparison to national norms (Department for Education, 2012,
2013), the study sample contained a higher-than-average proportion
eligible for Free School Meals (FSM; 28.9%), speaking English as an
Additional Language (EAL; 21.2%), and reported as having special
educational needs (SEN; 21.8%). The proportions of students scoring in
the clinical range on measures used in the present study (SDQ–see
below) were consistent with published norms (Goodman, 1997). Si-
milar to the national picture of state-funded elementary schools
(Department for Education, 2011), the sample comprised 69.9% Cau-
casian (n = 1137), 10.6% Asian (n = 173), 7.6% Afro-Caribbean
(n = 123), 5.2% mixed race (n = 84), 2.3% other/unclassified race
(n = 38, 2.3%), and .6% Chinese (n = 9) students. Ethnic background
data was not available for the remaining 62 students (3.8%).
In terms of school-level characteristics, those in the current study
were larger (M = 334.04 full-time students, SD = 111.85) and con-
tained a higher proportion of students eligible for FSM (29%) than is
seen nationally in England (Department for Education, 2012). The
composition of participating schools mirrored national averages in
terms of EAL (22.4%) but lower proportions of students were identified
as having SEN (17.18%) (Department for Education, 2012, 2013).
2.3. Measures
Social-emotional competence (T1) was assessed using the self-report
Social Skills Improvement System-Social Emotional Learning edition
(SSIS-SEL; Gresham & Elliott, 2018) for ages 8–12. The 46-item SSIS-
SEL is a reconfiguration of the SSIS Social Skills domain (Gresham &
Elliott, 2008) and measures children’s social-emotional competence as
defined by CASEL (2003), specifically self-awareness (e.g., “I say nice
things about myself without bragging”), self-management (e.g., “I stay
calm when I disagree with others”), social-awareness (e.g., “I try to
think about how others feel”), relationship skills (e.g., “I work well with
my classmates”), and responsible decision making (e.g., “I tell people
when I have made a mistake”). The five domains can also be summed
up to create a composite score, which provides an overall indicator of
social-emotional competence (Gresham & Elliott, 2018). A 4-point scale
(0 = not true, 3 = very true) is used to respond to its items with higher
scores indicating greater social and emotional competence. The SSIS-
SEL is reliable, with acceptable internal consistency and test–retest
reliability for the five domains (α = .72–.85; r = .68–.77) and the
composite scale (α = .94; r = .81). It has good convergent validity
against the Behavior Assessment System for Children, but limited sup-
port for its construct validity. More specifically, the student five-factor
correlated structure showed an inconsistent model fit, with
RMSEA = .06 (90% CI [.052, .056]) and CFI = .83 (Gresham et al.,
2018), thus requiring further investigation (see Results section).
School connectedness (T2) was assessed through the 4-item School
Environment subscale of the Kidscreen-27 (Ravens-Sieberer et al.,
2007). Students were asked to consider the past month and respond to
the items (e.g., “Have you got along well with your teacher?”) using a 5-
point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). Higher scores on
the scale suggest a more positive school environment and greater
connectedness. This subscale is psychometrically robust with good
construct (Robitail et al., 2007) convergent (with the Pediatric Quality
197
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
of Life Inventory), criterion (with Kidscreen-57), and known-groups
(between different socioeconomic, gender, and year groups) validity
(Ravens-Sieberer et al., 2007). It is also reliable, with acceptable tes-
t–retest reliability (ICC = .74; Ravens-Sieberer et al., 2007) and in-
ternal consistency (α > .76; Robitail et al., 2007).
Mental health difficulties (T2) were assessed using the 20-item
teacher informant-report version of the Strengths and Difficulties
Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 1997). The SDQ consists of four do-
mains1 assessing conduct problems, hyperactivity, emotional symp-
toms, and peer problems. Teachers respond to a series of statements
about a child (e.g., “Often unhappy, downhearted”) using a 3-point
scale (not true, somewhat true, certainly true), with higher scores in-
dicating greater difficulties. The teacher version of the SDQ exhibits
acceptable predictive (e.g., help seeking) and concurrent validity (with
Child Behavior Check List), and satisfactory internal consistency
(average α = .82), and test–retest reliability (average r = .84). It also
shows good known-groups validity as it discriminates between children
with and without psychiatric diagnoses (average area under the
curve = .83; Stone, Otten, Engels, Vermulst, & Janssens, 2010).
Academic performance (T3) was assessed using 2014 Key Stage 2
(KS2) national curriculum test scores in mathematics, reading, and
writing. At the end of the elementary phase of education in England,
students take standardized assessment tests (SAT) in core curriculum
areas as a means to assess their learning progress ahead of the transition
to secondary school. Raw scores from each test are converted to point
scores, which can be used to classify a student's performance in terms of
national curriculum levels (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and sublevels (e.g., 4a, 4b,
4c), each of which map onto descriptors of what a student working at
that level can do. For example, in terms of the decoding component of
the reading assessment, students working at level 4b can use their
knowledge of a word's etymology and structure to help them under-
stand a word in context. Students in KS2 are expected to work between
levels 2 (i.e., average score of 13) and 5 (i.e., average score of 35) with
level 4b being the government's expected level of achievement at the
end of elementary school. Independent psychometric assessment of KS2
SAT data has demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (α > .91)
and classification accuracy (> 85%) for each subject (He, Hayes, &
Wiliam, 2013). Further evidence for the predictive validity of the test
was provided by strong relationships with future academic outcomes
(Education Endowment Foundation, 2013). More precisely, KS2 English
(reading and writing) and mathematics scores at age 11 were found to
significantly predict Key Stage 3 and General Certificate of Secondary
Education outcomes at age 14 and 16, respectively (Strand, 2006). Si-
milar to national averages (Department for Education, 2014) 79.2%
(n = 1288) of the current sample achieved level 4b (i.e., average score
of 27) or above in reading, writing, and mathematics.
Prior academic performance (covariate) was assessed using the
mean 2010 Key Stage 1 (KS1) national curriculum test score in
mathematics, reading, and writing (observed variable). KS1 assessment
occurs at the end of Grade 1 and as with KS2, point scores are used to
classify a student's performance in terms of national curriculum levels.
The average point score for the current sample was 14.9 (SD = 3.74;
see Table 1), in line with the national average of 15.3 (Department for
Education, 2010). As above, KS1 scores are highly predictive of future
academic performance, both in terms of KS2 SAT scores (Humphrey
et al., 2015) and independent standardized tests scores (Humphrey
et al., 2018).
2.4. Procedure
Following approval from the authors’ host institution ethics
1
The SDQ also includes a five-item prosocial behavior scale but this is not a
part of the total difficulties score and was thus not utilized in the current
analysis.
M. Panayiotou et al. Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204

Table 1
Descriptive statistics, internal consistency, and correlations between the study variables (and the latent factors).
1 2 3 4 5

1. Mean prior academic attainment –

2. Academic attainment .80 (.85) –
3. Social-emotional competence .12 (.13) .10 (.13) –
4. School connectedness .19 (.25) .18 (.25) .38 (.51) –
5. Mental health difficulties −.42 (−.48) −.41 (−.56) −.22 (.33) −.40 (−.55) –
Min–Max 3–21 10.50–39 6–142 4–20 0–35
Mean 14.90 28.79 102.79 17.54 6.13
SD 3.74 4.39 20.41 2.65 6.03
Composite reliability ω [95% CI] – .85 [.83, .86] .95 h [.94, .95] .74 [.71, .77] .93 h [.93, .94]
Cronbach’s alpha – .85 .94 .74 .88
Skewness −.76*** −.70*** −.62*** −1.60*** 1.34***
Kurtosis .86*** 1.21*** .42** 3.07*** 1.73***

Note. CI = confidence interval. In brackets are the correlation coefficients between the latent variables. All correlations are statistically significant at the .001 level.
h
Hierarchical omega coefficient.
** p < .01.
*** p < .001

committee (Ref: 11,470), written consent was sought from schools’
head teachers. Opt-out consent was also sought from parents, and opt-in
assent from participating students. In total, 40 parents out of 1666
(2.4%) chose to opt-out their children from the research. Data collec-
tion took place between May and July (summer term) of each academic
year starting in 2012 and finishing in 2014. Teachers of participating
students provided SDQ data for an average of 25 students. Data were
collected electronically via a secure online survey site, with the ex-
ception of academic data, where standardized pen and paper tests were
used. Survey completion was conducted on a whole-class basis. School
staff supported any students with literacy difficulties to enable them to
access the measures. Responses were tracked through each wave of data
collection and matched through the use of a unique reference number.
This information was used solely for accurate data matching and was
destroyed shortly thereafter.
2.5. Intervention
line with developer expectations, average lesson completion rates of
around 50% have been reported in the only other studies of PATHS to
report descriptive statistics for this aspect of implementation (e.g.,
Berry et al., 2016; Faria, Kendzior, Brown, O'Brien, & Osher, 2013), and
the total number of lessons delivered exceeds the median number in
SEL interventions more broadly as reported by Durlak et al. (2011) in
their seminal meta-analysis.
Teachers in UP schools implemented lessons on Personal, Social and
Health Education (PSHE) as part of the standard school curriculum as
well as other SEL-related activities. They reported using universal in-
itiatives such as the Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL)
whole school resources (81%) and individual lessons (62%), the
National Healthy Schools program (81%), and Circle Time (57%); and
targeted initiatives such as SEAL small group work (24%) and Family
SEAL (10%), Targeted Mental Health in Schools (19%), Circle of
Friends (19%), Nurture Groups (29%), and restorative justice (24%)
(Humphrey et al., 2018).

The PATHS curriculum aims to promote self-control, emotional
understanding, positive self-esteem, relationships, and interpersonal
problem-solving skills among children in pre-school and elementary
education settings. It is one of the most well validated SEL interven-
tions, with multiple randomized trials demonstrating positive effects
(Humphrey et al., 2018). PATHS comprises a taught curriculum, sup-
plemented by generalization activities and techniques, and parent
materials. Each class receives curriculum packs containing lessons and
send-home activities built around four conceptual units (emotional
understanding; self-control; social problem-solving; peer relations and
self-esteem), plus associated material resources (e.g., posters, feelings
dictionaries). PATHS is implemented by class teachers as part of the
general classroom timetable. Lessons last approximately 30–40 min and
are designed to be delivered throughout the school year, approximately
twice per week. Curriculum packs contain an average of 40 lessons.
Teachers receive a full day of initial training with a half-day follow-up
four months later, and also receive on-going technical support and as-
sistance (e.g., lesson modelling, observation and feedback) from ex-
ternal coaches.
Structured observations of PATHS delivery were conducted by
trained research assistants as part of a comprehensive implementation
and process evaluation, and indicated that lessons were taught ap-
proximately once per week (dosage), with in excess of 90% of students
in a given class present (reach). Teachers adhered closely to the PATHS
lesson guidance (procedural fidelity average > 8/10) and delivered
sessions in an engaging, enthusiastic manner (quality average > 8/10),
with students responding positively (participant responsiveness
average > 7/10; Humphrey et al., 2018). Though dosage was not in
2.6. Data analysis
Missing data ranged from 2.7% to 25.9% for the main variables in
the analysis at T1, T2 and T3 (4.9% for the KS1 covariate), attributable
to student absence or attrition, and error-based omission for individual
survey items. Little’s Missing Completely At Random (MCAR) test
showed no significant association between student-level variables and
missingness, χ2 (27,607) = 27,335, p > .05, allowing the inclusion of
observed or estimated information for all 1626 cases, as per standard
practice when using weighted least squares means and variance ad-
justed (WLSMV) estimation (pairwise present). However, tabulated
pattern analysis indicated elevated missingness at T2, which was at-
tributable to student absences (e.g., students changing schools) or
school drop-out, and was therefore considered to be missing at random.
All models were tested by structural equation modelling (SEM) in
Mplus 8.1. The hypothetical constructs of the current study were
modelled as latent variables,2 as they estimate and remove item-level
measurement error, providing more accurate estimates of auto-
regressive pathways (Newsom, 2015). Separate scores on mathematics,
reading, and writing for KS2 and individual measure items were used as
indicators to construct the latent variables (see Table 2 for the structure
used). WLSMV3 was used to account for the categorical nature of the
indicators of the latent variables, which can handle computationally
2
Prior academic attainment was modelled as an observed exogenous variable
(KS1 mean score).
3
Robust Maximum Likelihood was used for the continuous 3-item con-
firmatory factor analysis model of academic attainment.

198
M. Panayiotou et al.
Table 2
Confirmatory factor analysis model fit indices for the study measures.
Measure Model structure (N indicators) χ2
Academic attainment Univariate model (3) 0b
SSIS-SEL 4-factor second-order (46) 2344.26***
KS27–School connectedness Univariate model (4) 5.89
SDQ 4-factor second-order (20) 795.17***
Note. KS27 = KIDSCREEN-27; SSIS = Social Skills Improvement System-Social Emotional Learning edition; SDQ = Strengths & Difficulties Questionnaire;
RMSEA = Root mean square error of approximation; CI = confidence interval; SRMR = standardized root mean squared residual; CFI = comparative fit index;
TLI = Tucker-Lewis index; ICC = intracluster correlation coefficient; λ = factor loadings for the first-order indicators.
a
The ICC value of prior academic attainment was .11. Prior academic attainment was assessed using an observed variable corresponding to the mean score of
English (reading and writing) and mathematics.
b
This is a saturated model.
†
All factor loadings were statistically significant (p < .001).
*** p < .001.
demanding models with large sample sizes and many latent factors
(Brown, 2015). Model fit was assessed using multiple measures as
generally recommended, specifically the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI),
Comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA; including 90% Confidence intervals) and standardized root
mean squared residual (SRMR). The chi-square statistic was reported in
the results but was not used to evaluate model fit due to its sensitivity to
sample size. Overall, TLI and CFI values above .95, RMSEA values
below .06 and SRMR values below .08 were considered to indicate good
model fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Given that students were nested within
schools (N = 45), the goodness-fit-statistics and the standard errors of
the parameter estimates were adjusted to account for the dependency in
the data (using Type = Complex in Mplus). To this end, both the ICC
and the design effect (Deff)—the latter of which indicates how much the
standard errors are underestimated in a clustered sample compared to a
random one—were estimated for all variables under study prior to
evaluating the models (Maas & Hox, 2005). A Monte Carlo study by
Muthén and Satorra (1995) indicated that approximate Deff values of
less than 2 do not severely distort chi-square values. The adjustment in
the data was, therefore, applied to measures whose variables had Deff
values greater than 2. Deff was estimated using the formula
1 + (average cluster size − 1) * ICC (Maas & Hox, 2005).
2.6.1. Measurement models
While accounting for the clustering in the data, confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) was applied in order to establish the structure and va-
lidity of each latent construct. In addition, the fit of the full measure-
ment model was assessed, as a viable measurement model must be es-
tablished prior to evaluating the full structural model (Brown, 2015).
The internal consistency of the overall measures and their subscales was
assessed through unidimensional (ω) and hierarchical (ωh) composite
reliability (known as McDonald’s omega) as proposed by Raykov and
Marcoulides (2015). Unlike Cronbach’s alpha, the omega coefficient
does not assume τ-equivalency and thus provides more accurate esti-
mates when such assumptions are violated.
2.6.2. Group measurement invariance
Prior to testing for differences in the pathways between assignment
groups (PATHS vs. UP), measurement invariance was assessed for each
measure through multigroup CFA. Following Muthén and Muthén
(1998–2017) a 4-step approach was taken for measures with continuous
indicators (i.e., academic attainment and second-order models): First, a
best-fitting baseline model was identified for each group, followed by
the configural invariance, in which factor loadings and intercepts are
freely estimated across groups. In step 3, metric invariance, in which
factor loadings are constrained to be equal across groups was examined,
followed by the scalar invariance model, where both the factor loadings
and intercepts are held equal across groups. For measures with cate-
gorical indicators we followed a 3-step approach (baseline, configural,
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
DF RMSEA [90% CI] SRMR CFI TLI ICC rangea λ range†
0 0 0 1.00 1.00 .10–.11 .79–.84
984 .03 [.03, .03] .06 .90 .89 .02–.07 .42–.77
2 .04 [.00, .08] .01 1.00 .99 .01–.06 .67–.76
166 .06 [.05, .06] .10 .94 .93 .07–.25 .44–.96
scalar) where thresholds and factor loadings are considered in tandem.
Models at each step were compared using the chi-square difference
testing, with a non-statistically significant value indicating full mea-
surement invariance. For academic attainment this was considered
alongside CFI difference (ΔCFI) with a threshold of .01 indicating non-
invariance (Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). This was not applied to models
using WLSMV as its utility with models using a polychoric correlation
matrix with WLSMV is yet to be sufficiently examined. Given that full
measurement invariance frequently does not hold, partial measurement
invariance was considered acceptable for proceeding to the examina-
tion of the logic model.
2.6.3. SEL logic model
The SEL logic model was constructed in line with the theoretical
framework of Fig. 1. The cross-domain relationships of the proposed
theoretical model were assessed whilst accounting for clustering in the
data, within-time covariance, gender effects (given recent findings; see
Panayiotou & Humphrey, 2017) and prior academic attainment at all
waves. This method provides control of the covariate influences on both
the exogenous and endogenous constructs (Newsom, 2015). Two pos-
sible indirect relationships between social-emotional competence and
academic attainment were identified and statistically assessed. Finally,
the degree to which intervention assignment (PATHS vs. UP) acted as a
moderator was explored through multigroup SEM. First, baseline
models were established for both groups, as an acceptable model fit
should be achieved before proceeding to multigroup analysis. This was
followed by a statistical comparison of nested models using the chi-
square difference testing as described by Muthén and Muthén (1998-
2017). Specifically, an unconstrained model (H1) in which all paths of
the proposed logic model were allowed to be freely estimated was
compared to a nested model (H0) where paths were constrained to be
equal between groups. A statistically significant chi-square difference
test would confirm the effect of treatment assignment as a moderator
and indicate that the logic model is non-invariant across groups.
3. Results
Means, standard deviations, internal consistency coefficients, and
bivariate correlations among the study variables (including the latent
factor intercorrelations) are shown in Table 1. Overall, small to medium
correlations were observed between the study variables. As expected,
mental health difficulties correlated negatively with academic attain-
ment, school connectedness, and social-emotional competence, and
prior academic attainment was highly correlated with later attainment.
Although not reported in Table 1, it is noteworthy that the subdomains
(first-order latent factors) of the SSIS-SEL and SDQ measures were
shown to exhibit acceptable internal consistency, SSIS-SEL
ω = .74–.85, SDQ ω = .76–.88.
199
M. Panayiotou et al.
3.1. Measurement models
The ICC values of the observed variables (see Table 2) were con-
sistent with existing studies assessing similar outcomes (e.g.,
Krishnakumar, Narine, Roopnarine, & Logie, 2014; Sellström &
Bremberg, 2006). For the majority of the items, the Deff value was
found to be greater than two. Notably, the highest ICC and Deff values
were observed for the academic attainment and SDQ items. The latter
could be explained by the use of a teacher-report measure for the as-
sessment of mental health difficulties. The CFA model fit and factor
loadings were examined for all measures and are presented in Table 2.
Model fit was found to be adequate for Kidscreen-27 school con-
nectedness and SDQ, supporting their use as latent factors in the model.
Given that the fit of the saturated model for academic attainment could
not be assessed, the factor loadings of writing, reading, and mathe-
matics were examined instead, which as seen in Table 2 were found to
be high. Substantial factor loadings (> .40) were observed for the items
of all measures and were thus considered to represent meaningful
constructs.
A warning indicating a non-positive definite psi matrix due to a
correlation > 1 between two of the latent factors of the SSIS-SEL (self-
awareness and responsible decision making), rendered the five-factor
correlated solution inadmissible. Given that the two factors were sta-
tistically indistinguishable we collapsed them into one, following gui-
dance (Brown, 2015). The four-factor correlated SSIS-SEL structure
showed excellent fit in terms of RMSEA and SRMR, but with less ade-
quate CFI and TLI values, χ2(983) = 2420.38, p < .001;
RMSEA = .031 (90% CI [.030,.033]); SRMR = .06; CFI = .89,
TLI = 88, which was consistent with the original validation study
(Gresham & Elliott, 2018). It is possible that the inconsistency in the fit
indices was caused by the low correlations between many of the items
(r = .08–.58, M = .26, SD = .07). Upon inspection of the modification
indices, two error terms were allowed to covary based on the items’
similar wording and conceptual meaning. Those were between “I let
people know when there is a problem” and “I tell others when I’m not
treated well”, and between “I stay calm when I am teased” and “I stay
calm when others bother me”. This resulted in a better fit,
χ2(9 8 1) = 2327.13, p < .001; RMSEA = .030 (90% CI [.029, .032]);
SRMR = .06; CFI = .90, TLI = .89, and with few residual correlations
≥.10 (11%) indicating low model misfit (Kline, 2016). Due to the large
factor correlations (r = .76–.95) we explored a second-order four-factor
structure, with the four specific competencies tapping onto a common
factor, that of social-emotional competence (we note that a five-factor
second-order structure resulted in a non-positive definite psi matrix).
Although not optimal, the model fit for the second-order SSIS-SEL was
shown to be acceptable, χ2 (9 8 4) = 2344.26, p < .001; RMSEA = .03
(90% CI [.029, .032]); SRMR = .06; CFI = .90, TLI = .89, with low
model misfit (90% of residual correlations < .10).
With marginally lower than the recommended cut-off values for CFI
and TLI, possibly due to the large number of variables in the model
(Kenny & McCoach, 2003), fit indices indicated that the full measure-
ment model provided an acceptable fit to the data,
χ2(2,540) = 3913.32, p < .001; RMSEA = .02 (90% CI [.017, .019]);
SRMR = .07; CFI = .92; TLI = .92. Correlations between the four latent
constructs ranged between .13 and .57, and below .85 for the first-order
factors suggesting good discriminant validity (Brown, 2015), except for
the self-management and self-awareness (r = .92), and self-awareness
and relationship skills (r = .94) factors of the SSIS-SEL. In addition, the
majority (> 85%) of correlation residuals were negligible (≤.10) in-
dicating satisfactory model fit. Given that the modification indices did
not indicate any theoretically justified pathways that could be added to
the model, the proposed measurement model was considered adequate
for use in subsequent analyses.
200
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
3.2. SEL logic model
Following full group measurement invariance for all constructs (see
online Supplemental material for details) we proceeded to the ex-
amination of multigroup SEM. The hypothesized logic model was
shown to have an acceptable baseline model fit for both PATHS
χ2(2,607) = 3317.57, p < .001; RMSEA = .02 (90% CI [.016, .020]);
SRMR = .08; CFI = .91; TLI = .91, and UP, χ2(2,681) = 3257.98,
p < .001; RMSEA = . 02 (90% CI [.014, .019]); SRMR = .08;
CFI = .92; TLI = .92. Multigroup analysis further indicated that both
the H1 model, in which the pathways were freely estimated, was found
to have a good fit, χ2(5,550) = 6809.21, p < .001; RMSEA = .02 (90%
CI [.015, .018]); SRMR = .08; CFI = .92; TLI = .92, as did the H0
model with the group equality constrains, χ2(5,564) = 6780.26,
p < .001; RMSEA = .02 (90% CI [.015, .018]); SRMR = .08;
CFI = .92; TLI = .92. The non-statistically significant chi-square dif-
ference test, Δχ2 (14), 11.58, p > .05, indicated invariant pathways. In
other words, treatment assignment was not a statistically significant
moderator of the proposed model. Subsequent analyses and inter-
pretations therefore focused on the full sample.
Notably, gender was shown to statistically predict all variables of
interest with the greatest impact on mental health difficulties, such that
girls were more likely to report lower mental health difficulties at T2.
Girls were also more likely to report greater social-emotional compe-
tence at T1 and school connectedness at T2 but score lower on the KS2
assessment at T3, although effects on the latter were trivial. Similarly,
prior academic attainment was found to have an effect on all variables
across time and in the expected direction, although expectedly the
largest one was that on T3 academic attainment. As seen in Fig. 2, after
controlling for gender and prior academic performance, the within-time
correlation between school connectedness and mental health difficul-
ties was statistically significant and in the expected direction (Hy-
pothesis 6).
77% of the variance in academic attainment was predicted by the
overall model. However, contrary to our expectations social-emotional
competence (Hypothesis 1) did not predict later academic attainment.
Consistent with our hypotheses, however, greater social-emotional
competence at T1 was associated with greater school connectedness
(Hypothesis 2) and fewer mental health difficulties (Hypothesis 3) at
T2. Hypothesis 4 was not supported, as school connectedness at T2 was
not a statistically significant predictor of academic attainment at T3. It
is of note that mental health difficulties were found to exhibit the
strongest explanatory power for later academic attainment, above and
beyond gender and prior academic attainment, such that more diffi-
culties at T2 were shown to predict poorer academic performance at T3
(Hypothesis 5). To summarize, while accounting for gender and prior
academic performance, data clustering, and the within-time covariance,
only mental health difficulties were found to statistically predict later
academic attainment. Of the two indirect pathways tested, only one was
found to be statistically significant (Hypothesis 8), such that mental
health difficulties at T2 mediated the relation between social-emotional
competence at T1 and academic attainment at T3, β = .05, p < .001,
95% CI [.03, .08], although we note the small effect size. Contrary to
our expectations, school connectedness failed to mediate this relation-
ship (Hypothesis 7).
4. Discussion
The current study sought to examine the temporal relations between
four of the main key components that underlie the SEL logic model:
social-emotional competence, school connectedness, mental health
difficulties, and academic attainment. As such, this is the first study to
work towards an integrative model that explains how these components
interact over time to contribute to future academic achievement. Some,
although not all, of the hypothesized pathways were supported in the
current study. The efforts of school-based SEL programs lie in their
M. Panayiotou et al.
Fig. 2. Structural equation model. Indirect effect, β = .05, p < .001, 95% CI [.03, .08].
delivery of a set of skills and competencies to children, the lack of
which can put them at a great disadvantage (Elias et al., 2015). For such
skills to become internalized and generalized they need to be learned
and practiced in safe and supportive environments (Elias et al., 2015;
Humphrey, 2013).
Confirming the findings of previous studies (Masten & Coatsworth,
1998; Ross & Tolan, 2017; Trentacosta & Fine, 2010) social-emotional
competence in the current study was found to act as a protective factor
and set the precedent for later positive developmental outcomes. A
focus on the lower part of our model (see Fig. 2) clearly shows the
buffering effects of social-emotional competence on later mental health
difficulties, which in turn predict improved academic performance.
Presumably, SEL skills and competencies allow children and young
people to sustain relationships, recover in the face of failure, regulate
emotions and stress, seek out educational opportunities, make re-
sponsible decisions, and identify with prosocial (as opposed to deviant)
peer groups (Guerra & Bradshaw, 2008). These skills in turn mitigate
the adverse effects of emotional symptoms and risky behaviors, which
would otherwise pose a risk to their academic achievement (Owens,
Stevenson, Hadwin, & Norgate, 2012). This association was shown to
play a significant role in our study, as it remained significant even after
controlling for the influence of prior academic performance and pro-
vides a significant contribution to the SEL evidence base, as it might
suggest that it is not the improvement of social-emotional competence
per se that positively influences later academic performance, but its
intermediate impact on mental health difficulties.
It is thus somewhat unsurprising that the mental health difficulties
variable was the only statistically significant mediator in the model.
This finding could potentially explain the lack of direct association
between social-emotional competence and academic attainment. While
when tested alone, greater social-emotional competence at T1 was
found to be associated with greater academic attainment at T3
(β = .12, p < .01), the magnitude of this pathway was close to zero
once students’ prior academic attainment was taken into account,
leading us to consider other explanations. For instance, it is likely that
individual social-emotional skills (e.g., empathy) have differing
201
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
**
p < .01, ***
p < .001.
importance for academic attainment, as others have found (Meier et al.,
2006; Milsom & Glanville, 2010). Due to the poor discriminant validity
of the SSIS-SEL factors in our study, we were unable to explore the
effects of specific social-emotional skills on academic attainment. Fu-
ture researchers should, therefore, consider replicating the current
findings with different distinct measures.
As anticipated based on the wider literature (see Allen et al., 2017),
students with greater social-emotional skills at T1 were shown to report
greater connection to school at T2. Because such students tend to better
manage emotions and behaviors and adapt to the demands of school
more easily, they typically report more positive school experiences
(e.g., positive peer relationships, social inclusion, and school motiva-
tion) and therefore greater school connectedness (Valiente et al., 2007).
In turn, as expected, students with higher levels of school connected-
ness were reported as exhibiting fewer mental health difficulties, and
vice versa. Consistent with the theoretical frameworks of attachment
and social development, secure attachment to key individuals within
the school environment (such as peers and teachers) provides a base for
a healthy development, as connectedness to a school with prosocial
norms and values can mitigate unhealthy behaviors (Bond et al., 2007;
Catalano et al., 2004).
To our surprise, however, school connectedness failed to predict
later academic achievement. One must consider the possibility that the
role of school connectedness, despite previous evidence (e.g., Wang &
Holcombe, 2010), is masked by the impact of mental health difficulties,
which might be a more salient domain in relation to childhood aca-
demic competence. Another explanation lies in the ongoing challenges
pertaining to the measurement of conceptually overlapped concepts.
CASEL (2003), for instance, has conceptualized school connection in
various ways, and a clear definition is currently lacking. More gen-
erally, the measurement of school connectedness has been particularly
challenging as it has been inconsistently operationalized throughout the
years (Libbey, 2004). The Kidscreen-27 school environment domain
used in the current study includes dimensions of affective (happiness at
school), cognitive (academic competency) and behavioral (perception
of teacher relationships) school connectedness, although its short
M. Panayiotou et al.
structure likely prevented us from fully capturing the multidimensional
nature of the construct. Given the lack of a universal definition, school
connectedness can be defined and measured in diverse ways, and fur-
ther work is therefore needed towards the comprehensive con-
ceptualization of this concept, if its measurement is to be consistent.
Until such time, researchers are encouraged to be aware of concepts
suffering from a ‘jingle’ (scales with the same name that actually
measure different constructs) and ‘jangle’ fallacies (scales with different
names that actually measure the same construct; Marsh, 1994) and to
consider using multiple tools to fully assess each construct (as in Ross &
Tolan, 2017) as this would possibly help overcome some of the afore-
mentioned issues, thus providing a more comprehensive representation
of the SEL logic model.
Finally, intervention exposure did not influence the examined
pathways, as these were invariant across the PATHS and UP groups. In
attempting to make sense of this finding, it is noteworthy that UP
schools were all delivering other approaches to SEL (including, for ex-
ample, the Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning program;
Humphrey et al., 2018). Given the proliferation of SEL in education,
this is unsurprising. Indeed, Durlak (1995) refers to, “the fantasy of
untreated control groups” (p.76). What our findings perhaps demon-
strate is that systematic exposure to a particular SEL program (in this
case, PATHS) does not matter; the longitudinal effects uncovered hold
regardless among students exposed to a range of approaches.
A number of limitations should be taken into account when inter-
preting the findings of the current study. First, although the current
sample was socio-demographically diverse, it was not fully re-
presentative of the population from which it was drawn, thus limiting
the generalizability of findings. The second limitation stems from the
secondary analysis of an existing dataset. Due to the restricted choice of
measures, our model does not portray a perfect representation of the
SEL logic model, but rather a close approximation of it. Therefore, fu-
ture work should extend these findings and seek empirical validation of
the CASEL logic model (CASEL, 2003) by including a proxy variable for
learning environment. Similarly, the SSIS-SEL measure used in the
current study is based on a recent reconfiguration of the existing SSIS
(Gresham & Elliott, 2008) with insufficient psychometric evidence.
Both the current study and the original validation work (Gresham &
Elliott, 2018) found that the SSIS-SEL suffers from poor discriminant
validity, which we partially addressed by modelling a second-order
structure. A similar picture emerged for Ross and Tolan (2017) second-
order five-factor SEL model, the fit of which improved upon correlating
several residual errors due to substantial item overlap. However, given
that the theoretical SEL model proposed by CASEL (2003) is yet to
receive substantial empirical support, we are unable to conclude whe-
ther the poor discriminant validity is measurement- or theory-specific.
Therefore, further work is needed towards the empirical validation of
CASEL’s (2003) social-emotional competence construct.
Third, although the teacher version of the SDQ was found to be a
robust measure (Stone et al., 2010), it is unclear whether this method
fully captured the range of students’ mental health difficulties, as evi-
dence suggests that teachers are more accurate in reporting ex-
ternalizing than internalizing problems (Winsler & Wallace, 2002).
Researchers are therefore encouraged to consider using clinical inter-
views and self-report measures, which are regarded to be more ade-
quate for the assessment of such symptoms in children and adolescents
(Whitcomb & Merrell, 2013). Fourth and finally, given that the main
aim of the current study was to empirically validate the theoretical
model that underlies SEL programs, the impact of individual char-
acteristics was not assessed. For example, one might expect to find
different pathways in other developmental periods. Future research is
therefore needed to confirm the above model in different populations
and developmental stages.
202
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
5. Conclusion
The current study makes a significant contribution to the field by
empirically validating some of the mechanisms through which SEL is
theorized to lead to improved academic achievement. The methodolo-
gical strengths of this study including the longitudinal design, con-
sideration of data nesting, use of latent variables, and the simultaneous
examination of the direct and indirect relations between four key SEL
components, provide a robust empirical validation of an integrative
model that has been notably absent from the extant literature. Our
findings extend current work on SEL in important ways. More specifi-
cally, irrespective of intervention exposure, mental health was shown to
be the only significant direct contributor to future academic attainment,
once gender and prior academic attainment was taken into account.
More importantly, the study also indicates some possible revisions to
our current understanding as to the role of social and emotional skills in
middle childhood, as their buffering effect on mental health difficulties
diminished their adverse effects on academic attainment. Further re-
search is, however, needed to extend this work by exploring a more
comprehensive SEL model in different groups and developmental
stages.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.009.
References
Allen, K., Vella-Brodrick, D., & Waters, L. (2017). School belonging and the role of social
and emotional competencies in fostering an adolescent’s sense of connectedness to
their school. In E. Frydenberg, A. J. Martin, & R. J. Collie (Eds.). Social and emotional
learning in Australia and the Asia-Pacific: Perspectives, programs and approaches (pp. 83–
100). . http://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3394-0.
Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during adolescence.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 795–809. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-
0663.94.4.795.
Ashdown, D. M., & Bernard, M. E. (2012). Can explicit instruction in social and emotional
learning skills benefit the social-emotional development, well-being, and academic
achievement of young children? Early Childhood Education Journal, 39, 397–405.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-011-0481-x.
Banerjee, R., Weare, K., & Farr, W. (2014). Working with ‘Social and Emotional Aspects of
Learning’ (SEAL): Associations with school ethos, pupil social experiences, atten-
dance, and attainment. British Educational Research Journal, 40, 718–742. https://doi.
org/10.1002/berj.3114.
Berry, V., Axford, N., Blower, S., Taylor, R. S., Edwards, R. T., Tobin, K., ... Bywater, T.
(2016). The effectiveness and micro-costing analysis of a universal, school-based,
social–emotional learning programme in the UK: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled
Trial. School Mental Health, 8, 238–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-015-
9160-1.
Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2015). School readiness and self-regulation: A developmental
psychobiological approach. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 711–731. https://doi.
org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015221.
Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., & Patton, G. (2007).
Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late
teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcomes. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013 357.e359–357.e318.
Brock, L. L., Nishida, T. K., Chiong, C., Grimm, K. J., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2008).
Children's perceptions of the classroom environment and social and academic per-
formance: A longitudinal analysis of the contribution of the Responsive Classroom
approach. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.
2007.02.004.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: The Guilford Press.
Caldarelle, P., Christensen, L., Kramer, T. J., & Kronmiller, K. (2009). Promoting social
and emotional learning in second grade students: A study of the Strong Start curri-
culum. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10643-009-0321-4.
Carroll, A., Houghton, S., Wood, R., Unsworth, K., Hattie, J., Gordon, L., & Bower, J.
(2009). Self-efficacy and academic achievement in Australian high school students:
The mediating effects of academic aspirations and delinquency. Journal of
Adolescence, 32, 797–817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.10.009.
Catalano, R. F., Haggerty, K. P., Oesterle, S., Fleming, C. B., & Hawkins, J. D. (2004). The
importance of bonding to school for healthy development: Findings from the Social
Development Research Group. Journal of School Health, 74, 252–261. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08281.x.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing
measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9,
233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5.
M. Panayiotou et al.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (2003). Safe and sound: An
educational leader’s guide to evidence-based Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) pro-
grams. Chicago, IL: Author.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (2008). Social and emotional
learning (SEL) and student benefits: Implications for the safe schools/healthy stu-
dents core elements. Retrieved from < https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED505369 > .
Davis, A., Solberg, V. S., de Baca, C., & Gore, T. H. (2014). Use of social emotional
learning skills to predict future academic success and progress toward graduation.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 19, 169–182. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10824669.2014.972506.
Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., Zinsser, K., & Wyatt, T. M. (2014). How preschoolers' social-
emotional learning predicts their early school success: Developing theory-promoting,
competency-based assessments. Infant and Child Development, 23, 426–454. https://
doi.org/10.1002/icd.1840.
Department for Education (2010). National curriculum assessments at Key Stage 1 in
England, 2010. (SFR 26/2010). Retrieved from < https://www.gov.uk/government/
uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/218884/sfr26-2010.pdf > .
Department for Education (2011). Schools, pupils, and their characteristics, January
2011. (SFR 12/2011). Retrieved from < https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/219064/main_20text_20sfr122011.pdf > .
Department for Education (2012). Schools, pupils, and their characteristics, January
2012. (SFR10/2012). Retrieved from < https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/219260/sfr10-2012.pdf > .
Department for Education (2013). Special educational needs in England, January 2013.
(SFR 30/2013). Retrieved from < https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225699/SFR30-2013_Text.pdf > .
Department for Education (2014). National curriculum assessments at Key Stage 2 in
England, 2014 (revised). (SFR 50/2014). Retrieved from < https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/428838/SFR50_2014_
Text.pdf > .
Domitrovich, C. E., Durlak, J. A., Staley, K. C., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Social-emo-
tional competence: An essential factor for promoting positive adjustment and redu-
cing risk in school children. Child Development, 88, 408–416. https://doi.org/10.
1111/cdev.12739.
Duckworth, K., & Schoon, I. (2010). Progress and attainment during primary school: The
roles of literacy, numeracy and self-regulation. Longitudinal and Life Course Studies, 1,
223–240. https://doi.org/10.14301/llcs.v1i3.92.
Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., ...
Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology,
43, 1428–1446. https://doi.org/10.1037/[0012-1649.43.6.1428].supp.
Durlak, J. (1995). School-based prevention programs for children and adolescents. London:
Sage Publications Inc.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011).
The impact of enhancing students' social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of
school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405–432. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x.
Eccles, T. S. (1999). The development of children ages 6 to 14. The Future of Children, 9,
30–44. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602703.
Education Endowment Foundation (2013). Pre-testing in EEF evaluations. Retrieved
from < https://v1.educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/uploads/pdf/Pre-testing_
paper.pdf > .
Eisenberg, N., & Sulik, M. J. (2012). Emotion-related self-regulation in children. Teaching
Psychology, 39, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311430172.
Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., & Eggum, N. D. (2010). Self-regulation and school readiness.
Early Education & Development, 21, 681–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.
2010.497451.
Elias, M. J., & Haynes, N. M. (2008). Social competence, social support, and academic
achievement in minority, low-income, urban elementary school children. School
Psychology Quarterly, 23, 474–495. https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.23.4.474.
Elias, M. J., Leverett, L., Duffell, J. C., Humphrey, N., Stepney, C., & Ferrito, J. (2015).
Integrating SEL with related prevention and youth development approaches. In J. A.
Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.). Handbook of social
and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 33–49). New York, NY: The Guilford
Press.
Elias, M. J., Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., Frey, K. S., Greenberg, M. T., Haynes, N. M., ...
Shriver, T. P. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Faria, A. M., Kendzior, A. K., Brown, L., O'Brien, B., & Osher, D. (2013). PATHS im-
plementation and outcome study in the Cleveland Metropolitan School District: Final re-
port. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T. S., Johnson, D. W.,
& Beechum, N. O. (2012). Teaching adolescents to become learners the role of non-
cognitive factors in shaping school performance: A critical literature review. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Flook, L., Repetti, R. L., & Ullman, J. B. (2005). Classroom social experiences as predictors
of academic performance. Developmental Psychology, 41, 319–327. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.319.
Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. The
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.
1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x.
Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2007). The role of emotion
regulation and children's early academic success. Journal of School Psychology, 45,
3–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.002.
Green, H., McGinnity, Á., Meltzer, H., Ford, T., & Goodman, R. (2005). Mental health of
children and young people in Great Britain, 2004. Cardiff: Office for National Statistics.
Greenberg, M. T. (2010). School-based prevention: Current status and future challenges.
Effective Education, 2, 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415531003616862.
Greenberg, M. T., & Kusche, C. A. (1993). Promoting social and emotional development in
deaf children: The PATHS project. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (2008). Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) rating scales
203
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
manual. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson.
Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (2018). Social skills improvement system social-emotional
learning edition manual. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
Gresham, F. M., Elliott, S. N., Metallo, S., Byrd, S., Wilson, E., Erickson, M., ... Altman, R.
(2018). Psychometric fundamentals of the social skills improvement system:
Social–emotional learning edition rating forms. Assessment for Effective Intervention.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508418808598 (Advance online publication).
Guerra, N. G., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2008). Linking the prevention of problem behaviors and
positive youth development: Core competencies for positive youth development and
risk prevention. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 122, 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.225.
He, Q., Hayes, M., & Wiliam, D. (2013). Classification accuracy in Key Stage 2 National
Curriculum tests in England. Research Papers in Education, 28, 22–42. https://doi.org/
10.1080/02671522.2012.754225.
Henry, K. L., & Slater, M. D. (2007). The contextual effect of school attachment on young
adolescents’ alcohol use. Journal of School Health, 77, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.
1111/j.1746-1561.2007.00169.x.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling:
A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
Humphrey, N. (2013). Social and emotional learning: A critical appraisal. London, England:
SAGE Publications.
Huston, A. C., & Ripke, M. N. (2006). Middle childhood: Contexts of development. In A. C.
Huston, & M. N. Ripke (Eds.). Developmental contexts in middle childhood (pp. 1–22).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Humphrey, N., Barlow, A., Wigelsworth, M., Lendrum, A., Pert, K., Joyce, C., ... Turner, A.
(2015). Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS): Evaluation report and ex-
ecutive summary. Retrieved from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/
public/files/Projects/Evaluation_Reports/EEF_Project_Report_
PromotingAlternativeThinkingStrategies.pdf.
Humphrey, N., Hennessey, A., Lendrum, A., Wigelsworth, M., Turner, A., Panayiotou, M.,
... Calam, R. (2018). The PATHS curriculum for promoting social and emotional well-
being among children aged 7 9 years: A cluster RCT. Public Health Research, 6(10),
1–116. https://doi.org/10.3310/phr06100.
Izard, C., Fine, S., Schultz, D., Mostow, A., Ackerman, B., & Youngstrom, E. (2001).
Emotion knowledge as a predictor of social behavior and academic competence in
children at risk. Psychological Science, 12, 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
9280.00304.
Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions
and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School
Psychologist, 8, 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340893.
Jones, D. E., Greenberg, M., & Crowley, M. (2015). Early social-emotional functioning
and public health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and
future wellness. American Journal of Public Health, 105, 2283–2290. https://doi.org/
10.2105/AJPH.2015.302630.
Kenny, D. A., & McCoach, D. B. (2003). Effect of the number of variables on measures of
fit in Structural Equation Modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary
Journal, 10, 333–351. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1003_1.
Kia-Keating, M., & Ellis, B. H. (2007). Belonging and connection to school in resettlement:
Young refugees, school belonging, and psychosocial adjustment. Clinical Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 12, 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104507071052.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New
York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Krishnakumar, A., Narine, L., Roopnarine, J. L., & Logie, C. (2014). Multilevel and cross-
level effects of neighborhood and family influences on children's behavioral outcomes
in Trinidad and Tobago: The intervening role of parental control. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology, 42, 1057–1068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-014-9852-2.
Lafavor, T. (2017). Predictors of academic success in 9- to 11-year-old homeless children:
The role of executive function, social competence, and emotional control. The Journal
of Early Adolescence. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431616678989 (Advanced online
publication).
LeCroy, C. W., & Krysik, J. (2008). Predictors of academic achievement and school at-
tachment among hispanic adolescents. Children & Schools, 30, 197–209. https://doi.
org/10.1093/cs/30.4.197.
Leerkes, E. M., Paradise, M., O'Brien, M., Calkins, S. D., & Lange, G. (2008). Emotion and
cognition processes in preschool children. Retrieved from Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,
54, 102–124. <http://www.jstor.org/>.
Li, Y., & Lerner, R. M. (2011). Trajectories of school engagement during adolescence:
Implications for grades, depression, delinquency, and substance use. Developmental
Psychology, 47, 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021307.
Libbey, H. P. (2004). Measuring student relationships to school: Attachment, bonding,
connectedness, and engagement. Journal of School Health, 74, 274–283. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08284.x.
Loukas, A., Suzuki, R., & Horton, K. D. (2006). Examining school connectedness as a
mediator of school climate effects. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 491–502.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00504.x.
Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling.
Methodology, 1, 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-1881.1.3.86.
Márquez, P. G.-O., Martín, R. P., & Brackett, M. A. (2006). Relating emotional intelligence
to social competence and academic achievement in high school students. Retrieved
from Psicothema, 18, 118–123. <http://ei.yale.edu/publication/relating-emotional-
intelligence-social-competence-academic-achievement-high-school-students/>.
Marsh, H. W. (1994). Sport motivation orientations: Beware of jingle-jangle fallacies.
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 16, 365–380. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.16.
4.365.
Masten, A. S., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). The development of competence in favorable
and unfavorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children.
American Psychologist, 53, 205–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.53.2.205.
McCombs, B. L. (2004). The learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for
balancing academic achievement and social-emotional learning outcomes. In J. E.
M. Panayiotou et al.
Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.). Building academic success on
social and emotional learning (pp. 23–39). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
McKown, C., Russo-Ponsaran, N. M., Allen, A., Johnson, J. K., & Warren-Khot, H. K.
(2016). Social-emotional factors and academic outcomes among elementary-aged
children. Infant and Child Development, 25(2), 119–136.
McLeod, J. D., & Kaiser, K. (2004). Childhood emotional and behavioral problems and
educational attainment. American Sociological Review, 69, 636–658. https://doi.org/
10.1177/000312240406900502.
Meier, C. R., DiPerna, J. C., & Oster, M. M. (2006). Importance of social skills in the
elementary grades. Retrieved from Education and Treatment of Children, 29, 409–419.
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/42899893>.
Milsom, A., & Glanville, J. L. (2010). Factors mediating the relationship between social
skills and academic grades in a sample of students diagnosed with learning dis-
abilities or emotional disturbance. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 241–251.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327460.
Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., ...
Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and
public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 108, 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108.
Moilanen, K. L., Shaw, D. S., & Maxwell, K. L. (2010). Developmental cascades:
Externalizing, internalizing, and academic competence from middle childhood to
early adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 635–653. https://doi.org/
10.1017/S0954579410000337.
Montroy, J. J., Bowles, R. P., Skibbe, L. E., & Foster, T. D. (2014). Social skills and pro-
blem behaviors as mediators of the relationship between behavioral self-regulation
and academic achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29, 298–309. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.03.002.
Murray, D. W., Rosanbalm, K., Christopoulos, C., & Hamoudi, A. (2015). Self-regulation
and toxic stress: Foundations for understanding self-regulation from an applied de-
velopmental perspective (OPRE Report 2015-21). Washington, DC: Office of
Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved from < https://www.acf.hhs.
gov/sites/default/files/opre/report_1_foundations_paper_final_012715_submitted_
508.pdf > .
Muthén, B. O., & Satorra, A. (1995). Complex sample data in Structural Equation
Modeling. Retrieved from Sociological Methodology, 25, 267–316. <http://www.
jstor.org/>.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Authors.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on
sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary
Journal, 9, 599–620. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0904_8.
Newsom, J. T. (2015). Longitudinal structural equation modeling: A comprehensive in-
troduction. New York, NY: Routledge.
Owens, M., Stevenson, J., Hadwin, J. A., & Norgate, R. (2012). Anxiety and depression in
academic performance: An exploration of the mediating factors of worry and working
memory. School Psychology International, 33, 433–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0143034311427433.
Panayiotou, M., & Humphrey, N. (2017). Mental health difficulties and academic at-
tainment: Evidence for gender-specific developmental cascades in middle childhood.
Development and Psychopathology. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095457941700102X.
Patalay, P., Fink, E., Fonagy, P., & Deighton, J. (2016). Unpacking the associations be-
tween heterogeneous externalising symptom development and academic attainment
in middle childhood. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 25, 493–500. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00787-015-0758-5.
Payton, J., Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., Schellinger, K.
B., & Pachan, M. (2008). The positive impact of social and emotional learning for kin-
dergarten to eighth-grade students: Findings from three scientific reviews. Chicago, IL:
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
Ravens-Sieberer, U., Auquier, P., Erhart, M., Gosch, A., Rajmil, L., ... Bruil, J. The
European KIDSCREEN Group. (2007). The KIDSCREEN-27 quality of life measure for
children and adolescents: Psychometric results from a cross-cultural survey in 13
European countries. Quality of Life Research, 16, 1347–1356. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11136-007-9240-2.
Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2015). Scale reliability evaluation under multiple as-
sumption violations. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23,
302–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.938597.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom
emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 104, 700–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027268.
Rhoades, B. L., Warren, H. K., Domitrovich, C. E., & Greenberg, M. T. (2011). Examining
the link between preschool social-emotional competence and first grade academic
achievement: The role of attention skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26,
182–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.07.003.
Riglin, L., Frederickson, N., Shelton, K. H., & Rice, F. (2013). A longitudinal study of
psychological functioning and academic attainment at the transition to secondary
school. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.
2013.03.002.
Riglin, L., Petrides, K. V., Frederickson, N., & Rice, F. (2014). The relationship between
emotional problems and subsequent school attainment: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Adolescence, 37, 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.02.010.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). Social and emotional learning in ele-
mentary school settings: Identifying mechanisms that matter. In J. A. Durlak, C. E.
Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.). Handbook of social and emotional
204
Contemporary Educational Psychology 56 (2019) 193–204
learning: Research and practice (pp. 151–166). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Robitail, S., Ravens-Sieberer, U., Simeoni, M. C., Rajmil, L., Bruil, J., ... Power, M. The
KIDSCREEN Group. (2007). Testing the structural and cross-cultural validity of the
KIDSCREEN-27 quality of life questionnaire. Quality of Life Research, 16, 1335–1345.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9241-1.
Romano, E., Babchishin, L., Pagani, L. S., & Kohen, D. (2010). School readiness and later
achievement: Replication and extension using a nationwide Canadian survey.
Developmental Psychology, 46, 995–1007. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018880.
Ross, K. M., & Tolan, P. (2017). Social and emotional learning in adolescence: Testing the
CASEL model in a normative sample. The Journal of Early Adolescence. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0272431617725198 (Advanced online publication).
Sellström, E., & Bremberg, S. (2006). The significance of neighbourhood context to child
and adolescent health and well-being: A systematic review of multilevel studies.
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 34, 544–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14034940600551251.
Sklad, M., Diekstra, R., Ritter, M. D., Ben, J., & Gravesteijn, C. (2012). Effectiveness of
school-based universal social, emotional, and behavioral programs: Do they enhance
students’ development in the area of skill, behavior, and adjustment? Psychology in the
Schools, 49, 892–909. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21641.
Stepp, S. D., Pardini, D. A., Loeber, R., & Morris, N. A. (2011). The relation between
adolescent social competence and young adult delinquency and educational attain-
ment among at-risk youth: The mediating role of peer delinquency. The Canadian
Journal of Psychiatry, 56, 457–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371105600803.
Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C. M. E., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2010).
Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and
Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-year-olds: A review. Clinical Child and Family
Psychology Review, 13, 254–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2.
Strand, S. (2006). Comparing the predictive validity of reasoning tests and national end of
Key Stage 2 tests: Which tests are the ‘best’? British Educational Research Journal, 32,
209–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920600569073.
Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive
youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interven-
tions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88, 1156–1171.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864.
Trentacosta, C. J., & Fine, S. E. (2010). Emotion knowledge, social competence, and
behavior problems in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review. Social
Development, 19, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00543.x.
Valiente, C., Eisenberg, N., Haugen, R., Spinrad, T. L., Hofer, C., Liew, J., & Kupfer, A.
(2011). Children's effortful control and academic achievement: Mediation through
social functioning. Early Education & Development, 22, 411–433. https://doi.org/10.
1080/10409289.2010.505259.
Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., & Castro, K. S. (2007). Children's effortful control and
academic competence: Mediation through school liking. Retrieved from Merrill-
Palmer Quarterly, 53, 1–25. <http://www.jstor.org/>.
Valiente, C., Swanson, J., & Eisenberg, N. (2012). Linking students' emotions and aca-
demic achievement: When and why emotions matter. Child Development Perspectives,
6, 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00192.x.
Vostanis, P., Humphrey, N., Fitzgerald, N., Deighton, J., & Wolpert, M. (2013). How do
schools promote emotional well-being among their pupils? Findings from a national
scoping survey of mental health provision in English schools. Child and Adolescent
Mental Health, 18, 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3588.2012.00677.x.
Wang, M. T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents' perceptions of school environment,
engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational
Research Journal, 47, 633–662. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209361209.
Welsh, M., Parke, R. D., Widaman, K., & O'Neil, R. (2001). Linkages between children's
social and academic competence: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of School
Psychology, 39, 463–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00084-X.
Wentzel, K. R. (1991). Relations between social competence and academic achievement
in early adolescence. Child Development, 91, 1066–1078. https://doi.org/10.2307/
1131152.
Whitcomb, S. A., & Merrell, K. W. (2013). Behavioral, social, and emotional assessment of
children and adolescents (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wigelsworth, M., Lendrum, A., Oldfield, J., Scott, A., ten Bokkel, I., Tate, K., & Emery, C.
(2016). The impact of trial stage, developer involvement and international trans-
ferability on universal social and emotional learning programme outcomes: A meta-
analysis. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46, 347–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0305764x.2016.1195791.
Wigelsworth, M., Qualter, P., & Humphrey, N. (2016). Emotional self-efficacy, conduct
problems, and academic attainment: Developmental cascade effects in early adoles-
cence. European Journal of Developmental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/
17405629.2016.1180971 (Advance online publication).
Winsler, A., & Wallace, G. L. (2002). Behavior problems and social skills in sreschool
children: Parent-teacher agreement and relations with classroom observations. Early
Education & Development, 13, 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed1301_3.
Zhao, Y., & Zhao, G. (2015). Emotion regulation and depressive symptoms: Examining the
mediation effects of school connectedness in Chinese late adolescents. Journal of
Adolescence, 40, 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.12.009.
Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). The scientific
base linking social and emotional learning to school success. In J. E. Zins, R. P.
Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.). Building academic success on social and
emotional learning (pp. 3–22). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Zins, J. E., & Elias, M. J. (2007). Social and emotional learning: Promoting the devel-
opment of all students. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17,
233–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474410701413152.