The role of teachers’ social and emotional competence in implementing social and emotional learning (SEL) curriculum in Malawi

Abstract

Social and emotional learning (SEL) enhances children's academic and life achievements when implemented well. While previous studies explored factors influencing teachers’ implementation of SEL, limited attention has been given to the role of their social and emotional competence (SEC). To address this gap, this study analyzed surveys from 434 primary school teachers in Malawi using hierarchical linear modeling. The findings reveal a positive relationship between teachers’ SEC, specifically in emotion regulation and relationship management, and their integration of SEL in daily classroom instruction. Notably, teachers serve as behavioral role models through socialization, communication, and emotional conduct. Strengthening teachers’ SEC, in conjunction with SEL pedagogy training, could help foster SEL-rich school environments for learners in Malawi and similar contexts.

Keywords

social and emotional learning teacher competence emotion regulation relationship management Malawi

Introduction

Social and emotional competence (SEC) refers to a person's ability to effectively navigate emotional situations and engage positively in social settings (Elias et al., 1997). Children who are socially and emotionally competent are better positioned to be successful in school and life, as they can regulate emotions, form positive relationships with others, and persist in the face of difficulties. On the other hand, children lacking SEC show poorer classroom participation, academic performance, and peer relationships (Durlak et al., 2011; Hunter et al., 2018; McKown et al., 2016; Raver, 2002). Crucially, these skills are learnable and actively teachable. Growing evidence, including findings from experimental research, suggests that when children are provided with organized and intentional social and emotional learning (SEL) opportunities, their SEC improves, leading to long-term achievements that extend into adulthood (Duckworth et al., 2012; Hassan & Mouganie, 2014; Moreira et al., 2014). As such, schools worldwide are increasingly incorporating SEL into their formal curriculum (Jones et al., 2021).

As SEL moves from experimental laboratories to real-world school settings, research has been active in identifying factors that facilitate its successful implementation in everyday classrooms (e.g., Domitrovich et al., 2012; Durlak, 2016; Evans et al., 2015). Teacher quality emerges as a pivotal factor, with studies indicating that the quality and outcome of children's SEL experience depend on various teacher factors, such as curriculum knowledge, teaching methods, confidence, commitment, and buy-in toward SEL (e.g., Brackett et al., 2012; J. Lee et al., 2019; J. Lee & Zuilkowski, 2022; Triliva & Poulou, 2006; Zinsser et al., 2014). Ongoing research and programs in diverse educational contexts thusly strive to enhance teachers’ knowledge and application of the latest innovations and science in SEL for children (e.g., Dung & Zsolnai, 2021; Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017; Todd et al., 2022).

While equipping teachers with subject knowledge and pedagogy of SEL is crucial, efforts directed at researching and developing teachers’ own SEC in relation to SEL implementation are relatively nascent and limited, particularly outside Western contexts, including Africa (Collie, 2017; Cross Francis et al., 2019; Molyneux, 2021). In the broader literature on school quality, teachers’ SEC is recognized as crucial in shaping the classroom climate and relationships (Lozano-Peña et al., 2021). However, as SEL curricula gain prevalence, teachers are now expected to deliver structured SEL instruction as part of the official school curriculum, either as standalone subjects or integrated into conventional subjects such as reading, life skills, and arts education (Dung & Zsolnai, 2021; J. Lee & Zuilkowski, 2022; Zinsser et al., 2018). This expectation goes beyond implicit demonstrations in classroom interactions or management. Hence, research “examining the link between teachers’ SEC and effective teaching,” along with investigations into SEL beliefs and pedagogy, will afﬁrm the importance of addressing teachers’ SEC specifically within the context of school-based SEL (Collie, 2017, p. 178).

The present study addresses this research demand by examining the role of two dimensions of teachers’ SEC—emotional regulation and relationship management—in their ability to implement SEL in classrooms. The study's focus on emotional regulation and relationship management is informed by research that claims these skills are successors to and more advanced than other SEC skills, such as emotion recognition and understanding (Joseph & Newman, 2010; Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Drawing on these research findings, this article empirically examines the relationship between teachers’ emotional regulation and relationship management skills and their integration of SEL into daily classroom instruction using data from 434 primary school teachers in Malawi.

Teachers’ SEC

Teachers are essential emotional socializers in school settings (Poulou, 2017; Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017). How a teacher interacts with students and manages the class depends on their ability to organize various social and emotional factors in the classroom (Buettner et al., 2016). Socially and emotionally competent teachers are responsive to students’ needs and strengths and design lessons to maximize students’ potential. These teachers cultivate supportive and warm relationships with and among students, serve as positive role models, and establish classroom routines that promote prosocial behavior among students. They also effectively guide students through conflict situations and address misbehavior (Aldrup et al., 2020; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009). Emotional regulation and relationship management skills are central to these teacher qualities, as identified in various studies (Aldrup et al., 2020; Buettner et al., 2016; Collie, 2017; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009; Karalyn, 2012; Zinsser et al., 2015; Zolkoski et al., 2020).

Emotion regulation refers to “the processes by which individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experience and express these emotions” (Gross, 1998, p. 275). In the classroom, this competence is demonstrated when teachers, for instance, compose emotions during stressful times to fulfill their responsibilities and respond respectfully to students (Aldrup et al., 2020; Collie, 2017).

Research from different educational contexts, such as China, Germany, and Greece, has shown that teachers’ emotional regulation is associated with positive workplace outcomes, including heightened job satisfaction, well-being, and instructional efficacy (Aldrup et al., 2020; Klusmann et al., 2008; M. Lee et al., 2016; Platsidou, 2010; Yin et al., 2018). Similarly, teachers in the United States strive to regulate negative emotions, both their own and students’, such as anger and frustration, to maintain classroom goals and embody the ideal teacher image as an emotional role model (Sutton, 2004). Notably, research finds the contagious nature of emotions, indicating that students can perceive and absorb teachers’ unregulated negative emotions, potentially jeopardizing teacher–student relationships (Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017). Conversely, enhanced emotional skills among teachers, fostered through mindfulness and regulation interventions, improve overall instructional quality. This improvement spans classroom organization, instructional and emotional support for learners, dedication to teaching, and the appraisal of teaching as meaningful (Hirshberg et al., 2020; Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017). Relatedly, a recent study in Greece reports a positive correlation between teachers’ emotional competence and students’ empathy and prosocial goals (Poulou & Garner, 2023).

Relationship management represents a person's ability to accommodate other people's needs while asserting their own desires (Aldrup et al., 2020; Elias et al., 1997). In the classroom, this competence manifests, for instance, when teachers respect and care for students’ needs, collaborate with them, offer and seek help, communicate clearly, and resolve conflict amicably (Aldrup et al., 2020; Collie, 2017). Teachers may also demonstrate these abilities through interactions with colleagues, school leadership, and parents (Collie, 2017).

Extensive evidence indicates that positive relationships at work are associated with greater teacher well-being, work motivation, and teaching efficacy (Carstensen & Klusmann, 2021; Spilt et al., 2011; Tschannen-Moran & Barr, 2004). Recent research further indicates that teachers’ interpersonal competence allows them to adeptly navigate the social demands of teaching, reducing emotional exhaustion. This competence is reflected in adaptive classroom management, including collaborative rule creation, offering alternatives, and fostering a conflict-resolving classroom climate (Carstensen & Klusmann, 2021). The benefits extend to students, as high-quality teacher–student relationships help promote student motivation, achievement, and adjustment (e.g., Chong et al., 2010; Martin & Dowson, 2009; Studsrød & Bru, 2012).

Recent studies have extended the research focus on teachers’ SEC to assess its influence on implementing school-based SEL interventions for children. The theoretical link between teachers’ SEC and SEL implementation was first postulated in the Prosocial Classroom Model by Jennings and Greenberg in 2009, alongside its role in classroom management and teacher–student relationships. Empirical testing of this model has recently emerged (Collie, 2017). For instance, Zolkoski et al. (2020) investigated this theoretical hypothesis in an empirical survey with 76 teachers from pre-kindergarten to 12th grades in rural U.S. schools. They found that teachers with stronger self-management skills were more willing to implement SEL than their colleagues. Another survey-based study reported a similar finding with 104 teachers in urban U.S. high schools (Dahl, 2022). Additionally, a qualitative study involving 32 preschool teachers in Virginia, United States, observed that those with strong emotional competence dedicate more time to teaching students emotional regulation compared to teachers with lower levels (Zinsser et al., 2015). These findings jointly demonstrate that the positive relationship between teachers’ SEC and their teaching of SEL holds across various grade levels and settings in the U.S. context.

The current study builds upon and extends existing research by empirically investigating the role of teachers’ SEC in implementing SEL in African contexts, specifically in Malawi, focusing on two dimensions: emotional regulation and relationship management skills.

SEL in Malawi

Malawi is a landlocked, long-stretched country in Southeastern Africa. It grapples with severe poverty, with 70% of the population living on less than 1.90 U.S. dollars per day. The country also faces persistent challenges from HIV infections, impacting 84,000 children under the age of 15 (UNAIDS, 2020; UNICEF, 2016). Children in Malawi suffer from additional stressors, such as malnutrition, orphaning, and physical and sexual abuse (Kalembo et al., 2019; Kishindo, 2011). The government has taken several measures to address these issues, including nationwide infant immunization and HIV prevention programs (NSO & ICF Macro, 2011).

In the education sector, the Ministry has introduced school-based psychosocial support through a Life Skills curriculum that incorporates SEL for children from Grades 2–10 (official admission ages 7–16; Mswayo, 2016). The Life Skills curriculum recognizes the chronic stressors Malawi's children experience and equips them with various SEC skills to prevent, withstand, or recover from such adversity. These include SEC skills widely taught in SEL programs globally, including conflict resolution, emotional regulation, empathy, relationship building, self-awareness, and esteem (Jones et al., 2021; MIE, 2007). Additionally, the curriculum integrates situation-driven SEC skills tailored to Malawi's prevalent social and health issues. These include assertiveness (expressing feelings to resist unwanted sexual advances and cultural practices, like having multiple partners, as introduced in the curriculum), problem-solving (preventing situations that may cause trouble, such as unwanted pregnancy), resistance (standing against peer pressure related to drinking, smoking, or engaging in sexual relationships), responsible decision-making (dedication to meeting family welfare and demands), and stress management (effectively managing stress to prevent risky behaviors like suicide and drug abuse; An et al., 2018; MIE, 2007).

The Ministry refrains from prescribing a specific instructional method for teaching the Life Skills curriculum, opting instead to encourage teacher autonomy. Official teachers’ guides provide examples of participatory methods to facilitate, not determine, teacher choices, such as role-play, group discussion, and poetry, that allow students to learn and practice SEC skills in real-life or simulated situations (MIE, 2007).

While the policy goal of the Life Skills curriculum is well intended, its real-world implementation faces challenges due to inadequate learning materials, insufficient teacher training, and parental pressure for teachers to prioritize academic subjects like reading and math (Chirwa, 2009; J. Lee & Zuilkowski, 2022). These issues impede teachers’ full compliance with the curriculum (Mswayo, 2016). Some teachers omit Life Skills from their teaching schedule while others teach it but allocate fewer lesson hours than mandated by the government, using the saved time for other prioritized subjects (Chirwa, 2009; J. Lee & Zuilkowski, 2022).

Collectively, the situations surrounding Malawi's SEL-infused Life Skills curriculum present a unique research opportunity to examine the role of teachers’ SEC in implementing school-based SEL interventions in everyday African school settings in two ways. First, Malawi's approach to SEL implementation, emphasizing teacher-led instructional decision-making, differs from typical practices in other African locations. For instance, SEL programs in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Torrente et al., 2019), Nigeria (Diazgranados et al., 2022), and Uganda (Matsuba et al., 2021) commonly require teachers to use a mindfulness-based curriculum designed and monitored by external program providers, often U.S.-based non-governmental organizations or research institutes. These curricula specify instructional details, including frequency, duration, and methods. Although the primary focus of this article is not the cross-national comparison of SEL methods, the situation in Malawi enables exploring the relationship between teachers’ SEC and their independently determined commitment to SEL implementation, free from external mandates.

Second, the challenges around Malawi's SEL implementation undoubtedly require additional instructional materials, teacher training, and parent orientation programs, as recommended by previous studies (Chirwa, 2009; Lee, 2022; Lee & Zuilkowski, 2022). Concurrently, Zinsser et al. (2015, p. 916) underscore that “training programs that aim to increase teachers’ emotionally supportive behaviors may be more effective if they first help teachers acquire positive attitudes toward, and greater understanding of, emotions, including their own.” This article takes on Zinsser and colleagues’ claim and explores whether cultivating teachers’ SEC, specifically emotional regulation and relationship management, could be a critical policy consideration to ensure high-quality SEL opportunities for children in Malawi.

Methods

Participants and procedure

This study drew upon a non-experimental research design with data collected from 434 teachers in 34 primary schools in Zomba, a southern district of Malawi. The 34 schools were selected randomly from a total of 197 public primary schools in the district. These schools shared similar institutional traits, including dilapidated facilities, limited learning resources, and class sizes exceeding the national benchmark of 60 students per class, which reflects the typical public school environment in Malawi (MMoEST, 2020; ZDC, 2013). The schools varied in terms of funding structures and religious affiliations. Nine schools were non-sectarian, while the others received subsidies from faith-based organizations, such as the Catholic church, besides regular government funding. School sizes ranged from 4 to 18 classes across grades, with an average of 10 classes per school. The average pupil-to-textbook ratio, including Life Skills, was 2.15, meaning every two children shared one textbook. On average, the schools received three supervisory visits from the local Ministry of Education for performance review. Thirty-one schools actively involved parent–teacher associations in management, while three formed ad hoc associations.

Across all schools sampled, a total of 434 teachers participated in the survey after providing informed and voluntary consent. Among the participants, 44% were female, and 56% were male. All teachers had a teaching certificate and taught in Grades 1–8, with an average class size of 123 students per teacher. On average, the teachers had 8.4 years of teaching experience. Approximately 37% of the teachers had received training in children's social and emotional development during college or through in-service training programs organized by the government or non-governmental organizations such as Save the Children. Table 1 presents summary statistics for the schools and teachers sampled.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics of school and teacher characteristics.

Variable	Mean/frequency	SD	Min.	Max.
School characteristics
Non-sectarian (yes/no)	0.24	—	0	1
Number of classes	9.94	3.57	4	18
Subject-wide pupil-to-textbook ratio	2.15	1.83	0.23	11.09
Number of supervisory visits in the current school year	2.99	1.09	1	6
Presence of active parent–teacher association (yes/no)	0.94	—	0	1
Teacher characteristics
Female (yes/no)	0.44	—	0	1
Years of teaching experience	8.44	7.96	1	30
Number of students currently taught by each teacher	123.03	53.70	8	286
Training experience in SEL-related topics (yes/no)	0.37	—	0	1
Type of teaching certificate (proportion)
Type 1: Certificate of education + teacher's certificate	0.90	—	0	1
Type 2: Junior certificate + teacher's certificate	0.09	—	0	1
Type 3: Primary education + teacher's certificate	0.002	—	0	1
Type 4: Junior certificate + in-service training only	0.01	—	0	1
Grade currently teaching (proportion)
Grade 1	0.12	—	0	1
Grade 2	0.12	—	0	1
Grade 3	0.15	—	0	1
Grade 4	0.13	—	0	1
Grade 5	0.14	—	0	1
Grade 6	0.13	—	0	1
Grade 7	0.12	—	0	1
Grade 8	0.07	—	0	1

Note. SD = standard deviation. In the case of binary variables like gender or yes/no, the mean signifies the proportion or frequency of occurrences where the variable takes the value of 1 in the dataset.

Before initiating fieldwork, the study obtained Institutional Review Board approvals from the Florida State University in the United States (HSC. No. 2016.18728, HSC. No. 2016.18526, and HSC. No. 2017.20785) and the Zomba District Ministry of Education in Malawi (DEM. ADMIN. 07.08.2016 and DEM. ADMIN. 05.24.2017). Participants gave written voluntary informed consent, including a confidentiality agreement.

Measures

Teachers completed an individual survey to self-report their ability to regulate emotions in various school situations, their relationships with students and colleagues, and the areas in which they integrate SEL. The survey also collected demographic and professional background information from teachers, including age, gender, years of teaching experience, type of teaching certificate held, and any prior training related to SEL. Additionally, to situate teachers’ work in broader school environments, I obtained scanned copies of school administrative data at each study school, including school size, religious affiliation, pupil-to-textbook ratio, and parent–teacher collaboration, as presented in Table 1.

Emotional regulation

I measured teachers’ emotion regulation by adapting the emotion regulation component of the Social–Emotional Competence Teacher Rating Scale (SECTRS), originally developed and validated in the United States (Karalyn, 2012). The construct consisted of five self-referencing statements: “I use positive emotions to motivate students,” “I think before I act,” “I can manage my emotions in healthy ways,” “I stay calm when addressing student misbehavior,” “I take criticism without getting angry.” These items are also presented in the top panel of Table 2. Teachers rated their agreement with each statement on a 6-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to establish construct validity among the Malawian teachers in the sample. The analysis resulted in a single-factor solution. Goodness-of-fit statistics showed Satorra-Bentler scaled, χ²(5) = 7.87 with p < .16, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.98, Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = 0.96, root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04, and standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) = 0.03. The McDonald’s omega coefficient was used to estimate internal consistency reliability, resulting in a score of 0.86, indicating strong reliability.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics of predictors and outcomes of interest.

Variable	Mean	SD	Min.	Max.
Emotional regulation	4.86	0.69
I use positive emotions to motivate students	5.00	1.00	1	6
I think before I act	5.24	0.87	1	6
I can manage my emotions in healthy ways	4.95	0.96	1	6
I stay calm when addressing student misbehavior	4.50	1.35	1	6
I take criticism without getting angry	4.62	1.20	1	6
Relationship management	4.87	0.62
I have a close relationship with students	4.80	1.20	1	6
Students come to me with problems	5.24	0.79	1	6
I create a community in the classroom	4.87	1.06	1	6
I have a positive relationship with students’ families	4.79	0.97	1	6
Staff members seek my advice	4.60	1.14	1	6
Staff members respect me	4.90	0.95	1	6
SEL implementation	4.00	0.52
I frequently teach SEL concepts	4.25	0.86	1	5
I coach SEL skills	3.97	0.93	1	5
I talk about SEL in 1:1 or small group	3.76	0.96	1	5
I discuss the potential reactions of SEL	3.45	0.88	1	5
I teach appropriate behavior in class	4.51	0.69	1	5
I discuss non-verbal cues for social interactions	3.71	1.06	1	5
I teach SEL through classroom rules	4.33	0.73	1	5

Note. SD = standard deviation.

Relationship management

I measured teachers’ relationship management by adapting the related component of the SECTRS (Karalyn, 2012), using a similar approach to the emotional regulation measurement. The construct consisted of six self-referencing statements: “I have a close relationship with students,” “Students come to me with problems,” “I create a community in the classroom,” “I have a positive relationship with students’ families,” “Staff members seek my advice,” “Staff members respect me.” These items are also shown in the middle panel of Table 2. Teachers responded using the same 6-point Likert-type scale. Construct validity was established among the surveyed Malawian teachers, with all six items loading on a single factor, as indicated by Satorra-Bentler scaled, χ²(9) = 17.75 with p < .04, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.05, and SRMR = 0.04. The reliability score was 0.84, indicating strong reliability.

SEL implementation

I measured teachers’ SEL implementation behavior by adopting the seven discrete teaching strategies Zinsser et al. (2014) profiled from highly emotionally supportive and competent SEL teachers in the United States. The wording of the seven SEL strategies was modified to create self-referencing statements about how teachers integrate SEL into their classroom activities and to what extent: “I frequently teach SEL concepts,” “I coach SEL skills,” “I talk about SEL in 1:1 or small group,” “I discuss the potential reactions of SEL,” “I teach appropriate behavior in class,” “I discuss non-verbal cues for social interactions,” “I teach SEL through classroom rules.” The seven items are presented in the bottom panel of Table 2. Teachers indicated their responses using a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Construct validity was established with the seven items loaded on a single factor. Satorra-Bentler scaled, χ²(14) = 40.81 with p < .01, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.86, RMSEA = 0.06, and SRMR = 0.05. The reliability score was 0.89, indicating strong reliability.

Analysis

I conducted multilevel linear regression analyses to examine the association between teachers’ emotion regulation and relationship management skills and their implementation of SEL. I created single-factor scores for each variable to incorporate these variables into the analysis, following a regression-based approach (DiStefano et al., 2009). The resulting factor scores were standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 in the computational process. In all analyses, I controlled for the background characteristics of the teachers and schools as Level-1 and Level-2 covariates, respectively, as listed in Table 1. Because I recruited teachers at the school, they were clustered within schools. I thus adjusted standard errors at the school level. The regression model followed a standard two-level structure, capturing variation at the school (j) and teacher (i) levels:

y_{i j} = β_{0 j} + γ S E C_{i j} + ϕ X_{i j} + ϵ_{i j}

(1)

β_{0 j} = β_{00} + δ W_{j} + u_{0 j}

(2)

where

y_{i j}

denotes the SEL implementation of ith teacher in school j.

S E C_{i j}

represents teachers’ emotion regulation and relationship management variables.

X_{i j}

is a matrix of teacher-level covariates, including gender, years of teaching experience, number of students being taught, training experience in SEL-related topics, type of teaching certificate, and grade taught. These covariates are presented in the bottom panel of Table 1.

W_{j}

is a matrix of the school-level covariates, which includes school ownership, size, school-wide pupil-to-textbook ratio, number of supervisory visits from the local Ministry of Education, and the presence of active parent-teacher association. These school-level covariates are displayed in the top panel of Table 1. The model also includes

β_{0 j}

, denoting school-specific random intercepts.

β_{00}

represents the grand mean of teachers’ SEL implementation scores. Lastly,

ϵ_{i j}

is the error term for teachers and

u_{j}

is the error term for schools. The parameter of interest is

γ,

which denotes the relationship between teachers’ emotion regulation, relationship management, and SEL implementation. Positive values of

γ

indicate that teachers with stronger emotion regulation or relationship management tend to implement SEL in more areas of their classroom activities or procedures.

Results

Descriptives

Table 2 reports the average raw scores of teachers’ emotion regulation, relationship management, and SEL implementation, disaggregated by item, among the 434 Malawian teachers included in this study. The teachers’ responses to the emotion regulation items all averaged around five points out of the highest score of 6 (strongly agree), with the lowest score of 4.62 for “taking criticism without getting angry” and the highest score of 5.24 for “thinking before acting.” Similarly, the responses to the relationship management items also averaged around 5, with the lowest score of 4.60 for “having colleagues seeking advice” and the highest score of 5.24 for “having students seeking help with problems.” Regarding SEL implementation, the average item scores showed more variability, ranging from 3.45 for “discussing the potential reactions to social and emotional interactions” and 4.51 for “teaching appropriate classroom behaviors” out of the highest score of 5 (strongly agree). These scores indicate that, on average, teachers in this study rated themselves positively in terms of their ability to regulate emotions and maintain good relationships with others in various school situations. However, how they implemented SEL varied across different classroom activities.

Regression analyses

Table 3 displays the regression coefficients of teachers’ emotion regulation and relationship management skills predicting their SEL implementation, both with and without adjustment for covariates. In both cases, emotion regulation and relationship management consistently and positively predicted teachers’ overall SEL implementation. The effect sizes (ESs) of these relationships were 0.25 and 0.20 standard deviations in the covariate-adjusted model, indicating a small ES. The pattern remained nearly the same in the unadjusted model, showing the stability of the findings.

Table 3.

Regression coefficients of teachers’ SEC predicting their implementation of SEL.

Teacher SEC	SEL implementation	SEL implementation
Teacher SEC	(1)	(2)
Emotion regulation	0.25***	0.31***
	(0.06)	(0.06)
Relationship management	0.20***	0.21***
	(0.04)	(0.04)
Covariate inclusion^a	Yes	No

Note. ^aCovariates included are presented in Table 1. Robust standard errors are in parentheses.

Statistical significance is marked with *** p < .01.

Taken together, the results of the regression analyses indicate that teachers with stronger abilities to control their emotions and manage interpersonal relationships are more proficient at integrating SEL into their classroom instruction and procedures than those with weaker abilities. These socially and emotionally competent teachers actively teach students various SEL concepts, demonstrate how to apply these concepts to actions, and recognize SEL cues in non-verbal interactions. Furthermore, they create a socially and emotionally supportive learning environment by encouraging students to share and discuss their SEL experiences and establish desirable behavioral expectations through classroom rules and routines.

Discussion

Children's social and emotional development can be nurtured through various factors in the learning environments teachers create. The foundation for this influence lies in teachers’ SEC (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009). Socially and emotionally competent teachers are self-aware and adept at recognizing emotions. They use emotions, such as excitement and joy, to motivate learning in both themselves and their students. These teachers also embody prosocial values and establish supportive relationships based on those values (e.g., Aldrup et al., 2020; Jennings & Greenberg, 2009; Zolkoski et al., 2020). This article recognized these teacher capabilities and investigated how teachers’ SEC might also predict effectively facilitating children's SEL in Malawi. The result showed a positive relationship between teachers’ ability to regulate emotions and build positive interpersonal relationships and their successful delivery of the SEL curriculum in everyday classroom settings. The finding offers a multifold insight into research and policy aimed at supporting teachers in their efforts to effectively implement school-based SEL interventions in Malawi and other countries pursuing similar educational goals.

First, this article contributes to the existing research on school-based SEL and its successful implementation. While previous research has explored various factors related to teachers’ delivery of SEL, the focus has primarily been on teacher perception and pedagogical aspects, such as beliefs, comfort, or methods, with limited attention given to teachers’ SEC. Additionally, the existing studies that considered teacher SEC have primarily explored the theoretical connection, lacking empirical evidence, with a few studies suggesting a positive relationship primarily in the U.S. context (Dahl, 2022; Zinsser et al., 2015; Zolkoski et al., 2020). The finding of this article contributes to filling the gaps in the existing literature by bringing together teachers’ SEC and their delivery of SEL into an empirical study in Malawi. The resulting evidence thus expands the current theory- and U.S.-dominant SEL literature to resource-constrained African contexts like Malawi. The findings of this study also broaden the extant literature on teachers’ SEC by showing that strong teacher SEC relates to teachers’ skills in fostering students’ social–emotional development, which in turn may contribute to a psychologically positive school experience for learners in addition to teachers’ own job satisfaction, motivation, and efficacy (e.g., Studsrød & Bru, 2012; Yin et al., 2018).

Second, by the extension of the initial contributions, this study also holds important policy implications. The result indicates that stronger teacher SEC is linked with their ability to provide structured, targeted SEL instruction, besides implicit or indirect demonstrations. Recognizing this potential, the finding advocates for systemic and intentional policy investment in developing teachers’ SEC alongside their subject and pedagogical knowledge in SEL. The suggestion aligns with the perspective of other researchers who emphasize that “SEL is for children and adults, each and every member of the school community” (Humphrey, 2013, p. 3).

Given the evidence substantiating SEL as an effective enabler of children's development and well-being across diverse country contexts, whether resource-rich or poor (Durlak et al., 2011; Matsuba et al., 2021; Torrente et al., 2019), having socially and emotionally competent teachers who actualize this potential in the classroom is valuable. While some teacher education programs in the United States address aspects of SEL for teachers (Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017), low-income countries such as Malawi and Vietnam currently lack such support (Dung & Zsolnai, 2021; J. Lee & Zuilkowski, 2022).

Policymakers and international donors in Malawi and other regions should consider investing in SEL programs specifically designed for teachers, separate from training focused on instructional strategies for SEL with learners. These recommendations are pertinent not only to program designers and providers in Malawi but also in countries like Nigeria and Tanzania where SEL programs lacking support to strengthen teachers’ own SEC before delivering SEL for learners did not produce significant learner outcomes (Diazgranados et al., 2022; RTI International, 2019). Additionally, school administrators can incorporate support for teachers’ SEC within in-school staff welfare interventions.

The specific types of SEC skills teachers should develop might vary in different contexts. In Malawi, the skills and behaviors assessed in the teacher emotion regulation and relationship management scales used in this study can serve as an informed starting point since higher scores on these scales directly relate to their teaching of SEL. For instance, the average teacher in this study reported lower scores on skills, such as staying calm when addressing student misconduct and taking criticism without getting upset. They also struggled with forming close relationships with students and their parents. Policymakers and teacher educators in Malawi could prioritize strengthening teachers’ SEC in these areas through targeted teacher support programs. Additionally, teacher training programs and guidance materials could include structured instruction on SEL strategies, with a particular focus on areas that received lower ratings on the SEL implementation scale, such as discussing non-verbal SEL cues and potential consequences.

Teachers in Malawi and other countries face challenges integrating SEL into their daily school instruction (McLeod et al., 2017; Mswayo, 2016). The findings of this article suggest that a promising policy and practice solution to address this challenge could involve strengthening teachers’ SEC alongside SEL pedagogy. By combining these two aspects, teachers can better integrate SEL effectively into their teaching practices.

Limitations

There are a couple of limitations to this study. First, the data used in this study rely on self-report surveys completed by teachers. Self-report measures aptly assess attitudes, internal beliefs, and behavior indicators (Haeffel & Howard, 2010), aligning with the constructs measured in this article. However, some teachers might provide inflated ratings of their SEC skills or levels of SEL implementation. To address this concern, I applied several mitigation strategies from Larson (2019), including participants’ voluntary involvement, ensuring anonymity, and obtaining informed consent. The survey's introduction clarified its purpose: to understand, not judge or penalize, teacher practices. These strategies should help alleviate pressure for socially desirable responses and elicit authentic responses to a certain extent. Still, future studies might enhance objectivity by incorporating direct behavior observations or third-person assessments into evaluating teachers’ SEC and SEL implementation.

Second, this study focused specifically on teachers’ emotional regulation and relationship management skills as indicators of SEC. Future studies could consider including other dimensions of SEC, such as self-awareness, self-management, or decision-making (Collie, 2017), to gain a more comprehensive understanding of whether and how these skills affect teachers’ implementation of SEL. Third, the results presented in this study are correlational; thus, causal conclusions cannot be drawn. I would encourage future studies to use randomized experiments to establish more robust evidence of the effect of teachers’ SEC on SEL implementation. Additionally, studies could examine the direct effect of teachers’ SEC on similar outcomes among children, going beyond teachers’ delivery of SEL as a process outcome. Lastly, as high-quality school-based SEL programming is relevant to other low- and middle-income countries, I would encourage other researchers to replicate this study in different contexts beyond Malawi.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Jeongmin Lee

Author biography

Jeongmin Lee is a research advisor at the University of Notre Dame's Global Center for the Development of the Whole Child. Jeongmin has over a decade of experience in international education and development in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, with expertise in primary education, teacher pedagogy, and policy analysis.

References

Aldrup

Carstensen

Köller

M. M.

Klusmann

(2020). Measuring teachers’ social-emotional competence: Development and validation of a situational judgment test. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(892), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00892

Eggum-Wilkens

N. D.

Chae

Hayford

S. R.

Yabiku

S. T.

Glick

J. E.

Zhang

(2018). Adults’ conceptualisations of children’s social competence in Nepal and Malawi. Psychology and Developing Societies, 30(1), 81–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971333617747345

Brackett

M. A.

Reyes

Rivers

Elbertson

Salovey

(2012). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about social and emotional learning. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(3), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911424879

Buettner

C. K.

Jeon

Hur

Garcia

R. E.

(2016). Teachers’ social-emotional capacity: Factors associated with teachers’ responsiveness and professional commitment. Early Education and Development, 27(7), 1018–1039. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1168227

Carstensen

Klusmann

(2021). Assertiveness and adaptation: Prospective teachers’ social competence development and its significance for occupational well-being. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 500–526. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12377

Chirwa

(2009). A case study of challenges facing the implementation of life skills education in primary schools in the Zomba District, Malawi [Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand]. http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/handle/10539/7324

Chong

W. H.

Huan

V. S.

Quek

C. L.

Yeo

L. S.

Ang

R. P.

(2010). Teacher-student relationship: The influence of teacher interpersonal behaviours and perceived beliefs about teachers on the school adjustment of low achieving students in Asian middle schools. School Psychology International, 31(3), 312–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034310366207

Collie

R. J.

(2017). Teachers’ social and emotional competence: Links with social and emotional learning and positive workplace outcomes. In Frydenberg

Martin

A. J.

Collie

R. J.

(Eds.), Social and emotional learning in Australia and the Asia-Pacific (pp. 167–184). Springer.

Cross Francis

Liu

Bharaj

P. K.

Eker

(2019). Integrating social-emotional and academic development in teachers’ approaches to educating students. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(2), 138–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732219864375

10.

Dahl

J. D.

(2022). The relationship between high school teachers’ self-reported social and emotional competencies and teacher social and instructional teaching practices and the implications for professional learning [Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University]. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/109341

11.

Diazgranados

Lee

Ohanyido

Hoyer

Miheretu

(2022). The cost-effectiveness of an accelerated learning program on the literacy, numeracy and social-emotional learning outcomes of out-of-school children in northeast Nigeria: Evidence from a mixed methods randomized controlled trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 15(4), 655–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2022.2037799

12.

DiStefano

Zhu

Mindrila

(2009). Understanding and using factor scores: Considerations for the applied researcher. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 14(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.7275/DA8T-4G52

13.

Domitrovich

C. E.

Moore

J. E.

Greenberg

M. T.

(2012). Maximizing the effectiveness of social-emotional interventions for young children through high-quality implementation of evidence-based interventions. In Kelly

Perkins

D. F.

(Eds.), Handbook of implementation science for psychology in education (pp. 207–229). Cambridge Univ Press.

14.

Duckworth

Duncan

G. J.

Kokko

Lyyra

A.-L.

Metzger

Simonton

(2012). The relative importance of adolescent skills and behaviors for adult earnings: A cross-national study (DoQSS Working Paper No. 12-03). Institute of Education, University College London.

15.

Dung

D. T.

Zsolnai

(2021). Teachers’ social and emotional competence: A new approach of teacher education in Vietnam. Hungarian Educational Research Journal, 12(2), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1556/063.2021.00050

16.

Durlak

J. A.

(2016). Programme implementation in social and emotional learning: Basic issues and research findings. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(3), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1142504

17.

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(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

18.

Elias

M. J.

Zins

Weissberg

R. P.

Frey

K. S.

Greenberg

M. T.

Haynes

N. M.

Kessler

Schwab-Stone

M. E.

Shriver

T. P.

(1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

19.

Evans

Murphy

Scourfield

(2015). Implementation of a school-based social and emotional learning intervention: Understanding diffusion processes within complex systems. Prevention Science, 16(5), 754–764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-015-0552-0

20.

Gross

J. J.

(1998). The emerging ﬁeld of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271

21.

Haeffel

G. J.

Howard

G. S.

(2010). Self-report: Psychology’s four-letter word. The American Journal of Psychology, 123(2), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.123.2.0181

22.

Hassan

K. E.

Mouganie

(2014). Implementation of the social decision-making skills curriculum on primary students (Grades 1–3) in Lebanon. School Psychology International, 35(2), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034312469758

23.

Hirshberg

M. J.

Flook

Enright

R. D.

Davidson

R. J.

(2020). Integrating mindfulness and connection practices into preservice teacher education improves classroom practices. Learning and Instruction, 66, Article 101298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101298

24.

Humphrey

(2013). Social and emotional learning: A critical appraisal. Sage Publications.

25.

Hunter

L. J.

Bierman

K. L.

Hall

C. M.

(2018). Assessing noncognitive aspects of school readiness: The predictive validity of brief teacher rating scales of social–emotional competence and approaches to learning. Early Education and Development, 29(8), 1081–1094. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2018.1495472

26.

Jennings

P. A.

Greenberg

M. T.

(2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491–525. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325693

27.

Jones

Brush

K. E.

Ramirez

Mao

Z. X.

Marenus

Wettje

Finney

Raisch

Podoloff

Kahn

Barnes

Stickle

Gretchen

B.-M.

McIntyre

Cuartas

Bailey

(2021). Navigating SEL from the inside out: Looking inside and across 33 leading SEL programs. Harvard Graduate School of Education.

28.

Joseph

D. L.

Newman

D. A.

(2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 54–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017286

29.

Kalembo

F. W.

Kendall

G. E.

Ali

Chimwaza

A. F.

(2019). Prevalence and factors associated with emotional and behavioural difficulties among children living with HIV in Malawi: A cross-sectional study. BMC Psychiatry, 19(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-019-2046-2

30.

Karalyn

(2012). Measurement of teachers’ social-emotional competence: Development of the social-emotional competence teacher rating scale [University of Oregon]. http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12351

31.

Kishindo

(2011). Life skills education and reproductive health education: Preliminary findings from the non-biomedical interventions into HIV and AIDS study. Centre for Social Research.

32.

Klusmann

Kunter

Trautwein

Lüdtke

Baumert

(2008). Engagement and emotional exhaustion in teachers: Does the school context make a difference? Applied Psychology, 57(s1), 127–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00358.x

33.

Larson

R. B.

(2019). Controlling social desirability bias. International Journal of Market Research, 61(5), 534–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785318805305

34.

Lee

(2022). “I always tell my children to learn from me”: Parental engagement in social and emotional learning in Malawi. International Journal of Educational Research, 116, 102090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102090

35.

Lee

Yang

Zuilkowski

S. S.

(2019). A multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis of teacher perceptions of social and emotional learning in rural Malawi. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(4), 600–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12247

36.

Lee

Zuilkowski

S. S.

(2022). “I can teach what’s in the book”: Understanding the why and how behind teachers’ implementation of a social-emotional learning (SEL) focused curriculum in rural Malawi. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 974–993. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12483

37.

Lee

Pekrun

Taxer

J. L.

Schutz

P. A.

Vogl

Xie

(2016). Teachers’ emotions and emotion management: Integrating emotion regulation theory with emotional labor research. Social Psychology of Education, 19(4), 843–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-016-9359-5

38.

Lozano-Peña

Sáez-Delgado

López-Angulo

Mella-Norambuena

(2021). Teachers’ social–emotional competence: History, concept, models, instruments, and recommendations for educational quality. Sustainability, 13(21), 12142. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112142

39.

Martin

A. J.

Dowson

(2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 327–365. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325583

40.

Matsuba

M. K.

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

McElroy

Katahoire

(2021). Effectiveness of a SEL/mindfulness program on northern Ugandan children. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 9(1), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2020.1760977

41.

Mayer

J. D.

Salovey

(1997). What is emotional intelligence? In Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3–34). Basic Books.

42.

McKown

Russo-Ponsaran

N. M.

Allen

Johnson

J. K.

Warren-Khot

H. K.

(2016). Social-emotional factors and academic outcomes among elementary-aged children. Infant & Child Development, 25(2), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.1926

43.

McLeod

B. D.

Sutherland

K. S.

Martinez

R. G.

Conroy

M. A.

Snyder

P. A.

Southam-Gerow

M. A.

(2017). Identifying common practice elements to improve social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes of young children in early childhood classrooms. Prevention Science, 18(2), 204–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0703-y

44.

MIE. (2007). Life skills: Teachers’ guide for Standard 2. Malawi Institute of Education.

45.

MMoEST. (2020). The 2018/19 education sector performance report. Malawi Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/en/2020/201819-education-sector-performance-report-7032

46.

Molyneux

(2021). Preparing teachers for emotional labour: The missing piece in teacher education. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 15(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v15i1.6333

47.

Moreira

Jacinto

Pinheiro

Patrício

Crusellas

Oliveira

J. T.

Dias

(2014). Long-term impact of the promotion of social and emotional skills. Psychology/Psicologia Refl Exão e Crítica, 27(4), 634–641. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7153.201427404

48.

Mswayo

J. C.

(2016). Background information on Life Skills education. Department of Inspectorate and Advisory Services.

49.

NSO & ICF Macro. (2011). Malawi demographic and health survey. National Statistical Office.

50.

Platsidou

(2010). Trait emotional intelligence of Greek special education teachers in relation to burnout and job satisfaction. School Psychology International, 31(1), 60–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034309360436

51.

Poulou

M. S.

(2017). Students’ emotional and behavioral difficulties: The role of teachers’ social and emotional learning and teacher-student relationships. International Journal of Emotional Education, 9(2), 72–72.

52.

Poulou

M. S.

Garner

(2023). Students’ other-oriented cognitions: The roles of teachers’ emotional competence and classroom social support in a Greek sample. School Psychology International, 01430343231216972, https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343231216972

53.

Raver

C. C.

(2002). Emotions matter: Making the case for the role of young children’s emotional development for early school readiness. Social Policy Report, 16(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2002.tb00041.x

54.

RTI International. (2019). USAID Tusome Pamoja pre-primary endline assessment. USAID. https://ierc-publicfiles.s3.amazonaws.com/public/resources/Tusome%20Pamoja%20Pre-primary%20Endline%20Report.pdf

55.

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

Kitil

M. J.

Hanson-Peterson

(2017). To reach the students, teach the teachers: A national scan of teacher preparation and social & emotional learning. University of British Columbia.

56.

Spilt

J. L.

Koomen

H. M. Y.

Thijs

J. T.

(2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of teacher–student relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 457–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9170-y

57.

Studsrød

Bru

(2012). Upper secondary school students’ perceptions of teacher socialization practices and reports of school adjustment. School Psychology International, 33(3), 308–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034311412841

58.

Sutton

R. E.

(2004). Emotional regulation goals and strategies of teachers. Social Psychology of Education, 7(4), 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-004-4229-y

59.

Todd

Smothers

Colson

(2022). Implementing SEL in the classroom: A practitioner perspective. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 95(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2021.2016566

60.

Torrente

Aber

J. L.

Starkey

Johnston

Shivshanker

Weisenhorn

Annan

Seidman

Wolf

Tubbs Dolan

(2019). Improving primary education in the democratic republic of the Congo: Endline results of a cluster-randomized wait-list controlled trial of learning in a healing classroom. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 12(3), 413–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2018.1561963

61.

Triliva

Poulou

(2006). Greek Teachers’ understandings and constructions of what constitutes social and emotional learning. School Psychology International, 27(3), 315–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034306067303

62.

Tschannen-Moran

Barr

(2004). Fostering student learning: The relationship of collective teacher efficacy and student achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3(3), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760490503706

63.

UNAIDS. (2020). Country factsheets: HIV and AIDS estimates. https://www.unaids.org/en/regionscountries/countries/malawi

64.

UNICEF. (2016). Statistics. https://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/malawi_statistics.html

65.

Yin

Huang

(2018). A multilevel analysis of job characteristics, emotion regulation, and teacher well-being: A job demands-resources model. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02395

66.

ZDC. (2013). District education plan 2013–2017. Zomba District Council.

67.

Zinsser

K. M.

Denham

S. A.

Curby

T. W.

(2018). Becoming a social and emotional teacher: The heart of good guidance. Young Children, 73(4), 77–83.

68.

Zinsser

K. M.

Denham

S. A.

Curby

T. W.

Shewark

E. A.

(2015). “Practice what you preach”: Teachers’ perceptions of emotional competence and emotionally supportive classroom practices. Early Education and Development, 26(7), 899–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2015.1009320

69.

Zinsser

K. M.

Shewark

E. A.

Denham

S. A.

Curby

T. W.

(2014). Mixed-method examination of preschool teacher beliefs about social–emotional learning and relations to observed emotional support. Infant and Child Development, 23(5), 471–493. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.1843

70.

Zolkoski

S. M.

Aguilera

S. E.

West

E. M.

Miller

G. J.

Holm

J. M.

Sass

S. M.

Stocks

E. L.

(2020). Teacher perceptions of skills, knowledge, and resources needed to promote social and emotional learning in rural classrooms. Rural Educator, 41(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.35608/ruraled.v41i3.1098