Schools everywhere want children not only to read and count, but also to learn. They also want them to learn how to cope with emotions, form friendships, and deal with loss. That’s why social and emotional learning (SEL) has become such a popular part of school life. The goal is admirable. But does it actually work?
An extensive independent study led by Neil Humphrey and colleagues at the University of Manchester, published in the Journal of Educational Psychology (2025), put that question to the test. More than 2,400 pupils in 62 primary schools participated in Passport: Skills for Life. This is a Canadian programme designed to help 9- to 11-year-olds manage emotions, relationships, stress, and change. Trained teachers delivered the lessons. They followed a well-structured, evidence-informed curriculum.
And yet… nothing happened. The programme showed no measurable effects on anxiety, depressive symptoms, emotion regulation, well-being, or loneliness. It made no difference. One likely reason is that the Passport didn’t add anything new to what British schools already do around SEL and wellbeing!
Interestingly, the same approach produced promising early results in Canada. In a smaller, developer-led study, teachers reported that they could easily implement the programme and enjoyed doing so, while children showed modest gains in coping and social skills. Yet that study wasn’t independent, and it ran in schools with fewer existing SEL initiatives. Once researchers scaled it up and tested it rigorously in England, the effects disappeared.
That is not bad news. It is a useful reminder. Schools around the world are investing heavily in wellbeing and resilience, but this study shows that context matters more than the package.
A social and emotional learning programme succeeds not because it offers eighteen well-crafted lessons, but because it lives within a culture where pupils feel safe and teachers build real relationships. It needs space for difficult conversations. Without that, even the best-intentioned programme becomes little more than a tick-box exercise.
The authors argue that Passport cannot be recommended as an effective tool for improving pupils’ mental health in England. To me, the study points to something larger: we should not stop innovating, but we should stop believing that one programme, by itself, can change everything.
Sometimes, a null result provides us with exactly the clarity we need.