







































Children and Teenagers 
ISSN 2576-3709 (Print) ISSN 2576-3717 (Online) 

Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct 

1 
 

Original Paper 

Teaching Emotion Regulation: K-12 Teachers’ Perceptions and 

Practices across the Curriculum 
Louis S. Nadelson1*, Estefany Soto1, Tye Smith1, Sarah Nekonchuk1, Jessica Ims1 & Sandra G. 

Nadelson2 
1 College of Education, University of Central Arkansas, 201 Donaghey Ave., Conway, AR, 72035, 

United States 
2 College of Health and Behavioral Sciences, University of Central Arkansas, 201 Donaghey Ave., 

Conway, AR, 72035, United States 
* Louis S. Nadelson, E-mail: lnadelson1@uca.edu 

 

Received: November 17, 2020  Accepted: November 30, 2020  Online Published: December 15, 2020 

doi:10.22158/ct.v4n1p1                               URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/ct.v4n1p1 

 

Abstract 

Students can gain a range of skills and knowledge from interactions in schools, including emotional 

competencies such as regulation of emotions. Teachers are positioned to support students’ development 

of emotion regulation in the social context of school. We sought to determine K-12 teachers’ sense of 

responsibility, preparation, engagement, comfort, and approach to teaching students emotion 

regulation. The quantitative and qualitative data we gathered from 155 general K-12 classroom 

teachers revealed a sense of responsibility, low preparation, varied engagement, and low to moderate 

comfort. We found differences by grade levels, school location, and teacher education level. There was 

moderate alignment between how the teachers regulate their emotions and the emotion regulation 

processes they teach their students. We share implications for school psychologists and suggest 

multiple directions for future research. 

Keywords 

emotion regulation, teacher practices, student well-being, implications for practice 

 

1. Introduction 

Students can gain a range of skills and knowledge through their school experiences that influence their 

development and long-term well-being (Carter, 2016; McCaslin & Good, 1996). While the focus on 

student learning tends to be on curriculum content, skills, and knowledge acquisition, students are 

likely to engage in peer and teacher interactions that influence their dispositions, social skills, and 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

2 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

character development (McCaslin & Good, 1996; Stefanou et al., 2004). Students’ social interactions in 

schools are likely to influence their emotional learning, including their ability to regulate emotions. 

In our search of the literature, we found multiple reports of curricula or programs designed to teach 

students how to regulate their emotions (e.g., Barton et al., 2014). However, we found few empirical 

studies that focused on the perceptions, preparation, practices, and support for teachers across grades 

PreK-12, concerning teaching their students how to regulate their emotions (e.g., Buchanona et al., 

2009). Briudgeland et al. (2013) recognize a gap in the research aligned with our focus and call for 

more empirical studies that explore classroom level teaching of social emotional learning. Further, we 

were not able to find any empirical studies that linked a general sampling of general classroom 

teachers’ personal emotion regulation with how they teach their students to self-regulate their emotions. 

Our research addressed these gaps in the literature as we explored PreK-12 teachers’ perceptions and 

practices for teaching their students to regulate their emotions. 

 

2. Review of Literature 

2.1 Importance of Emotion Regulation 

“Emotional regulation” and “emotion regulation” includes the ability to appraise and reappraise a 

situation, express emotions adequately, and act in socially acceptable ways (McRae & Gross, 2020; 

Reeck et al., 2016). Emotion regulation also includes the ability to influence one’s own emotions and 

the emotions of others (Gross, 1998) and is closely aligned with emotional self-regulation. “Emotion 

regulation” and “emotional self-regulation” have, at times, been used interchangeably by various 

researchers even though there are subtle differences in the definition of the terms. There are multiple 

varied definitions of “emotion regulation” (Cole et al., 2004; McRae & Gross, 2020). To guide our 

research and we synthesized the following definition based on the range of perspectives we found in 

the literature: “the ability to recognize and manage personal feelings and the potential emotional 

reactions that may impact self and others”. 

Children need to learn to effectively manage their emotions in order to be productive and well-adjusted 

citizens. The development of emotion regulation occurs rapidly during the beginning years of life and 

becomes more stable in adulthood (Eisenberg et al., 2010). It is unrealistic to expect children to have 

the capacity to consistently regulate their emotions without being taught how to or without a supportive 

environment in which they can develop their abilities to self-regulate. Children may learn emotion 

regulation in a range of settings, including in schools. Blair and Diamond (2008) conclude that emotion 

regulation is linked to school success, specifically for children who are at risk for maladjustment. The 

association between learning and emotion regulation (Reschly et al., 2008) increases the need to 

explore how educators teach their students to regulate their emotions (Denham & Browen, 2010; 

Jackson & Peck, 2018). 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

3 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

2.2 Teacher Preparation to Teach Students Emotion Regulation 

General teacher preparation programs tend to focus on the fundamentals of teaching and subject 

content knowledge. Additionally, teacher certification standards typically include expectations for 

preparing teachers to teach emotion regulation (e.g., Melnick & Martinez, 2019). However, as Hoffman 

(2009) recognizes, social-emotional learning has yet to become a major focus of teacher preparation 

programs. Programs that prepare teachers to reflect on the importance of emotion regulation are rare 

(Fried, 2011).  

Typically, there is little or no time devoted to preparing teachers to teach social-emotional learning in 

the classroom, indicating that many teachers enter the profession without adequate preparation to 

effectively teach their students how to regulate emotions (Schonert-Reichl et al., 2015). An exception is 

special education teachers, who commonly are required as part of their professional preparation to take 

courses in behavior management and are exposed to an array of content that is focused on teaching 

students how to regulate their emotions (Hemmeter et al., 2008). Even with preparation, it is unclear 

how the preparation translates to practice (Elias, 2006; Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017). 

Given the association between emotion regulation and successful learning there is a critical need for 

teachers to be prepared to teach students to regulate emotions. Doss et al. (2019) recommends that 

researchers investigate teachers’ need for support related to teaching their students emotion regulation. 

Thus, there is reason for exploring the level of teachers’ professional preparation and their desire for 

continued support for teaching their students to regulate emotions. 

2.3 Responsibility to Teach Emotion Regulation 

The association between students’ ability to regulate their emotions and their academic performance 

(e.g., Diamond, 2010; Greenberg et al., 2003; Graziano et al., 2007) suggests a level of responsibility 

for teachers to teach emotion regulation. In general, students are much more motivated and engaged in 

learning when they effectively regulate their emotions (Denham & Brown, 2010). Thus, students 

benefit from teachers who help them learn to regulate their emotions, which lead to a positive learning 

environment (Jackson & Peck, 2018). The relationship provides justification for examining teachers’ 

perceptions of responsibility for teaching emotion regulation. 

Multiple organizations have developed social emotional learning standards that indicate that teachers 

hold some responsibility for teaching their students emotion regulation. These standards are similar to 

or aligned with the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) (2017). 

While standards for teaching emotion regulation are common, there is a dearth of information 

regarding teachers’ perceptions of their level of responsibility to teach students to regulate their 

emotions. We did find reports on early childhood educators indicating they take responsibility for 

supporting the social emotional development of their students (Harrington et al., 2020; Humphries et al., 

2018). Additionally, we located research on differences by country in expectations for teachers to take 

responsibility for teaching emotion regulation and differences in expectations and approaches between 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

4 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

teachers teaching special education and regular education students (Ferreira-Gonzalez et al., 2019). 

However, we were not able to locate any studies empirically documenting general education PreK-12 

teachers’ perceptions of their level of responsibility to teach their students to emotionally regulate. 

Given the importance of social-emotional learning for students’ success, there is warrant for examining 

elementary and secondary general education teachers’ perceptions of responsibility to teach their 

students emotion regulation. 

2.4 Approaches for Teaching Emotion Regulation 

There are different approaches that can be used to teach emotion regulation, including adopting and 

implementing of prepared curriculum (for lists of the curricula see CASEL, 2013, 2015; Jones et al., 

2017). CASEL (2015) recognizes packaged curriculum typically involves one or a combination of four 

common instructional approaches: integrate teaching emotion regulation into the current learning 

environment; infuse emotion regulation content into the general curriculum; shifts in policies and 

organizational structures to support student emotion regulation development; explicitly teaching 

emotion regulation as specific lessons. It is interesting to note that the actual implementation of school 

intervention programs and corresponding shifts in students’ emotion regulation are rarely studied and 

reported (Schlesier et al., 2019). Thus, according to Schlesier et al. (2019) there are package curricula 

for teaching social emotional learning which tend to be evidence-based, but there is a lack of empirical 

evidence associated with how teachers are teaching the content. 

Harley and colleagues (2019) propose a model of emotion regulation based on a reappraisal of 

situations. The translation of the model to teacher practice involves two approaches that include 

refocusing student attention. One approach involves teaching students to shift their expectations for 

what might happened in the future. A second approach involves adjusting perspective of events that 

have taken place. Both approaches have been found to be effective for helping students regulate their 

emotions (Gross, 1998; Schutte et al., 2009). It is important to note that individuals are likely to use a 

combination of strategies in their emotion regulation (Aldao & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2013). 

Davis and Levine (2013) documented how students’ ability to regulate their emotions enhances their 

learning. Davis and Levine report that when students navigate through sad events in ways that lowered 

their negative emotions, it resulted in an increased ability to remember, and therefore, learn. Davis and 

Levine recommend that teachers and parents work with children to help them learn to evaluate 

situations for importance and lower negative emotions to increase their ability to function effectively. 

Yet, we speculate few teachers have been exposed to specific approaches to teaching emotional 

regulation and therefore, do not approach teaching emotion regulation strategically. 

Given the potential for teachers to influence their students’ emotion regulation there is justification for 

examining the approaches teachers use. Further, there is a need to determine if the approaches they are 

using are evidence-based. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

5 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

2.5 Teacher Comfort and Confidence for Teaching Emotion Regulation 

As teachers are working with developing youth, they are in positions to implicitly and/or explicitly 

influence the development of their students’ emotion regulation (Sutton, 2004). Even though teachers 

may teach emotion regulation to their students, they may be uncomfortable or lack confidence with the 

process (Cvar, 2019). Doss and colleagues (2019) report that even those teachers who have received 

professional development focused on teaching students how to regulate emotion, continued to perceive 

a need for additional support to be effective. Teachers’ ongoing need for support even with preparation 

may potentially reflect a lack of comfort or confidence for teaching students how to regulate their 

emotions (Durlak & DuPre, 2008). Consequently, there is a justification for examining the relationship 

between level of preparation to teach emotion regulation and the comfort or confidence with the 

process. 

Despite the increase in knowledge about emotion regulation and the importance of learning, there 

remains challenges (Harley et al., 2019). Due to the specialized knowledge needed to teach students to 

emotion regulate, it is common for certain groups of teachers, such as special education teachers, to 

have been prepared for the instruction (Cressey, 2019). However, special education teachers typically 

focus on special education students, leaving the teaching of emotion regulation to the majority of the 

students, to general classroom teachers. However, if teachers lack comfort and confidence with the 

teaching emotion regulation they may be reluctant to engage in the process. 

In our search of the literature, we were not able to locate any empirical studies that explicitly focused 

on teacher confidence and comfort for teaching emotional regulation, particularly with regard to their 

levels of preparation for the process. The gaps in the literature and the lack of understanding of 

teachers’ confidence and comfort for teaching emotion regulation provides a justification for our 

research. 

2.6 Teacher Self-Regulation of Emotions 

Teaching is a physically and psychologically demanding profession, and it is common for teachers to 

become emotionally overwhelmed in the classroom (Katz et al., 2018). Teachers’ emotions are 

associated with their professional effectiveness (Day & Quing, 2009; Sutton, 2005; Trendall, 1989). 

Therefore, teachers who are able to regulate their emotions are likely to be more effective at teaching 

students how to emotion regulate (Young, 2016). Given the physiological indicators of stress that 

teachers accumulate over the school year, some emotion regulation strategies may positively or 

negatively influence the progression of chronic stress (Katz et al., 2018). For example, applying the 

strategy of cognitive reappraisal (i.e., changing perceptions of situations to reduce an emotional 

response) may help teachers manage their emotions and reduce their stress (Katz et al., 2018).  

There is a high probability that teachers lack professional knowledge of how their emotion regulation 

affects their teaching practices (Sutton et al., 2009). Some teachers may have high levels of emotion 

regulation while other teachers may struggle, which may manifest in variations in how teachers interact 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

6 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

with students, colleagues, and community members (Sutton, 2007; Taxer & Frenzel, 2015). Research 

on teachers’ perceptions of emotion regulation indicate that teachers understand the benefits of 

emotional expression and acknowledge the importance in regulating emotions, particularly their 

negative feelings (Zinsser et al., 2015). Teachers will commonly engage in emotion regulation 

strategies to manage their anger and frustration (Sutton, 2004). Teachers may engage in cognitive, 

behavioral, and responsive strategies, which may include sitting in a quiet place, talking to peers, or 

diverting attention (Sutton et al., 2009). 

Teachers’ personal variables and professional experiences may influence their emotion regulation. 

Demetriou et al. (2009) have identified gender differences in teachers’ expressions of emotions 

associated with their teaching. The research findings indicate personal traits of teachers may be 

predictive of their emotion regulation and ability to navigate emotional situations that occur during 

teaching. 

While teachers may utilize strategies to regulate their own emotions and recognize these strategies may 

improve their physiological and psychological stress, there is limited research on general classroom 

teachers engaging in emotion regulation strategies and modeling the practices for their students. 

Research to date has focused on teachers teaching emotion regulation in physical education (Klemola et 

al., 2013), in sports (Wagstaff et al., 2013), and in elementary settings (Zinsser et al., 2015). Our study 

addressed the limited research reported in the literature by exploring elementary, middle, and high 

school general classroom teachers’ engagement in emotion regulation strategies and if and how they 

teach the strategies they use with their students.  

 

3. Methods 

3.1 Research Question 

Our overarching question was, “What are PreK-12 teachers’ perceptions of and practices for teaching 

their students emotion regulation?” To answer this question, we developed the following guiding 

research questions: 

i. How have teachers been prepared to teach their students to regulate their emotions? 

ii. What level of responsibility do teachers feel they have in teaching their students emotion 

regulation? 

iii. What are teachers’ approaches for teaching their students emotion regulation?  

iv. What are teachers’ levels of comfort and confidence for teaching emotion regulation? 

v. What is the relationship between teachers’ personal emotion regulation and teaching their 

students to regulate their emotions? 

vi. What is the relationship between the perceptions and practices for teaching emotion regulation 

and teachers’ personal and professional variables? 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

7 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

3.2 Participants 

The participants in our research were PreK-12 teachers working in a region of south-central United 

States. There were 155 teachers who completed the survey, of which 70% identified as female and 28% 

identified as male, 2% did not provide a gender. The educators’ ages ranged from 22-67 years of age, 

with the average age being 40.77 years old (SD = 11.67). The average teaching experience was 13.36 

years (SD = 10.16) and the grades taught varied from elementary, middle/junior high, high school, or 

multiple levels. Most of the educators taught elementary (37%), followed by 35% teaching high school, 

27 % taught middle/junior high, and 1% indicated teaching multiple levels. Class sizes ranged from 

three to 22 students, with the average class size being 21.06 students (SD = 8.02). The majority of the 

educators identified as White (94%), followed by Asian (2%), and the remaining identified as either 

Black, Native American, or Hispanic (4%). Most of the teachers worked in a suburban setting (54.2%), 

25.2% worked in a rural area, and the remaining 20% indicated working in an urban location. 

Twenty-eight percent of the educators reported having a bachelor’s degree, 5% indicated post 

bachelor’s course work, 50% indicated having a master’s degree, 12% indicated post master’s course 

work, 2% indicated being an education specialist, and 2% indicated they held a doctoral degree.  

3.3 Measure  

In our search of the literature, we were unable to locate an extant instrument designed to assess the 

engagement of K-12 teachers across disciplines in teaching their students emotion regulation (most 

extant studies focused exclusively on teachers of Special Education). Therefore, we deemed it 

necessary to develop an instrument. 

We started our instrument development by using our guiding research questions to frame the generation 

of multiple free and selected-response items. We developed a cache of items with representation for 

each area of our research focus (e.g., preparation, comfort, and confidence). We then reviewed the 

cache of items for redundancy, alignment, clarity, and complexity. Our goal was to have about five 

survey items for each of our guiding research questions. 

Through discussion and editing of items, we retained 23 selected-response items and two free-response 

items. The survey is designed for participants to respond to the selected-responses items on a Likert 

scale (i.e., Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree) or Likert-like scale (i.e., Never to Constantly), with 

“1” being the lowest end of the range and “5” being the upper end of the range of possible answers. 

Our selected-response items included items such as, “Sometimes I have to put forth a lot of effort to 

regulate my emotions in the classroom” and “I feel uncomfortable working with students having an 

emotional breakdown”. Our two free-response items were, “What strategies for emotion regulation do 

you model for your students?” and “How would you teach your students to self-regulate emotions?” 

Once we created a working version of our survey, we sought to establish the instrument validity. We 

shared the tool with several PreK-12 teachers and post-secondary faculty members in a college of 

education. We asked them to consider each item and the instrument as a whole, through a lens of 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

8 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

teaching students to regulate their emotions. Based on their feedback, we made minor adjustments to 

the survey and prepared the tool for data collection. Our process gave us the confidence we had 

established the content and construct validity of our tool. We assessed our survey Cronbach’s alpha to 

be .83 (N = 155), indicating an acceptable level of internal consistency for our 23 selected-response 

items. 

3.4 Data Collection 

The population from which we intended to sample were PreK-12 teachers working in a range of 

situations and across disciplines in a region of the southern United States. To collect the data, we 

invited teachers from multiple schools and districts to participate in our research. After obtaining 

authorization to conduct our research, we emailed approximately 1,200 PreK-12 teachers using 

publicly accessible email addresses. We had 155 of the teachers we contacted complete our survey. 

3.5 Data Coding 

To analyze the participants’ responses to, “how do you teach their students to self-regulate their 

emotions” we developed and applied a coding system. The codes, definitions, and a representation of 

the participants’ responses are included in Table 1. To assure interrater reliability, we coded a set of 20 

responses collectively and discussed our justification of code classification. We then worked in pairs 

going through a similar process, with each pair of researchers coding a subset of the dataset and 

discussing their coding choices and resolving differences. The coding provided additional insight into 

the data, illuminating how teachers were teaching their students to regulate their emotions. 

 

Table 1. Codes, Definitions, and Representative Responses to How the Teachers Teach their 

Students to Regulate Emotions 

Code Definition Representative Participant Response 

Emotional 

Awareness 

Being conscious of 

personal emotions 

I would first attempt to teach students how to recognize their emotions, 

and then how to deal with them accordingly. 

Emotional 

Sharing 

Sharing feelings and 

emotions with another 

Every morning during Morning Meeting Time with a different social 

emotional prompt that we all share and discuss out loud. 

Breathing 

Purposeful and 

conscious inhaling and 

exhaling 

We use tools from our occupational therapist (deep breaths, chair 

pushups). 

Expectations 

Plans and 

consequences for 

emotional stress  

Third, at a later time frame we have a discussion to create an action plan 

for future frustrations. 

Safe Space A physical location to Provide a cool down spot and tools. I teach them how to use the tools 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

9 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

escape from emotional 

stress 

before letting them use the area. 

Reflecting 

Thinking about and 

sharing emotional 

conditions 

I like to use reflection surveys, conversation circles, and scenarios to 

practice the skill. 

Brain Break 

Using imagery or 

other mental/physical 

activities to redirect 

focus 

We learn an exercise to calm them down (stand, cross legs, cross arms 

and interlace fingers, rotate arms up so hands touch chin, take a deep 

yoga/belly breath). 

Set 

Curriculum 

A developed 

combination of 

content and instruction 

for teaching emotion 

regulation 

Choose Love or Conscious Discipline. 

Classroom 

Climate 

Changes to the 

physical or social 

environments that 

results in different 

expectations and 

interactions with 

others 

Sometimes we all take a calming break, listen to music, dim lights until 

the emotions have passed. 

Disengage 
To end interactions 

with a situation 
If they feel they are getting upset, walk away and breathe. 

Counselors 

Professionals prepared 

to support emotion 

regulation 

development 

We use tools from our occupational therapist (deep breaths, chair 

pushups). 

Modeling 

Performing in a way 

that is noticeable and 

recognizable by others 

I model making mistakes and being kind to self. 

Role Playing 

Interacting in 

situations that are not 

real but parallel reality 

Role play, books, discussions on things I am seeing in class and what we 

could do in certain situations, calm down corner. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

10 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Social Stories 

Stories of interactions 

between and among 

individuals 

I use the Zones of Regulation, Social Stories, and the Superflex social 

skills curriculum. 

Don’t Know 

No specific 

instructional approach 

identifiable 

There’s no problem in the classroom that is worth getting worked up over. 

I am emotionally on an even keel mostly 24/hrs a day because I know that 

most things are unimportant in the big picture. 

 

We replicated our process for establishing interrater reliability and coding to analyze the responses to 

our item asking the teachers to share how they regulate their own emotions. The codes that we 

developed, definitions, and representative responses are presented in Table 2. 

 

Table 2. Codes and Representative Responses of Teachers Approaches for Self-Regulating 

Emotions 

Code Definition Representative Response 

Breathing 

Purposeful and 

conscious inhaling 

and exhaling 

Taking a moment to be silent and breathe 

Emotional Sharing 

Sharing feelings 

and emotions with 

another 

“thinking aloud” (talking about how I feel and why), etc. 

Emotional Awareness 
Being conscious of 

personal emotions 
I probably don’t let them know I’m having to regulate my emotions. 

Brain Break 

Using imagery or 

other 

mental/physical 

activities to redirect 

focus 

I don’t raise my voice when tensions get high 

I have the student take a “time out” if need be and I have said to a class 

before “we all need to take a 5 minute brain break) when I saw 

frustration levels rising. 

I stay calm and considerate towards all students 

Reflecting 

Thinking about and 

sharing emotional 

conditions 

Taking time out to breathe, keeping quiet, avoiding the frustrating 

situation, focusing on the positive. 

Modeling Performing in a Practice with cognitive reframing. Modeling regulation in front of them. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

11 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

way that is 

noticeable and 

recognizable by 

others 

De-stigmatizing emotional responses. 

Safe Space 

A physical location 

to escape from 

emotional stress 

Deep breathing, taking a moment 

Classroom Climate 

Changes to the 

physical or social 

environments that 

results in different 

expectations and 

interactions with 

others 

Sometimes we all take a calming break, listen to music, dim lights until 

the emotions have passed. 

Disengage 
To end interactions 

with a situation 

Sometimes I may distance myself for a brief time and come back to 

regroup when student(s) are ready. 

Expectations 

Plans and 

consequences for 

emotional stress 

I watch my volume and tone when speaking or redirecting students. 

Set Curriculum 

A developed 

combination of 

content and 

instruction for 

teaching emotion 

regulation 

Choose Love or Conscious Discipline  

Don’t Know 

No specific 

instructional 

approach 

identifiable 

Show professionalism, courtesy. Remain calm, but firm. 

Role Playing 
Interacting in 

situations that are 

Modeling, explicit instruction, discussions, picture books, situation 

based, etc. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

12 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

not real but parallel 

reality 

Social Stories 

Stories of 

interactions 

between and among 

individuals 

I try to teach them explicitly using examples from my own life with 

small bits of role-playing infrequently throughout the school year. 

 

4, Results 

4.1 Teacher Preparation to Teach Students Emotion Regulation 

Our first guiding research question asked, “How have teachers been prepared to teach their students to 

regulate their emotions?” To answer this question, we examined the teachers’ mean responses to our 

selected-response items assessing their preparation to support their students’ emotion regulation (see 

Figure 1). We found the teachers agreed that they would like to know more about how to teach students 

emotion regulation (M = 3.98, SD = .77, Mdn = 4.00). Teachers’ responses also leaned to agree that 

they take time to educate themselves about how to help students regulate their emotions (M = 3.64, SD 

= .94, Mdn = 4.00). In contrast, teachers were neutral in their responses about whether they have had 

professional development courses on teaching emotion regulation (M = 3.09, SD = 1.26, Mdn = 3.00). 

Additionally, teachers seemed to disagree with the statement, “I learned to teach students emotion 

regulation in my preparation program” (M = 2.28, SD = 1.15, Mdn = 2.00). We interpret the results to 

indicate that the teachers had moderate levels of engagement in professional preparation to teach their 

students emotion regulation. Our data suggest that the participants either wanted more support with 

preparation or were self-preparing to teach their students emotion regulation. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

13 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 
Figure 1. Averages for the Responses to Our Teaching Emotion Regulation Items 

 

4.2 Responsibility to Teach Emotion Regulation 

Our second guiding research question asked, “What level of responsibility do teachers feel that they 

have in teaching their students emotion regulation?” We examined the teachers’ mean responses to the 

items assessing their perceived level of responsibility to teach emotion regulation to their students (see 

Figure 2). Our analysis revealed that overall, teachers agreed that it is important for them to support 

students’ emotion regulation development (M = 4.23, SD = 0.78, Mdn = 4.00). The teachers also tended 

to agree with sending students to the counselor when they have emotion breakdowns (M = 3.58, SD = 

0.99, Mdn = 4.00), which suggests they rely on others in the school to help them teach their students 

emotion regulation. The teachers tended to disagree with the statement indicating that they do not have 

time to teach students emotion regulation (M = 2.52, SD = 1.03, Mdn = 2.00), signifying that teachers 

tend to have time to teach their students to regulate their emotions. The teachers were more likely to 

disagree that it is the sole responsibility of parents to teach children emotion regulation (M = 2.11, SD = 

0.78, Mdn = 2.00) and that it is not their responsibility to teach students emotion regulation (M = 2.05, 

SD = 0.83, Mdn = 2.00). Overall, our results indicate that teachers feel a level of responsibility for 

teaching their students emotion regulation.  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

14 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 

Figure 2. The Mean Responses for Our Responsibility for Teaching Emotion Regulation Items (R 

Indicates negatively Stated Item Stem) 

 

4.3 Approaches for Teaching Emotion Regulation 

Our third guiding research question asked, “What are teachers’ approaches for teaching their students 

emotion regulation?” We examined the participants’ mean responses to the selected items assessing 

their use of approaches to teach emotion regulation (see Figure 3), their coded responses for how they 

would teach their students to self-regulate (see Table 1), and the frequencies for each coded response 

(see Figure 4).  

The teachers agreed to strongly agreed that they watch their students for signs of emotion breakdowns 

(M = 4.22, SD = .76, Mdn = 4.00). Teachers’ average responses indicated that they agreed they give 

students permission to sit in a place of their choice when they are feeling emotional (M = 3.97, SD 

= .78, Mdn = 4.00). Similarly, teachers were more inclined to agree that they do teach their students 

how to regulate their emotions (M = 3.62, SD = .82, Mdn = 4.00). Teachers’ also tended to agree to the 

statement, “I use specific strategies to help students regulate their emotions” (M = 3.55, SD = .95, Mdn 

= 4.00). Additionally, teachers’ responses tended to disagree when responding to whether they 

incorporate how to regulate emotions for their students into their lesson plans (M = 2.65, SD = .1.03, 

Mdn = 2.00). Overall, the data indicate that there were moderate levels of teachers attending to and 

teaching students emotion regulation, but the teaching was in response to potential or actual students’ 

outbursts and not necessarily structured or planned. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

15 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 

Figure 3. The Mean Responses for Our Approaches to Teaching Emotion Regulation Items 

 

We analyzed the frequency of the occurrences of codes in the participants’ responses to how they teach 

emotion regulation (see Figure 4). We were able to identify 288 unique strategies in the 155 participant 

responses, as some teachers shared more than one instructional approach. The participating teachers’ 

responses were varied. About two-thirds of the teachers (94 of 155) indicated that they use emotional 

awareness or emotional sharing to teach their students to self-regulate. About one in three teachers (68 

of 155) responses included using breathing, reflection, or set curriculums to teach emotion regulation. 

In contrast, only a few teachers (18 of 155) indicated that they teach their students emotion regulation 

through modeling, role-playing, or telling social stories to their students to facilitate learning about 

emotion regulation. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

16 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 
Figure 4. The Frequency of the Free-responses Codes to Our Item Asking the Teachers How They 

Teach Emotion Regulation 

 

4.4 Comfort and Confidence for Teaching Emotion Regulation 

Our fourth guiding research question asked, “What are teachers’ levels of comfort and confidence for 

teaching emotion regulation?” To answer this question, we examined their mean responses to the items 

included to assess their comfort and confidence for teaching emotion regulation (see Figure 5). 

Teachers’ average responses were neutral about feeling competent working with students who are 

having an emotional breakdown (M = 3.1, SD = 1.04, Mdn = 3.00). Additionally, teachers’ responses 

were near neutral in feeling uncomfortable working with students having an emotion breakdown (M = 

2.81, SD = 1.07, Mdn = 3.00). Overall, our results indicate that teachers were neutral to feeling 

competent and comfortable teaching their students to regulate their emotions. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

17 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 
Figure 5. The Participants’ Mean Responses for Our Confidence and Comfort for Teaching 

Emotion Regulation to Their Students 

 

4.5 Teacher Self-Regulation of Emotions 

Our fifth guiding research question asked, “What is the relationship between teachers’ personal 

emotion regulation and teaching their students emotion regulation?” To answer this question, we began 

by examining the teachers’ mean responses to our survey items aligned with the self-regulation of 

emotions (see Figure 6). On average, the teachers’ responses were in between agreeing and strongly 

agreeing that it is important to regulate their emotions in the classroom (M = 4.53, SD = .63, Mdn = 

5.00) with the majority strongly agreeing to the importance of regulating their emotions. Similarly, 

teachers leaned towards agreeing that they get frustrated when their students do not listen (M = 3.82, 

SD = .73, Mdn = 4.00). The teachers also tended to agree to having to put forth a lot of effort to 

regulate their emotions in the classroom (M = 3.31, SD = 1.07, Mdn = 4.00), with the majority agreeing 

or strongly agreeing toward putting a lot of effort forth to regulate their emotions. Interpreted, while the 

participants perceived the importance of regulating emotions and may need to regulate their emotions 

due to the likelihood of getting frustrated with their students, they may need to put forth a lot of effort 

toward the process.  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

18 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 

Figure 6. The Mean Responses for Our Teachers’ Self-regulation of Emotions Items 

 

We continued our analysis by determining the coding frequency of responses to our free-response item, 

which asked the participants to share how they teach their students to regulate emotions. These asked 

the teachers to share the approaches that they teach their students to regulate their emotions. Our 

assessment revealed the teachers shared approaches to self-regulating their emotions similar to the 

strategies they teach their students. 

The most frequent approach (50 of 155) used by the teachers to model emotion regulation for their 

students was breathing techniques (see Figure 7). A moderate number of teachers indicated they 

engaged in emotional sharing (34 of 155), emotional awareness (32 of 155), brain breaks (24 of 155), 

or reflection (21 of 155) to model for their students’ strategies for emotion regulation. Only a few 

teachers indicated that they modeled emotion regulation by having a safe place for students, 

establishing a classroom climate, or by disengaging with the group and engaging with the group at a 

later time. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

19 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 
Figure 7. The Frequency of the Free-responses Codes to Our Item Asking the Teachers How They 

Self-regulate Their Emotions 

 

Following the examination of how our participants self-regulate their emotions and how they teach 

their students to regulate their emotions, we examined the alignment between the frequency of the 

approaches (see Figure 8). We found the highest frequency approaches teachers use to self-regulate 

emotions included three of most frequent strategies they teach their students. However, there was 

considerably less alignment among the moderate to low frequency used approaches to self-regulating 

and the approaches to emotion regulation the teachers teach their students. Our interpreted data suggest 

that while teachers may be modeling emotion self-regulation to their students, the strategies they use 

may be of limited usefulness to the students. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

20 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

 

Figure 8. Frequency of the Coded Responses for the Teachers’ Self-regulation Strategies and 

Strategies They Teach Students 

 

4.6 Teaching Emotion Regulation Relation to Personal and Professional Variables  

Our sixth research question asked, “What is the relationship among the perceptions and practices for 

teaching emotion regulation and personal and professional variables?” To answer this question, we 

conducted a series of tests of means and calculated correlations.  

We began our analysis by calculating the composite score for our measures of confidence and comfort 

teaching emotion regulation, responsibility for teaching emotion regulation, preparation to teach 

emotion regulation, approaches to teaching emotion regulation, and teacher self-regulation of their 

emotions. We generated the composite score by finding the average of the responses to the related 

items.  

Using the composite scores, we calculated the correlation among the different facets of teachers’ 

perceptions and practices in teaching and engaging in emotion regulation (see Table 3). We found that 

the composite scores for all the major construct composite scores were significantly positively 

correlated (p < .01), which indicates that if one area of emotion regulation teaching perceptions or 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

21 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

practices increases, the others are likely to increase as well. Interpreted, our data indicates that 

preparation, engagement, responsibility, comfort and confidence for teaching students to self-regulate 

emotions are related. We found a positive relationship between teachers’ self-regulation of emotions 

and the responsibility for teaching emotion regulation (r = .25, p < .01) and with their approaches to 

teaching emotion regulation (r = .17, p < .05). The finding suggests as teachers’ self-regulation 

increases so does their level of responsibility for teaching emotion regulation and their approaches to 

teaching emotion regulation (see Table 3). 

 

Table 3. Correlations between Difference Facets of Teacher Perceptions and Practices Composite 

Scores 

 

M SD 
Responsibility 

to Teach ER 

Approaches 

to Teaching 

ER 

Competent 

and Comfort 

Teaching ER 

Teachers’ 

ER 

Prepared to 

Teach ER 
3.44 .63 .40** .50** .35** .05 

Responsibility 

to Teach ER 
3.39 .43  .53** .50** .25** 

Approaches to 

Teaching ER 
3.45 .68   .47** .17* 

Competent and 

Comfort 

Teaching ER 

3.14 .92    .14 

Teachers’ ER 3.14 .55     

** p < 0.01 * p < .05 (2-tailed). 

 

We continued our analysis by examining the correlations among facets of teaching emotion regulation 

and the composite scores for different aspects of emotion regulation. We found a significant negative 

correlation between a teacher’s level of frustration and their perceived responsibility to teach emotion 

regulation (r = -.26, p < .01). This finding indicates an inverse relationship between teachers’ level of 

frustration and their perceived level of responsibility to teach emotion regulation. Our analysis also 

revealed a significant negative correlation between teachers’ level of frustration and their emotion 

regulation (r = -.19, p = .02), indicating that as the level of frustration increases, self-reported level of 

ability to regulate emotions is likely to decrease. We also found a negative relationship between the 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

22 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

level of frustration and competency to teach emotion regulation (r = -.17, p = .037), indicating as the 

level of frustration decreases the level of competency to teach emotion regulation is likely to increase. 

We continued our analysis by conducting an ANOVA using the school level (e.g., elementary, middle, 

and high school) as the factor. Results revealed a significant difference in responsibility to teach 

emotion regulation (F [2,143] = 9.44, p < .01) and the approaches used to teach emotion regulation (F 

[2,143] = 4.55, p = .01). Post hoc analysis revealed that the differences in responsibility to teach 

emotion regulation varied between elementary and middle school and between elementary and high 

school. Our analysis suggests that elementary school teachers take a higher level of responsibility to 

teach emotion regulation than both their middle school and high school colleagues. The post hoc 

analysis for approaches to teach emotion regulation revealed that elementary school teachers engage in 

more emotion regulation teaching practices than high school teachers.  

Using school location (e.g., urban, suburban, rural) as a factor revealed there was a significant 

difference in preparation to teach emotion regulation (F [2,151] = 4.64, p =.01). Our post hoc analysis 

revealed that there was a difference between the teachers working in suburban and rural school 

locations. Teachers in a suburban school location indicated a higher level of preparation to teach 

emotion regulation than teachers teaching in a rural location.  

Additionally, we used education level as a factor to examine comfort and confidence in teaching 

emotion regulation. Our results revealed a significant relationship (F [5,149] = 2.34, p = .04). Post hoc 

results indicated that teachers with education beyond a bachelor’s degree had a higher level of comfort 

and confidence in teaching emotion regulation than teachers with just a bachelor’s degree.  

 

5. Discussion and Implication 

The association between students being able to regulate their emotions and their learning in schools 

justifies determining how teachers are teaching their students to emotion regulate. The lack of research 

on the general classroom teachers’ comfort, confidence, engagement, commitment, and responsibility 

for teaching students to self-regulate provides additional support for our research. Further, the potential 

association between teachers’ self-regulation of emotions and their effectiveness in teaching their 

students, increases the importance of assessing teachers’ perceptions of teaching and engaging in 

emotion regulation. There are multiple implications for our findings. 

5.1 Teacher Preparation to Teach Students Emotion Regulation 

While many educational standards include social-emotional learning, which includes emotion 

regulation (e.g., CASEL, 2017), we found evidence to suggest that teachers tend to feel under-prepared 

and may not have experienced formal preparation to teach their students to regulate their emotions. We 

speculate that most teacher preparation programs focus more on the curricula the teachers will teach 

rather than educating the child as a whole, which limits the opportunity to prepare teachers to teach 

students to self-regulate emotions. Similarly, we speculate that many professional development 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

23 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

offerings for inservice teachers focus on the cognitive aspect of student achievement or other school 

district issues (e.g., policies and procedures), limiting the opportunity to use the time to prepare 

teachers to teach students how to regulate their emotions. The implications are that teachers may be 

using approaches that are not evidence-based or are not engaging in teaching their students to 

self-regulate their emotions. Examining how teacher preparation programs are preparing teachers to 

teach their students to self-regulate is a needed direction for research. 

5.2 Responsibility to Teach Emotion Regulation 

Our participants indicated that they agree that they have some responsibility to teach their students 

emotion regulation. Many of the teachers recognized the potential interference emotional issues may 

have on students’ learning and therefore, realized they must teach their students to regulate their 

emotions to help them learn. Teachers may recognize the potential disruption to the education of all 

students when some students have emotional outbreaks, and therefore, to keep the students learning as 

a group, may need to teach all how to regulate their emotions. The implications of our findings are the 

potential for teachers to commit to supporting the social-emotional development of their students. 

Further examination is needed of teachers’ explanations for taking responsibility for teaching their 

students to regulate their emotions. 

5.3 Approaches to Teaching Emotion Regulation 

Our participants engaged in a wide range of approaches to teaching their students to regulate their 

emotions. Given the lack of preparation to teach emotion regulation, we speculate that the teachers rely 

on their personal experiences, ideas from other teachers, their intuition, and perhaps some ideas they 

gained from self-sought knowledge. The implication of our findings is the approaches teachers use may 

or may not be evidence-based. Further, it is possible that other strategies may be more useful for 

helping students regulate their emotions than the choices of the teachers. Investigating teachers’ 

strategy preferences for teaching their students emotion regulation is likely to be a fruitful line of 

research. 

5.4 Comfort and Confidence for Teaching Emotion Regulation 

We found the participants were near neutral toward their comfort and confidence for teaching emotion 

regulation. Comfort and confidence may be directly associated with their level of preparation to teach 

their students to regulate their emotions. Our finding of a significant correlation between our survey 

comfort and confidence subscale and level of preparation subscale provides additional support for the 

potential relationship. The implication of our finding is that the lack of comfort and confidence for 

teaching emotion regulation may hinder teacher engagement in teaching their students how to regulate 

their emotions. Exploring how to increase teacher comfort and confidence for teaching emotion 

regulation to their students is an excellent direction for future research. 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

24 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

5.5 Teacher Approaches to Self-Regulation 

We found the teachers used a range of approaches to regulate their emotions. Teachers’ engagement in 

self-regulation is important as the majority indicated they get frustrated when interrupted. The lack of 

ability to self-regulate their emotions may result in inappropriate reactions to students who act in ways 

that elicit an emotional response from their teachers. However, we are not able to determine the 

situations the teachers were considering when sharing how they regulate their emotions. The specific 

approaches teachers take in response to emotional reactions is a needed line of research. 

5.6 Association with Personal and Professional Variables 

We found school location, grade level of the school, level of education, class size, and level of 

frustration to be indicators of different facets of teaching students to regulate their emotions. Our 

findings reinforce the notion that teaching emotion regulation is likely to be associated with multiple 

personal and professional variables. The implications for our findings are teachers (both preservice and 

inservice) may need different approaches to prepare for teaching emotion regulation. Unlike content 

knowledge acquisition, where teachers need to acquire an understanding of concepts and phenomena, 

gaining the knowledge necessary to effectively teach emotion regulation may require self-reflection, 

shifts in attitudes, understanding of the needs of others, human behavior and emotions, and compassion. 

The range of potential predictors of teacher engagement in teaching their students emotion regulation 

likely requires additional research to refine how we prepare teachers to teach their students to regulate 

their emotions. 

5.7 Implications for School Psychologists 

The lack of teacher preparation to teach their students emotion regulation and their varied approaches 

to emotion regulation instruction suggest there is a critical need for support. School psychologists are 

well-positioned to make differences in school by taking steps to increase teachers’ knowledge of 

evidence-based practices and approaches for teaching emotion regulation. Our research made apparent 

teachers are not being prepared to teach their students emotion regulation in their preservice programs, 

suggesting there is currently a need to address teachers’ inservice professional development. Thus, 

school psychologists should think about how they could facilitate and catalyze teacher preparation to 

teach their students emotion regulation using evidence-based methods. 

One approach that school psychologists might consider is identifying and sharing available and 

accessible resources teachers could use to learn more about teaching emotion regulation. Shifting 

through the abundance of open access resources for teaching emotion regulation requires knowledge 

and understanding of approaches that are based on evidence and have been empirically documented 

effectiveness. School psychologists can provide direction for accessible resources, available at low or 

no cost, which are attainable for teachers to use to become better prepared to teach emotion regulation. 

School psychologists may also consider taking a proactive role in increasing inservice teachers’ 

preparation by providing professional development opportunities. School psychologists might consider 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

25 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

using innovations such as demonstration, role-playing, or simulation to help teachers envision and 

practice different approaches to teaching emotion regulation. By engaging teachers in active learning 

experiences, school psychologists can increase teachers’ understanding and comfort using different 

approaches to teach their students emotion regulation. 

Regardless of the approach taken to support teacher preparation to teach emotion regulation, it is 

critical for school psychologists to be leaders. School psychologists have expert knowledge and skills 

associated with teaching emotion regulation, and therefore, can make a difference by preparing teachers 

with similar knowledge and skills. Through the preparation of the teachers to teach emotion regulation, 

school psychologists can influence the well-being of entire school communities. 

 

6. Limitations 

The first limitation of our research is the nature of our data collection, which involved completing our 

survey. While we found consistency in our dataset, our survey does not allow us to determine why the 

teachers responded the way they did. Also, we did not observe their practice. Therefore, we could not 

determine their actual approaches to teaching emotion regulation or regulating their own emotions. 

Researching deeper teacher engagement in emotion regulation teaching and self-regulation of emotions 

is an excellent direction for future research. 

The second limitation of our research is we recruited participants from a specific region in the southern 

United States. Teachers from different regions or cultures may hold different perspectives and engage 

in various practices than the teachers in our sample. Thus, our sample may not be representative of the 

larger population of teachers in the United States. There is a need to replicate our study with teachers 

recruited from different areas of the United States to determine the extent to which our results apply to 

the more significant population of teachers. 

A third limitation is a potential for other influences on teacher perceptions and practices in teaching 

emotion regulation that we did not consider in our research. We did find multiple personal and 

professional variables associated with the elements of teaching emotion regulation. Yet, there may be 

some other variables that we did not consider, which may be critical to teacher engagement. Exploring 

additional variables associated with teacher engagement in teaching emotion regulation is an essential 

consideration for future research. 

A fourth limitation is the potential for bias in our sample and in the participants responses. The 

sampling bias may have resulted from those who participated in our research holding an interest in 

teaching emotion regulation, while those with little interest chose not to participate. The response bias 

may have resulted from the participants providing socially desirable responses that may not be aligned 

with their actual perceptions and practices. Additional research using a range of methodologies is need 

to determine the representativeness of our data. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

26 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

7. Conclusion 

The association between learning and students’ ability to regulate their emotions motivated us to 

determine K-12 teachers’ practices and perceptions for teaching emotion regulation. We designed our 

research to assess multiple facets of teacher engagement in teaching emotion regulation. We found a 

need to better prepare teachers to effectively teach their students emotion regulation across grade levels. 

The findings illuminated multiple new relationships, as well as situations that need further 

consideration. Our findings have potential implications for school psychologists and their role in 

supporting teachers’ engagement in teaching their students emotion regulation. We hope other 

researchers will join our efforts to continue to explore the complex process of teacher engagement in 

teaching their students how to regulate their emotions. 

 

References 

Aldao, A., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2013). One versus many: Capturing the use of multiple emotion 

regulation strategies in response to an emotion-eliciting stimulus. Cognition & Emotion, 27(4), 

753-760. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.739998 

Barton, E. E., Steed, E. A., Strain, P., Dunlap, G., Powell, D., & Payne, C. J. (2014). An analysis of 

classroom-based and parent-focused social-emotional programs for young children. Infants & 

Young Children, 27(1), 3-29. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000001 

Blair, C., & Diamond, A. (2008). Biological processes in prevention and intervention: The promotion 

of self-regulation as a means of preventing school failure. Development and Psychopathology, 

20(3), 899-911. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579408000436 

Bridgeland, J., Bruce, M., & Hariharan, A. (2013). The missing piece: A national teacher survey on 

how social and emotional learning can empower children and transform schools. A report for 

CASEL. Civic Enterprises. 

Buchanan, R., Gueldner, B. A., Tran, O. K., & Merrell, K. W. (2009). Social and emotional learning in 

classrooms: A survey of teachers’ knowledge, perceptions, and practices. Journal of Applied 

School Psychology, 25(2), 187-203. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377900802487078 

Carter, D. (2016). A nature-based social-emotional approach to supporting young children’s holistic 

development in classrooms with and without walls: The Social-Emotional and Environmental 

Education Development (SEED) framework. International Journal of Early Childhood 

Environmental Education, 4(1), 9-24. 

Cole, P. M., Martin, S. E., & Dennis, T. A. (2004). Emotion regulation as a scientific construct: 

Methodological challenges and directions for child development research. Child Development, 

75(2), 317-333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00673.x 

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2013). Effective social and 

emotional learning programs—preschool and elementary school edition. Collaborative for 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

27 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Academic, Social and Emotional Learning. 

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2015). Effective social and 

emotional learning programs—middle and high school edition. Collaborative for Academic, 

Social and Emotional Learning. 

Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2017). Social and emotional 

learning (SEL) competencies. Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning. 

Cressey, J. (2019). Developing culturally responsive social, emotional, and behavioral supports. 

Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 12(1), 53-65. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-01-2019-0015 

Cvar, K. H. (2019). Practitioners’ beliefs regarding social and emotional learning and its implications 

for implementation (Doctoral dissertation, California State University, Fullerton). 

Davis, E. L., & Levine, L. J. (2013). Emotion regulation strategies that promote learning: Reappraisal 

enhances children’s memory for educational information. Child Development, 84(1), 361-374. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01836.x 

Day C., & Qing, G. (2009) Teacher emotions: Wellbeing and effectiveness. In P. A. Schutz, & M. 

Zembylas (Eds.), Advances in teacher emotion research (pp. 11-31). Springer. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0564-2_2 

Demetriou, H., Wilson, E., & Winterbottom, M. (2009). The role of emotion in teaching: Are there 

differences between male and female newly qualified teachers’ approaches to teaching? 

Educational Studies, 35(4), 449-473. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690902876552 

Denham, S. A., & Brown, C. (2010). “Plays nice with others”: Social-emotional learning and academic 

success. Early Education and Development, 21(5), 652-680. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2010.497450 

Diamond, A. (2010). The evidence base for improving school outcomes by addressing the whole child 

and by addressing skills and attitudes, not just content. Early Education and Development, 21(5), 

780-793. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2010.514522 

Doss, C. J., Steiner, E. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2019). Teacher perspectives on social and emotional 

learning in Massachusetts: Findings from the American Teacher Panel. RAND Corporation. 

https://doi.org/10.7249/RR3171 

Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of 

implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal 

of Community Psychology, 41(3-4), 327-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0 

Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Eggum, N. D. (2010). Emotion-related self-regulation and its relation 

to children’s maladjustment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 495-525. 

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131208 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

28 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Elias, M. J. (2006). The connection between academic and social-emotional learning. In M. J. Elias, & 

H. Arnold (Eds.), The educator’s guide to emotional intelligence and academic achievement (pp. 

4-14). Corwin Press. 

Ferreira González, L., Hennemann, T., & Schlüter, K. (2019). Teachers’ perception of an integrated 

approach to biology and emotional learning. Journal of Science Education for Students with 

Disabilities, 22(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.14448/jsesd.11.0002 

Fried, L. (2011). Teaching teachers about emotion regulation in the classroom. Australian Journal of 

Teacher Education (Online), 36(3), 1. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n3.1 

Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2007). The role of emotion regulation in 

children’s early academic success. Journal of School Psychology, 45(1), 3-19. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.002 

Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O’brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., & Elias, M. 

J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, 

emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58(6-7), 466. 

https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.466 

Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent-and response-focused emotion regulation: divergent consequences for 

experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 

224-237. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.224 

Harley, J. M., Pekrun, R., Taxer, J. L., & Gross, J. J. (2019). Emotion regulation in achievement 

situations: An integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 54(2), 106-126. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1587297 

Harrington, E. M., Trevino, S. D., Lopez, S., & Giuliani, N. R. (2020). Emotion regulation in early 

childhood: Implications for socioemotional and academic components of school readiness. 

Emotion, 20(1), 48-53. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000667 

Hemmeter, M. L., Santos, R. M., & Ostrosky, M. M. (2008). Preparing early childhood educators to 

address young children’s social-emotional development and challenging behavior: A survey of 

higher education programs in nine states. Journal of Early Intervention, 30(4), 321-340. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815108320900 

Hoffman, D. M. (2009). Reflecting on social emotional learning: A critical perspective on trends in the 

United States. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 533-556. 

https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325184 

Humphries, M. L., Williams, B. V., & May, T. (2018). Early childhood teachers’ perspectives on 

social-emotional competence and learning in urban classrooms. Journal of Applied School 

Psychology, 34(2), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2018.1425790 

Jackson, L., & Peck, S. (2018). Managing the classroom by teaching emotional regulation. ASCD 

Express, 14(1). Retrieved from 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

29 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/vol14/num01/Managing-the-Classroom-by-Teaching-Emotional

-Regulation.aspx 

Jones, S. M., Brush, K., Bailey, R., Brion-Meisels, G., McIntyre, J., Kahn, J., & Stickle, L. (2017). 

Navigating SEL from the inside out: Looking inside & across 25 leading SEL programs: A 

practical resource for schools and OST providers (Elementary School Focus). The Wallace 

Foundation. 

Katz, D. A., Harris, A., Abenavoli, R., Greenberg, M. T., & Jennings, P. A. (2018). Educators’ emotion 

regulation strategies and their physiological indicators of chronic stress over 1 year. Stress and 

Health, 34(2), 278-285. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2782 

Klemola, U., Heikinaro-Johansson, P., & O’Sullivan, M. (2013). Physical education student teachers’ 

perceptions of applying knowledge and skills about emotional understanding studied in PETE in a 

one-year teaching practicum. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 18(1), 28-41. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2011.630999 

McCaslin, M., & Good, T. L. (1996). The informal curriculum. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), 

Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 622-670). Prentice Hall International. 

McRae, K., & Gross, J. J. (2020). Emotion regulation. Emotion, 20(1), 1-9. 

https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000703 

Melnick, H., & Martinez, L. (2019). Preparing teachers to support social and emotional learning: A 

case study of San Jose State University and Lakewood Elementary School. Learning Policy 

Institute. 

Reeck, C., Ames, D. R., & Ochsner, K. N. (2016). The social regulation of emotion: An integrative, 

cross-disciplinary model. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(1), 47-63. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.09.003 

Reschly, A. L., Huebner, E. S., Appleton, J. J., & Antaramian, S. (2008). Engagement as flourishing: 

The contribution of positive emotions and coping to adolescents’ engagement at school and with 

learning. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 419-431. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20306 

Schlesier, J., Roden, I., & Moschner, B. (2019). Emotion regulation in primary school children: A 

systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 100, 239-257. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.02.044 

Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Hanson-Peterson, J. L., & Hymel, S. (2015). Social and emotional learning and 

pre-service teacher education. In J. A. Durlak, C. E. Domitrovich, R. P. Weissberg, & T. P. Gullotta 

(Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 406-421). 

Guilford. 

Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Kitil, M. J., & Hanson-Peterson, J. (2017). To reach the students, teach the 

teachers: A national scan of teacher preparation and social and emotional learning. A report 

prepared for the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ct                        Children and Teenagers                        Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021 

30 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

University of British Columbia. 

Schutte, N. S., Manes, R. R., & Malouff, J. M. (2009). Antecedent-focused emotion regulation, 

response modulation and well-being. Current Psychology, 28(1), 21-31. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-009-9044-3 

Stefanou, C. R., Perencevich, K. C., DiCintio, M., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Supporting autonomy in the 

classroom: Ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership. Educational 

Psychologist, 39(2), 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_2 

Sutton, R. E. (2004). Emotional regulation goals and strategies of teachers. Social Psychology of 

Education, 7(4), 379-398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-004-4229-y 

Sutton, R. E. (2005). Teachers’ emotions and classroom effectiveness: Implications from recent 

research. The Clearing House, 78(5), 229-234. 

Sutton, R. E., Mudrey-Camino, R., & Knight, C. C. (2009). Teachers’ emotion regulation and 

classroom management. Theory into Practice, 48(2), 130-137. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840902776418 

Sutton, K. E. (2007). Teachers’ anger, frustration. and self-regulation, In P. A, Schutz, & R. Pekrun 

(Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 251-266). Academic Press. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012372545-5/50016-2 

Taxer, J. L., & Frenzel, A. C. (2015). Facets of teachers’ emotional lives: A quantitative investigation of 

teachers’ genuine, faked, and hidden emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 49, 78-88. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.03.003 

Trendall, C. (1989). Stress in teaching and teacher effectiveness: A study of teachers across mainstream 

and special education. Educational Research, 31(1), 52-58. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188890310106 

Wagstaff, C. R., Hanton, S., & Fletcher, D. (2013). Developing emotion abilities and regulation 

strategies in a sports organization: An action research intervention. Psychology of Sport and 

Exercise, 14(4), 476-487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.01.006 

Young, H. (2016). Perceived lack of teacher empathy and remedial classroom conflicts (Doctoral 

dissertation). Nova Southeastern University.  

Zinsser, K. M., Denham, S. A., Curby, T. W., & Shewark, E. A. (2015). “Practice what you preach”: 

Teachers’ perceptions of emotional competence and emotionally supportive classroom practices. 

Early Education and Development, 26(7), 899-919. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2015.1009320 


