Page 76 | Volume 5 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal for K-12 Educational Leadership

74 both of these SEL competencies demonstrated higher relationships overall with the digital environment domains. A causal relationship cannot be established; however, the results provide insight regarding the students’ selfperceptions and their views of their digital environment. The current study adds to the research as it provides quantitative data in an area where more qualitative research has been conducted. The data may provide the North Texas school district with more focused conversation for continued SEL implementation. The DESY provides information in how students relate to the digital world. Overall, they do not find digital devices to impede conversations with their friends, family, or classmates, and for the most part, they desire to communicate face-to-face with their friends. They seem to be socially aware, but less unsure about their own feelings and emotions. For this group of students, educators may be able to assist them with recognizing their strengths, identifying their emotions, and developing accurate selfconcepts. The current study was conducted in February 2020 with the onset of the Coronavirus pandemic affecting the closing of schools in March 2020 (Morris & Barragan, 2020). In February before the national crisis, the District’s eighth graders preferred face-to-face communication over digital communication. This is contrary to what many suggest about today’s young people. While this particular group of students may be tech savvy, they have not lost an affinity for face-to-face human connection. In a time of quarantines and social distancing, students and families were forced into further digital communication (Romm, 2020). Families perhaps were spending more time face-to-face in their households and had limited person-to-person contact with extended family, friends, co-workers, or peers. One must wonder how these circumstances will influence the future—the digital environment, communication trends, and individuals’ social-emotional skills. Jamie Farber, EdD References AASA. (2018). Social-emotional learning: How it can make schools developmentally healthy places. School Administrator. ASCD. (2018). The promise of social-emotional learning. Educational Leadership, 76(2). Borba, M. (2016). Unselfie: Why empathetic kids succeed in our all-about-me world. Touchstone. Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional intelligence 2.0. TalentSmart. Carr, N. (2010). The Shallows: What the internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton & Company. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning [CASEL]. (2017). Core SEL competencies. https://casel.org/wp-content/up loads/2019/12/CASEL- Competencies.pdf Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning [CASEL]. (2019a). SEL assessment guide. http:// measuringsel.casel.org/assessment-guide/ Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning [CASEL]. (2019b). What is SEL? https://casel.org/what-is-sel/ Dunckley, V. (2015). Reset your child’s brain: A four-week plan to end meltdowns, raise grades, and boost social skills by reversing the effects of electronic screen-time. New World Library. Haggerty, K., Elgin, J., & Woolley, A. (2011, January 5). Social-emotional learning assessment measures for middle school youth. https://casel.org/so cial-emotional- learning-assessment-measures-for-middle-school- youth/ Jones, S., & Doolittle, E. (2017). Social and emotional learning: Introducing the issue. The Future of Children, 27(1), 3-11. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4 4219018 Kardaras, N. (2016). Glow kids: How screen addiction is hijacking our kids—and how to break the trance. St. Martin’s Press. Kuss, D., Harkin, L., Kanjo, E., & Billieux, J. (2018). Problematic smartphone use: Investigating

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODc4ODgx