Teaching character, grit and resilience in schools is valuable to children but is unlikely to play a major part in eradicating the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their wealthier peers, according to research.
In recent years, policymakers in England and elsewhere in the world have focused on social and emotional learning, and the importance of developing character, determination and self-belief as a way of improving learning, particularly among children from lower income backgrounds.
A study by academics from the universities of Cambridge, Zürich and Tübingen, however, has found that the relative underperformance of disadvantaged pupils has little to do with them lacking the character, attitude or mindset of their wealthier peers.
Researchers analysed data collected by the 2018 programme for international student assessment (Pisa) from more than 240,000 15-year-olds across 74 countries and found the average difference in science results between the top and bottom 25% of pupils in terms of wealth was a huge 70.5 points, equivalent to almost three years of schooling.
Although children from wealthier backgrounds were found to have higher levels of socio-emotional skills on average, the impact of the discrepancy on the overall achievement gap was modest. Researchers calculated that if disadvantaged pupils had the same social and emotional skills as their wealthier peers and the academic effects were exactly the same, the gap would close by just 9%, probably less.
The lead author, Dr Rob Gruijtersof the University of Cambridge, said: “Educational inequality cannot be solved through social and emotional learning. The idea that children can overcome structural disadvantage by cultivating a growth mindset and a positive work ethic overlooks the real constraints many disadvantaged students face, and risks blaming them for their own misfortune.”
His co-author Nicolas Hübner, an assistant professor at the Institute of Education at the University of Tübingen, added: “Developing social and emotional skills is hugely valuable for children, but the evidence suggests it has little to do with why low-income students are more likely to struggle academically. According to our results, it is not a magic bullet for tackling the socioeconomic achievement gap.”
The authors urge politicians to focus instead on the structural reasons for lower attainment among poorer children, including the difference in the quality, resourcing and funding of the schools they attend and fewer out-of-school opportunities compared with their wealthier peers.
Paul Whiteman, general secretary of school leaders’ union NAHT, said: “Schools do a great deal to try to mitigate the effects of disadvantage upon their pupils, but they cannot address the underlying drivers of poverty nor nullify all the impacts it has on children’s lives.”
Lee Elliot Major, professor of social mobility at the University of Exeter, added: “It is absolutely critical we address stark socioeconomic gaps in social emotional skills, not because they help children pass exams, but because working with others, showing empathy, being resilient are all essential for flourishing in life.”
He said new research for the Nuffield Foundation, out next year, would demonstrate that social-emotional skills are just as important for life prospects as academic skills. “We need to acknowledge that human talents come in many forms – creative, vocational, sporting, social and emotional as well as academic – and value and celebrate these in all our children.”