Don’t make children fight for help they need

Bullying in schools has not been eradicated. Children's mental health is a serious and growing problem. The difference from a generation ago is that there are ways to counteract these issues and help children learn in a safe environment. Somehow, that's become controversial.

The fight against those methods, part of a larger war on education that takes a new form every few years, says much more about the people waging that fight than on the methods themselves.

The issue is social-emotional learning, which is widely utilized in schools in Connecticut and around the country. The state of Connecticut defines it as “the process through which children and adults achieve emotional intelligence through the competencies of self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills and responsible decision-making.”

It's about ensuring not only physical safety but emotional well-being. At a time of massive disruption caused primarily by an unprecedented pandemic, this should all be uncontroversial, and encouraged. But the same way national attention on what's referred to as critical-race theory has found its way into Connecticut policy discussions, so has concern about social-emotional learning.

Critics around the country say it's actually a way of indoctrinating kids, often with sexual undertones. “Anything they don't understand they assume is detrimental to kids or their own personal beliefs,” a superintendent told the Washington Post.

One of the problems appears to be the name itself. “Parents are largely supportive of schools teaching the skills that fall under the umbrella of social-emotional learning,” said a report in Education Week, “but the term itself is unpopular.” Parents prefer terms like “life skills,” which is fine. It's the content that matters.

There remains a notion in some quarters that schools should do nothing but teach basic skills, from how to read to doing calculus, but that doesn't reflect reality. Education has to be about preparing children for the rest of their lives, and that includes their emotional well-being. A curriculum aimed at helping students manage emotions, develop good relationships and make positive decisions is crucial.

So naturally, it's come under attack. The questions about critical race theory, which were a major issue in last fall's elections, haven't gone away, but are more easily rebutted because CRT is something found in graduate schools. Mostly the term is used by critics as a catch-all for any kind of curriculum that tells uncomfortable truths about American history. Socialemotional learning, by contrast, is clearly part of local school programs. It's real.

And the push-back is real, too. These are not issues that we can ignore just because Connecticut legislators aren't fomenting rage about them.

In Florida, for example, the state has rejected dozens of math textbooks because they “incorporate prohibited topics or unsolicited strategies,” including socialemotional learning. At the same time, that state is enacting a law that's been given the name the “Stop W.O.K.E. Act,” which the New York Times reports would bar “instruction that could prompt students to feel discomfort about a historical event because of their race, sex or national origin.”

Which is odd since in rejecting the textbooks, that governor said: “Math is about getting the right answer . ... It's not about how you feel about the problem.”

It's hard to keep clear when feelings should matter in school. Maybe it's more about whose feelings matter.

The issue has come up in Connecticut, handled reasonably in West Hartford, less so in Killingly. There will be more occasions where local school board face these questions, especially as the issue dominates prime time opinion shows on certain news networks.

There's also been action at the state level, where the General Assembly passed much-needed funding for increased access to mental health services. That's welcome, but not enough on its own.

A few months ago, my family chatted with the outgoing superintendent of schools in our town, who was leaving for a similar job at a larger district. We talked about some of the controversies affecting Connecticut schools, which at the time included masking, as well as parent complaints against diversity efforts aimed at boosting inclusivity, which is a major concern in many overwhelmingly white school districts.

“When did these become bad things?” he asked rhetorically, referring to concepts like inclusion and antidiscrimination. Isn't that we're supposed to be doing?

The pandemic necessitated an upheaval in education, especially in the early months when we knew so little. The result is that assistance for children's emotional development has never been more necessary, which makes the assault against those skills that much more dangerous. Anyone who cares about public schools needs to push back.

These are not issues that we can ignore just because Connecticut legislators aren’t fomenting rage about them.