Kimberly A. Schonert-Reichl University of British Columbia
Educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all
Aristotle
[S]elf-absorption in all its forms kills empathy, let alone compassion. When we focus on ourselves, our world contracts as our problems and preoccupations loom large. But when we focus on others, our world expands.
Our own problems drift to the periphery of the mind and so seem smaller, and we increase our capacity for connection - or compassionate action
Daniel Goleman (2006, p. 54)
Introduction
A fundamental mission of schools is to educate students to master essential content areas such as reading, writing, math, and science. In addition to these basic academic skills, however, most ed-ucators, parents, students, and the public at large support a more comprehensive agenda for edu-cation – one that includes promoting students’ cial and emotional competence, morality, and so-cial responsibility (Rose & Gallop, 2000).
Current theory and research posit that a high quality education should not only cultivate the in-tellectual skills of students, schools today also need to nurture the development of positive hu-man traits, such as social awareness, compassion, and altruism – characteristics that will lead to meaningful employment and engaged citizenship (Greenberg et al., 2003).
Schools have been implicated as contexts that can play a crucial role in fostering children’s positive development, and have recently been ac-knowledged as one of the primary settings in which activities to promote social competence and prevent unhealthy behaviors should occur (Durlak & Wells, 1997; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998; Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg, & Walberg, 2004). Indeed, schools are important settings in which to promote social and emotional
develop-ment because they provide access to most children on a regular and consistent basis over the major-ity of their formative years of development. To-day’s schools, however, are facing increased pres-sure to improve academic performance while also giving attention to children’s social and emo-tional needs, and are thus expected to do more than ever before with diminishing resources.
Given competing demands, educators often strug-gle to implement evidence-based curricular ap-proaches that optimize learning and social adap-tation, while proving to be both time- and cost-effective.
This chapter focuses on the ways in which children’s positive human qualities – such as, empathy, compassion, and altruism – can be ad-vanced in educational settings. The first section of this chapter provides a rationale for promot-ing children’s social and emotional competence in schools. Included in this section is a both a ra-tionale and description of the field of social and emotional learning (SEL). In the second section, extant research and theory on the development of empathy and altruism is presented, which is then followed by a description of one classroom-based universal social and emotional competence pro-motion program for promoting empathy among elementary school children – the Roots of Empa-thy. The chapter ends with an example from practice that illustrates children’s altruism in a school setting and a discussion of the impor-tance of efforts to promote SEL in the wider school context.
Making the Case for the Promotion of Children’s Social and Emotional Competence in School Addressing the social, emotional, and mental health needs of children has become a priority in countries across the globe (UNICEF, 2007; World Health Organization, 2003). Epidemiological re-ports highlight increased childhood mental health disturbances, with approximately one in five chil-dren and adolescents experiencing psychological disorders severe enough to warrant mental health services (Romano, Tremblay, Vitaro, Zoccolillo,
& Pagani, 2001). Yet, fewer than 15% of those needing help receive the services they need (Na-tional Advisory Mental Health Council, 1990), and those that do receive services receive such serv-ices via their schools (Rones & Hoagwood, 2000).
Childhood mental health problems have been identified as a salient concern among researchers, clinicians, and educators alike not only because of continuities in the manifestation of such prob-lems in children (Greenberg, Domitrovich, &
Bumbarger, 2001; Loeber, Wung, Keenan, &
Giroux, 1993) and concomitant problems associ-ated with mental health difficulties including peer relationship problems and school dropout (Coie &
Dodge, 1998; Parke & Slaby, 1983), mental health problems (e.g., anxiety, aggression) are often asso-ciated with contemporaneous difficulties, such as significant disruption to the social and academic ethos for other children in classrooms and schools as well as the community at large. Given that be-havior problems during the early school years can be potent warning signs for later more serious forms of psychopathology, elementary schools in particular have been considered as the locus for pri-mary prevention because early instantiations of problems may be more amenable to prevention ef-forts than their later manifestations. Indeed, the significant role of mental health problems and as-sociated risks underscore the need to implement the effectiveness of school-based prevention pro-grams whose aim is to promote protective factors and foster resiliency among all children and ado-lescents (Institute of Medicine, 2009).
School-based prevention efforts have been heralded as an efficacious and cost-effective way to promote students’ positive development and stave off an upward trajectory of aggression and mental health problems. Bolstered by evidence indicating that empirically based curricula can deter the onset of problem behaviors and emotional difficulties (see Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, &
Schellinger, in press), many school districts throughout North America and the world have strengthened their efforts to include programs that promote students’ social and emotional compe-tence because such factors have been identified as those that reduce or ameliorate risk, promote pos-itive child development, and prevent problems in child development.
Social and Emotional Learning (SEL)
Social emotional learning, or SEL, is the process of acquiring the competencies to recognize and man-age emotions, develop caring and concern for oth-ers, establish positive relationships, make
responsi-ble decisions, and handle challenging situations ef-fectively (Greenberg et al., 2003). In short, SEL competencies comprise the foundational skills for positive health practices, engaged citizenship, and school success. SEL is sometimes called “the miss-ing piece” because it represents a part of education that is inextricably linked to school success, but has not been explicitly stated or given much attention until recently. The good news is that these skills can be taught through nurturing and caring learning environments and experiences (Elias et al., 1997;
Greenberg, 2010). Moreover, SEL emphasizes ac-tive learning approaches in which skills can be gen-eralized across curriculum areas and contexts when opportunities are provided to practice the skills that foster positive attitudes, behaviors, and think-ing processes. Research clearly demonstrates the significant role of SEL in promoting the healthy de-velopment and academic achievement of all stu-dents. It also shows that SEL reduces problem be-haviors and emotional distress that interfere with the learning and development of some students. Re-search further indicates that SEL programming sig-nificantly raises test scores while it lowers levels of emotional distress; disruptive behavior; and alcohol, tobacco, or other drug use (see Durlak et al., in press).
The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL; www.casel.org) a nonprofit organization in Chicago, IL, is at the forefront in North American and international ef-forts to promote SEL. Founded in 1993 by Daniel Goleman (famed author of the 1995 landmark book, Emotional Intelligence) and Eileen Rocke-feller Growald, its mission is to advance the science of SEL and expand evidence-based, integrated SEL practices as an essential part of preschool through high school education. CASEL has identified a set of social emotional skills that underlie effective and successful performance for social roles and life tasks, drawing from extensive research in a wide range of areas, including brain functioning and methods of learning and instruction. The SEL competencies identified by CASEL include the following five di-mensions described by Weissberg, Payton, O’Brien, and Munro (2007):
• Self-awareness—accurately assessing one’s feelings, interests and strengths; maintain-ing a well-grounded sense of self-confidence The Development of Positive Human Qualities
• Self-management—regulating one’s emotions to handle stress, control impulses, and moti-vate oneself to persevere in overcoming ob-stacles; setting and monitoring progress toward the achievement of personal and academic goals; expressing emotions appropriately
• Social awareness—being able to take the perspective of and empathize with others;
recognizing and appreciating individual and group similarities and differences; recogniz-ing and effectively usrecogniz-ing family, school, and community resources
• Relationship skills—establishing and main-taining healthy and rewarding relationships based on cooperation; resisting inappropriate social pressure; preventing, managing, and constructively resolving interpersonal con-flict; seeking help when needed
• Responsible decision-making—making de-cisions based on consideration of all relevant factors, including ethical standards, safety concerns, social norms, respect for others, and likely consequences of alternative courses of action; applying decision-making skills to daily academic and social situations; con-tributing to the well-being of one’s school and community
The impact of CASEL is already being seen around the world. Indeed, rrecognition of the im-portance of SEL in schools has spread rapidly across the globe in the last several years. SEL has become the organizing umbrella that encompasses many different education movements emphasizing simi-lar concepts and skills, such as programs in charac-ter education, violence prevention, anti-bullying, drug prevention, and school discipline. SEL pro-vides a framework within which several seemingly disparate programs and initiatives can coherently work together.
In 2008, the Marcelino Botin Foundation published a report entitled “ Social and Emotional Education: An International Analysis” in which they describe some of the SEL work taking place in Europe and the U.S. The Foundation’s website (http://educacion.fundacionmbotin.org/) has re-ports describing SEL in the UK, Sweden, The Netherlands, Spain, the US and Germany (Click the country name to see that country’s report). Singa-pore has undertaken an active initiative, as have
some schools in Malaysia, Hong Kong, Japan, and Korea. In Europe, the U.K. has led the way, but more than a dozen other countries have schools that embed social emotional learning approaches within the school curriculum, including the Isle of Man, Israel, Spain, Australia, New Zealand, and some countries in Latin America and Africa (see the CASEL website for a full description of SEL initia-tives in various countries around the world:
http://www.casel.org/sel/ globe.php). UNESCO, in 2003, initiated a worldwide plan to promote SEL by preparing a report delineating ten basic principles for implementing SEL based on the latest empirical search in the area (Elias, 2003). The UNESCO re-port was sent to the ministries of education in 140 countries (available at www.casel.org).
In Canada a number of SEL initiatives have emerged in the last several years. For example, in British Columbia in 2000, the Ministry of Educa-tion identified social responsibility as one of four
“foundational skills,” as important as reading, writ-ing, and numeracy. The framework for BC’s Social Responsibility Performance Standards includes a common set of expectations for the development of students along four categories (see Table 1, and www.
bced.gov.bc.ca/perf_stands/social_resp.htm for the full report).
Empathy, Altruism, and Prosocial Behavior Do children have the capacity for empathy and al-truism, and for acting out of altruistic rather than egoistic motives? How does empathy and altruism develop across childhood and adolescence and what are the ways in which educators and families can cultivate such positive human qualities and guide children on a path to reach their personal and hu-man potential? As I discuss these questions, I draw from recent theory and research on the develop-ment of children’ empathy and altruism. In con-sidering what leads to empathy and concern for others and how these qualities can be fostered, I ar-gue that it would behoove parents and educators to gain an understanding of the developmental pro-gression of children’s empathy and the conditions that can facilitate or undermine it.
This focus on prevention and social and emo-tional competence promotion aligns with the par-adigm shift occurring in psychology that is reflected in a growing interest among researchers to study the positive aspects of human nature rather than its
negative aspects (see Keltner, 2009 for an excellent recent review of research on the role of positive emotions in human behavior). The positive psy-chology movement, as it has been called, aims to ex-amine the positive features of human development including the study of personal traits such as, ‘‘sub-jective well-being, optimism, happiness, and self-de-termination’’ (Seligman & Csikszentimihalyi, 2000, p. 9). Recent work within this area has been ex-panding to include younger populations (Clonan et al., 2004; Huebner & Gilman, 2003; Huebner, Gilman, & Furlong, 2009; Terjesen et al., 2004).
Shifting away from a focus of human dysfunction to a strengths-based approach, the recent years have been marked by a growing body of research and lit-erature on conditions that explain, promote, and foster well-being in children and adolescents. Im-plicit in this trend is the assumption that educa-tional interventions can be designed to foster chil-dren’s positive development and resiliency (Hymel, Schonert-Reichl, & Miller, 2007; Schonert-Reichl
& Hymel, 2007). Nonetheless, there remains a paucity of interventions and research that focus on the promotion children’s positive human qualities –empathy, altruism, and kindness.1
Empathy is increasingly being recognized as an important dimension of social competence be-cause it not only tends to prompt altruistic
behav-iors (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987: Hoffman, 2000), but because it also “may play a particularly signifi-cant role in the control of aggression” (Feshbach, 1983, p. 267). Indeed, a plethora of empirical in-vestigations have found that empathy inhibits, or at least mitigates, aggressive and antisocial behaviors (Caravita, Di Blasio, & Salmivalli, 2009; Gini, Al-biero, Benelli, & Altoè, 2007; Miller & Eisenberg, 1988). In addition to the critical role that empathy plays in helping individuals desist from aggressive behaviors, research also points to the significance of empathy in enhancing or diminishing the quality of one’s social relationships (Schonert-Reichl, 1993).
Empathy, according to some, is one of the most de-sirable of personality traits, not only because it pro-vides a buffer against antisocial and aggressive be-haviors, but also because of positive association with pro-social behaviors, such as helping, sharing and cooperating (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987).
Definitions of Empathy
Empathy is derived from the Greek word em-patheia, defined as, “physical affection, passion, partiality” which comes from en, “in at” + pathos
“passion” or “suffering”. The Greek term means
“to suffer with”. Lipps (1907), who is credited with introducing the concept of empathy into psychol-ogy, translated the Greek term into the German The Development of Positive Human Qualities
Table 1: Categories of BC’s Social Responsibility Standards
Social Responsibility Dimension Example Behaviors
Contributing to the classroom and Sharing responsibility for their social and
School community physical environment
Participating and contributing to the class and to small groups
Solving problems in peaceful ways Managing conflict appropriately, including presenting views and arguments respectfully, and considering others’ views
Using effective problem-solving steps and strategies Valuing diversity and defending human rights Treating others fairly and respectfully; showing
a sense of ethics
Recognizing and defending human rights Exercising democratic rights and responsibilities Knowing and acting on rights and responsibilities
(local, national, global)
Articulating and working toward a preferred future for the community, nation, and planet – a sense of idealism
word Einfühlung — a term which literally means
“feeling into”. It was not until 1909 that Ticthener provided the translation of Einfühlung into the English word “empathy” (Wispe´, 1991). As a psy-chological construct, empathy has been used to de-scribe a broad range of feelings, expressions, and be-haviors that enable individuals to recognize, to perceive, and to respond appropriately to the emo-tional state of others. Although some have argued that empathy is a characteristic unique to humans, other have demonstrated that emotional contagion and consolation occurs in other mammalian species, including social primate species, and especially bonobo chimpanzees (see de Waal, 2002).
In his book “Theory of Moral Sentiments”
written over two centuries ago, Adam Smith (1790) described empathy as ‘‘the ability to understand an-other’s perspective and to have a visceral or emo-tional reaction’’ (as cited by Hastings, Zahn-Waxler,
& McShane, 2006). Many researchers have spent considerable time trying to distinguish empathy from other related constructs, including sympathy, compassion, and personal distress (Feshbach, 1979;
Hoffman, 2000; Wispé, 1991). Eisenberg et al.
(2006), for instance, have put forth a clear distinc-tion between empathy and sympathy. In their view, empathy is considered a mirroring or vicarious ex-perience of another’s emotions whereas sympathy
“is an affective response that frequently stems from empathy, but can derive directly from perspective taking or other cognitive processing, including re-trieval of information from memory. It consists of feeling sorrow or concern for the distressed or needy other (rather than feeling the same emotion as the other person is experiencing or is expected to expe-rience)” (p. 647). In contrast, personal distress, which also emerges from exposure to another person’s dis-tress, refers to a self-focused and aversive reaction (e.g., anxiety, discomfort) to the vicarious experi-encing of another’s emotion (Eisenberg et al., 1991).
Compassion is much like sympathy in that it stems from the suffering of another, but it also in-cludes the need or desire to alleviate suffering. As Knafo, Zahn-Waxler, Van Hulle, Robinson, and Rhee (2008) posit, “Compassion is a dimension of morality that emphasizes concern for the well-be-ing of others in distress. It is an important aspect of interpersonal responsibility and ethical behavior.
Empathy and prosociality are essential to the ex-pression of compassion” (p. 737).
Despite the problems that have arisen when trying to nail down a single definition of empathy, there appears to be a confluence of findings across empirical studies, emerging from a range of disci-plines with both human and nonhuman species that “show that individuals of many species are dis-tressed by the distress of a conspecific and will act to terminate the object’s distress, even incurring risk to themselves” (Preston & de Waal, 2002, p. 1).
Nonetheless, identifying the proximate mechanism of empathy has stirred much discussion and em-pirical investigation. Is empathy motivated by self-interest? Simply a result of conditioning? Or is em-pathy motivated by a genuine concern for others?
Hence, there is not only conceptual confusion about the precise nature of the term, discerning the
“why” of empathy is still under debate. Indeed, what G. W. Allport said more than 40 years rings true today, “the process of empathy remains a riddle in social psychology... The nature of the mechanism is not yet understood (Allport, 1968, p. 30 from Wispé 1987, original emphasis). Although debates arise when trying to come to agreement regarding the primary function of empathy in human and nonhuman species, recent theoretical, method-ological, and empirical advances seem to point to the importance of empathy in helping individuals form and maintain lasting social bonds (Anderson
& Keltner, 2002).
The Development of Empathy in Children It is during the second year of life in which true em-pathy likely emerges (Eisenberg et al., 2006). Hoff-man (2000) has been acknowledged as being one of
The Development of Empathy in Children It is during the second year of life in which true em-pathy likely emerges (Eisenberg et al., 2006). Hoff-man (2000) has been acknowledged as being one of