SEL Series Overview:
As schools around the world continue investing in Social-Emotional Learning (SEL), one essential question remains largely unasked: Are all students truly ready to access what SEL offers?
This three-part series explores a growing body of research and real-world insights pointing to a foundational gap in many SEL programs: most begin with emotional instruction and self-reflection, but few consider the role of the body and sensory-motor readiness as prerequisites for emotional growth.
Over three installments, you’ll learn:
- Why even the most well-designed SEL programs may be inaccessible to the students who need them most
- What neuroscience and developmental psychology reveal about the sequence of learning regulation skills
- How trauma, neurodivergence, and sensory processing challenges impact emotional learning
- The practical, low-cost strategies that educators, parents, and school leaders can implement to support physiological regulation—first
- How to build SEL programs that are inclusive, equitable, and actually work for all students
Whether you’re an educator, therapist, school leader, caregiver, or advocate, this series invites you to reframe your understanding of emotional readiness…not as a given, but as a developmental milestone that must be supported before students can truly regulate, relate, and rise.
Alert Program® is designed to be complimentary to SEL, behavioral health, and wellness initiatives and is not intended to replace, but rather support, existing curriculum.
Miss Part 1 of the Series? Read it here!
Part 2: What SEL Programs Often Miss
The standard SEL curriculum is built around well-intentioned strategies: naming feelings, resolving conflicts through discussion, practicing empathy and active listening. These are valuable tools…but only for students whose systems are regulated enough to use them.
Traditional SEL often overlooks sensory dysregulation, particularly affecting neurodivergent students, trauma-exposed children, and those with sensory sensitivities.
What these programs often fail to account for is the physiological dysregulation that many students bring with them into the classroom. Neurodivergent children, trauma-impacted children, and those with sensory processing difficulties may not yet have the body awareness or control necessary to access these emotional strategies.
As Conesa points out, students may struggle with emotional and social interactions if their fundamental needs—such as sensory regulation—are not met. Surya reinforces that a child’s ability to successfully adapt to learning environments requires awareness of both emotional and physiological regulation.
This is not a fringe concern. It is central. If SEL is to fulfill its promise as a universal support strategy, it must begin not at the emotional level, but at the physical one. Until then, it will continue to serve some students while failing others.
I. Case Study: A Classroom in Crisis
Consider the example of a preschool teacher named Ms. Lopez, who has implemented an SEL curriculum aligned with the latest best practices. Her classroom has a calm-down corner, she begins each day with a feelings check-in, and she regularly reads books that help children identify and express their emotions. For most of her students, this approach seems to be working…they engage with the material, use the language of emotions, and demonstrate growth in their peer relationships.
But one student, Daniel, continues to have outbursts. He throws toys, screams during transitions, and has trouble sitting through circle time. Despite the nurturing and structured environment, Daniel doesn’t seem to benefit from the tools that are helping his peers. Ms. Lopez, feeling frustrated and concerned, wonders what she might be doing wrong.
The answer, as is often the case, lies beneath the surface. Daniel is not resisting SEL because he lacks empathy or self-awareness. He is not “bad” at feelings. He is dysregulated. His sensory system may be overwhelmed by the noise and activity of the classroom. He may lack the proprioceptive awareness to understand where his body is in space, making sitting still physically uncomfortable or even distressing. Asking Daniel to talk about his feelings while his nervous system is in overdrive is like asking someone to read a book while their house is on fire.
This example illustrates a common problem: traditional SEL assumes readiness that may not exist. It’s not that Daniel doesn’t need SEL (he needs it deeply), but in a sequence that honors his physiological state. Without first addressing his sensory needs, the emotional strategies offered to him are like tools handed to someone wearing mittens…conceptually useful, but functionally out of reach. Research confirms sensory dysregulation is directly linked to social exclusion, particularly in children with ASD or sensory processing disorders.
Teacher Tip: If one of your students isn’t responding to SEL, pause before assuming they’re oppositional. Ask yourself, “What is this child’s body trying to tell me?” The answer might change the entire trajectory of your support.
II. What the Research Addresses, And Misses
While the SEL field has made enormous progress in legitimizing emotional and social learning as essential components of education, its research base still leaves important questions unanswered. The conversation about what makes SEL effective is incomplete without a deeper analysis of two things: for whom it works and under what conditions it is most successful.
Many SEL programs are designed for a general student population, but they often do not specify what foundational skills are necessary for participation. The assumption remains that a basic level of self-awareness and behavioral control is already present. But if we are to be truly inclusive—and truly effective—this assumption must be challenged. Without clearly defining the readiness conditions under which SEL instruction can flourish, we continue to implement a one-size-fits-all solution in a world of diverse neurological, cultural, and emotional needs.
As Durlak and colleagues noted:
“There is little consistency regarding conditions and mechanisms by which these programs are most effective.”
Even more troubling is how little attention has been paid to cultural adaptation and developmental tailoring in early SEL research. Albritton’s review of preschool-level SEL studies found that only six culturally adapted programs met inclusion criteria…an astonishingly low number given the growing diversity of the student population.
This is not an argument against SEL; it is an urgent call for refinement. SEL must evolve from a general framework into a responsive, developmentally aligned, and brain-informed model that honors the physiological stages of regulation. Otherwise, we risk unintentionally reinforcing exclusion by assuming a level of cognitive access that not all students possess. Even more concerning is how SEL programs rarely address diverse cultural and developmental needs, with only six preschool-level SEL programs culturally adapted in a major review.
III. Missing Voices: Students, Teachers, and Equity
To fully understand the implications of this sensory-emotional gap, we must consider the perspectives of those most directly affected by SEL implementation: students, educators, and those communities most likely to be marginalized when foundational readiness is overlooked.
The Student Experience
Children who are dysregulated may not have the language to explain what is happening inside their bodies, but they do demonstrate the behaviors. These behaviors—fidgeting, defiance, withdrawal, outbursts—are often misunderstood as intentional when they are, in fact, physiological. Imagine a student thinking, “I can’t sit still—it feels like bees in my chest,” or “The lights and noise make my body want to run.” These are not dramatic statements—they are accurate reflections of sensory overload. Internally, students might experience dysregulation as ‘I can’t sit still’, ‘it feels like bees in my chest,’ reflecting genuine sensory distress, not intentional misbehavior. Similarly, learners for whom English is a second language may face additional challenges when it is expected that they process complex emotional language in unfamiliar contexts while also managing sensory overload. Trauma impacted students may exhibit such signs as hypervigilance or avoidance, which could be misunderstood and labeled as disruptive or inappropriate behaviors.
According to Critz, Blake, and Nogueira:
“Sensory overresponsivity has also been shown to be correlated with internalizing and externalizing behavior problems and poorly developed adaptive social behaviors.”
Without tools to recognize or manage their internal states, these children are often the very ones who are excluded from SEL’s benefits…and disproportionately subjected to disciplinary actions.
The Educator’s Burden
Educators are often the first to witness dysregulation, yet the last to receive the training necessary to address it appropriately. In the absence of a sensory-informed framework, many teachers fall back on assumptions or default disciplinary strategies. This is not a failing of the teacher, but a gap in the system.
Understanding that dysregulation is often not willful but neurological can shift a teacher’s mindset from punishment to support. This reduces misinterpretations, minimizes frustration, and lowers teacher burnout. When teachers are equipped to understand and support students’ nervous systems before introducing behavioral expectations, classrooms become more inclusive, more productive, and less reactive.
Equity Considerations
The stakes can be even higher when a lens of equity is added.
Gregory and Fergus emphasize this disparity:
“Students of color are more likely to be disciplined for subjective behaviors, such as defiance, which may reflect cultural misunderstandings or unaddressed emotional regulation challenges.”
And as Potapa notes:
“Children from high-risk backgrounds may exhibit difficulties with attention, emotional regulation, and impulse control that are often misunderstood as intentional misbehavior.”
To build a truly equitable SEL program, we must also consider these realities. Sensory-informed SEL is not a specialized intervention…it is a universal design strategy. It benefits all children but is essential for those at the highest risk of being mislabeled or misunderstood.
Subscribe now so you do not miss Part 3. In the meantime, explore the Alert Program® Online Course and Your Best Self: The Alert Program® for All, or contact us for group discounts.
References:
- Ogden, P., Minton, K., & Pain, C. (2006). Trauma and the body: A sensorimotor approach to psychotherapy. W. W. Norton.
- CASEL. (n.d.). Adopt an evidence-based program for SEL. CASEL School Guide. https://schoolguide.casel.org/focus-area-3/school/adopt-an-evidence-based-program-for-sel/
- CASEL. (n.d.). What does the research say? https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/what-does-the-research-say
- Chen, Y., & Yu, L. (2022). Impact of social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1040522. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1040522/full
- Stark, K., et al. (2024). Inclusive SEL in special education: Designing for equity. Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(1), 35–49.
- O’Grady, M., et al. (2024). Foundational regulation skills in SEL program implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 138, 104420.
- Ng, C. (2024). Self-determination theory and emotional regulation development in school settings. [Manuscript].
- Conesa, C. (2022). Basic psychological needs and classroom engagement: A self-determination theory perspective. [PDF].
- Surya, M. (2023). A paternalistic lens on SEL: Emotional and physiological regulation in structured environments. Social-Emotional Learning Review, 8(3), 65–78.
- Designing and implementing SEL for equity. (2023). [White paper].
- Lindner, K. (2022). Social inclusion for students with special educational needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 37(2), 204–220.
- Kojovic, N., et al. (2019). Sensory overresponsivity and social scene exploration in children with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49, 4508–4522.
- Durlak, J. A. (2022). Universal school-based SEL programs: A critical review of conditions and mechanisms. [Manuscript].
- Albritton, K. (2024). Culturally adapted preschool SEL programs: A systematic review. [Manuscript].
- Critz, C., Blake, K., & Nogueira, C. (2015). Sensory processing challenges in children. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 29(5), 435–444.
- Gregory, A., & Fergus, E. (2017). Social and emotional learning and equity in school discipline. The Future of Children, 27(1), 117–136.
- Potapa, S. (2024). The need for trauma-informed, culturally conscious restorative discipline. Journal of School Mental Health Practice, 18(1), 50–62.
- CASEL. (n.d.). Adopt an evidence-based program for SEL. CASEL School Guide. https://schoolguide.casel.org/focus-area-3/school/adopt-an-evidence-based-program-for-sel/
- Dussault, K. (2024). The role of emotional regulation in executive functioning and academic success. [Manuscript].
