Language Matters

     What better way to get educators going than to take something in schools and politicize the heck out of it? This week’s topic hits close to home, considering I have spent most of my career in the area of social and emotional learning and equity/diversity. What is so interesting about this topic is that it is not new; in fact, we have been talking about this since the one-room schoolhouse, just calling it different things along the way. The public does not realize that the disagreements around these topics weigh heavily on the language we use. Language matters, and it can matter even more depending on a community. 

Hess and Noguera's dialogue between chapter 6 and chapter 10 about SEL and equity/inclusion. The authors attempt to define what these terms mean in practical application. For SEL, they capture SEL in the same way CASEL describes SEL as teaching students about emotional regulation, relationship skills, etc. While Hess and Noguera agree that SEL is valuable when supporting the whole child, Noguera cautions institutions not to create an environment that is not in the scope of an educator. These sentiments are helpful, and yet, what educators see in application is the erosion of SEL for the fear of it being too “therapeutic.” In Utah state legislation, there are a number of codes that address this topic in surveying, assessing, and teaching. Inadvertently, legislators have taken the loud voices of a few to represent the many, creating a fear around SEL and its implications. Again, language matters. Couching SEL with therapy is not necessarily a match. Although they are not strangers, they absolutely do not have to be married to each other. 

Chapter 10 is similar to Chapter 6, discussing how the well intentions of an initiative may go sideways quickly. Although the initiatives in equity/diversity are critical in supporting gaps for students and ensuring access to education, the politicalization and defamation of equity, diversity, and inclusion language create a hostile environment where educators feel paralyzed to move forward. The authors agree that educational disparities are present in institutions. They even agree that schools should be supporting all students, creating a more equitable playing field. Despite this, the authors vary in their perspective of the role of a school in all of this. This last point is the nexus where these topics meet, begging the question- What is the role of the school? Is it the school’s position to make sure that initiatives of SEL, equity, and diversity are implemented? Educators and communities continue to grapple with these questions. The variability of the prioritization of these initiatives suggests that K-12 education has not figured it out. However, what is clear is that within the political arena, the language that centers around these initiatives absolutely matters. It very well could be the difference between successful implementation and ostracization of all things SEL and well-being within the K-12 settings.