Few educational ideas have received as much attention over the past decade as social-emotional learning (SEL). Yet scepticism remains: does it really help students learn better? Or is it mainly a feel-good exercise that steals time from ‘real’ subjects? A new meta-analysis by Ha and colleagues (2025) offers the most thorough answer so far. It draws on 40 universal school-based programmes involving more than 33,000 pupils across primary and secondary education.
SEL can work
The short answer: yes, SEL can work, but the effect is small. It’s strongest in primary education and only becomes visible when programmes run long enough.
The researchers found an average Hedges’ g of .10 for the impact of SEL on academic achievement. That’s modest but statistically reliable and robust. To put that in perspective, .05 to .20 is typically considered a small-to-moderate effect. Yes, that’s a different scale from the one John Hattie reports his effect sizes on. In percentile terms, it means a roughly 4–6-point gain for pupils taking part in an SEL programme. These gains can reach up to 8 points for those in programmes lasting more than 4 months.
It made little difference whether outcomes were measured through grades or standardised tests: in both cases, students performed better (g ≈ .10–.11). Literacy benefitted most (g = .14). Still, mathematics also showed a significant improvement (g = .09).
The gains were most consistent in primary school, where results were less variable across studies. In secondary education, findings were more mixed – partly due to smaller samples and the wide range of interventions.
Time matters more than slogans.
What makes this meta-analysis particularly valuable is that it doesn’t just report an overall average; it also examines moderators. These are factors that influence when and how SEL works. Programme duration proved crucial. Short interventions of a few weeks had little effect. Only longer, sustained approaches led to noticeable gains in academic outcomes. These approaches give students time to practise and internalise social and emotional skills.
The authors note that most SEL programmes are not designed primarily to boost grades. Their main aim is to strengthen competencies such as self-regulation, resilience, and collaboration. Yet these appear to have a positive spillover into learning. Students who manage emotions and relationships effectively are better prepared to focus, persist, and engage in complex tasks.
In a context of learning loss and rising mental distress among young people, that’s hardly trivial. The study ends with a clear message: investment in social and emotional development is not an optional extra, but an essential part of effective schooling. As the authors conclude, SEL programmes “significantly improve academic achievement across subjects and grade levels when implemented consistently over time.”
Or, to put it more simply: when you invest in the person, you invest in the learner.
Abstract of the study: