Preschool Teacher Professional Development for Promoting Social–Emotional Learning in Pakistan: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Abstract

Purpose

This study evaluates the impact of social and emotional learning (SEL) training for Pre-K teachers on classroom dynamics and children's well-being.

Design/Approach/Method

Conducted in public schools across Karachi, Pakistan, the study utilized an experimental design with a sample comprising 12 schools, 24 teachers, and 410 preschoolers. Evaluation instruments included the Classroom Assessment and Scoring System (CLASS) and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. The SEL teacher training program employed a locally tailored curriculum, spanning 4 months, during which teachers received both training and mentorship for implementing SEL practices.

Findings

Analysis revealed significant enhancements in intervention schools across all three CLASS dimensions: emotional support (p-value .036), classroom organization (p-value .009), and instructional support (p-value <.001) compared to control schools. Moreover, preschoolers exhibited notable improvements in functional well-being, particularly in total difficulty score (p-value <.001), peer problems (p-value <.001), and prosocial behavior (p-value <.001). However, no significant changes were observed in emotional symptoms (p-value .081), conduct problems (p-value .087), and hyperactivity (p-value .354). SEL training positively influences classroom environments and preschoolers’ social–emotional development.

Originality/Value

This study underscores the significance of SEL teacher training in fostering conducive classroom environments and enhancing the social–emotional well-being of preschoolers.

Keywords

Early childhood education quasi-experiment study social–emotional learning teacher professional development

Introduction

Children are at high risk of behavioral, emotional, and mental disorders. There has been a significant rise in challenging behavior among children due to the inability of teachers to understand and manage these problems (Bodrova & Leong, 2006; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000). Engaging in social and emotional learning (SEL) activities during childhood lays a robust neurocognitive groundwork for future learning, social adaptability, and self-regulation (Payton et al., 2008). SEL encompasses a developmental process aimed at educating children to cultivate emotional awareness, social skills, and problem-solving abilities (Cohen, 2001). The early years mark a period of rapid brain development, facilitating the establishment of habits, the discernment of distinctions between various groups, and the formation of emotional bonds through social interactions (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). A lack of emphasis on SEL makes children more susceptible to engaging in risky behaviors, substance abuse, delinquency, violence, and experiencing mental health challenges (Webster-Stratton & Herman, 2010).

Prevalence of SEL Problems

Studies investigating social–emotional issues among preschoolers revealed a prevalence of 12% in the general population (Hemmeter et al., 2006) and 30% among children from low-income households (Feil et al., 2000; Gross et al., 1999; Hemmeter et al., 2006; Huaqing & Kaiser, 2003). Research indicates that boys tend to experience more behavioral challenges compared to girls (Coie & Dodge, 1998; Kaiser et al., 2002).

SEL Context in Schools of Pakistan

SEL has been given limited consideration in developing nations, particularly Pakistan. The prevalence rates among elementary students demonstrated an escalating trend from 9.3% (Javed et al., 1992) to 33% (Syed & Hussein, 2009), with conduct problems being the most prominent. Essau et al. (2017) also noted elevated levels of externalizing and internalizing problems among adolescents, and Lasi et al. (2023) reported 35% of preschool children in urban Karachi with socioemotional problems.

SEL Readiness for Children Entering Schools

The majority of children embark on their educational journeys lacking the socioemotional skills crucial for academic success (Gilliam & Shahar, 2006; Mahoney et al., 2021; Raver & Knitzer, 2002; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000), especially those hailing from vulnerable backgrounds (Benson et al., 1999; Murano et al., 2020; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000). The school curriculum predominantly emphasizes language and cognitive development (Weissberg & Cascarino, 2013) and SEL often remains on the periphery of classroom instruction. Consequently, a notable disparity exists in policies, interventions, and services aimed at addressing socioemotional issues at the school level (Vostanis et al., 2013).

Evidence Base for SEL Interventions

Several intervention studies have investigated the impact of SEL on both immediate and long-term outcomes, employing a wide array of variables and indicators for preschool-aged children. Evidence suggests that integrating SEL into early childhood programs yields positive effects on children's socioemotional development, subsequently lowering the likelihood of behavioral problems and mental health issues later in life (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2002; Cunha & Heckman, 2010; Jones et al., 2015). Two longitudinal studies notably demonstrated a strong correlation between social–emotional indicators during the preschool years and outcomes in adulthood (Jones et al., 2015; Moffitt et al., 2011). These findings revealed increased educational attainment, improved employment prospects, decreased reliance on public assistance, reduced involvement in delinquency and substance abuse, better overall health, and enhanced socioeconomic status (Jones et al., 2015; Moffitt et al., 2011). Research conducted in Jamaica (Walker et al., 2011) and the Mother–Child Education Program (ACEV) in Palestine (Leckman et al., 2014) both underscore the importance of creating a nurturing environment that fosters the development of social–emotional skills like emotion regulation, collaboration, and conflict resolution.

Role of Teachers in SEL

Extensive research has emphasized the pivotal role of teachers in the early identification and management of socioemotional problems among children (Hussein & Vostanis, 2013; Webster-Stratton et al., 2012). Students often face academic and behavioral challenges when their teachers struggle to manage socioemotional demands (Schonert-Reichl, 2017). Actively engaged teachers who are involved with their students, rather than being passive supervisors, tend to facilitate greater student achievement (Brophy, 1986). Moreover, numerous research studies have demonstrated positive correlations between teacher–student interactions and student behavior at the Pre-K level (Pianta et al., 2002; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000).

Theoretical Framework

Research by the Center for Advanced Study of Teaching and Learning highlights teacher–child interactions as a crucial factor in shaping children's social development. Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden (2005) also emphasize the importance of high student engagement, continuous feedback, and the creation of a well-functioning and respectful classroom environment conducive to children's productive learning. Furthermore, substantial evidence supports a positive link between social–emotional development in preschool children and the classroom environment (Burchinal et al., 2008; La Paro et al., 2004; Mashburn et al., 2008; Vandell et al., 2003). The theoretical framework guiding this research is illustrated in Figure 1. Teachers are instrumental in promoting SEL (Sheridan et al., 2009; Winton & Snyder, 2015); however, many school systems lack sufficient teacher training focused on fostering students’ SEL (Jones & Bouffard, 2012). Additionally, Jones and Bouffard (2012) indicate that teachers receive limited SEL training during both preservice and in-service training programs. Preservice training often inadequately addresses teachers’ personal social–emotional competence and students’ SEL needs (Garner, 2010; Poulou, 2009). Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of teacher training in promoting SEL, facilitating positive changes in the classroom environment, and enhancing the socioemotional competence of Pre-K students.

Figure 1.

The prosocial classroom model, adapted from Jennings and Greenberg (2009, p. 142).

Research Question

What is the relationship between teacher professional development (PD) on SEL and its impact on the classroom environment and the social–emotional competence of preschool children?

Hypotheses

H1: There is no significant difference in the mean classroom environment scores between preschool teachers who have undergone SEL training and those who have not received SEL training.

H2: There is no significant difference in the mean emotional and behavioral scores of preschool children whose teachers have undergone SEL training compared to those whose teachers have not.

Method

Study Setting

Pakistan, situated in Southeast Asia, is a low-middle-income country (LMIC) with a population exceeding 207 million as per the 2017 Census, ranked as the fifth most populous country (United Nations Population Fund‌, 2025). In recent years, there has been an increased focus on early childhood education (ECE) in Pakistan. To ensure quality preschool education and a well-prepared workforce, various reform efforts have been implemented nationwide over the past 5–10 years. According to the Pakistan Education Statistics report (2016–2017), approximately 9.7 million children are enrolled in Pre-K programs across the country. Of these, 39% are in rural areas, with 23% attending public schools and 16% enrolled in private or community-run schools. In urban areas, 45% of children are enrolled in Pre-K, with only 10% attending public schools and the remainder in private schools (ASER, 2019). Therefore, examining SEL for Pre-K children can provide valuable insights for implementing effective interventions and achieving both short-term and long-term impacts. The findings can serve as a foundation for improving existing programs and designing future initiatives for public Pre-K education in Pakistan.

The research took place in the city of Karachi, Sindh province in Pakistan. Karachi comprises 18 towns, with a population of 16 million (Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, 2017). The Gadap town is one of the 18 towns, with a population of 316,684. Typically, households consist of five to seven individuals, predominantly from middle to low socioeconomic backgrounds. Pradhan et al. (2018) reveal that 60% of households in Gadap town fall below the poverty line, with 37% of adults having never attended school and 25% of children aged 3 to 15 being out of school. The town is served by 360 primary schools (Grades 1 to 5), including 37 girls’ primary schools, mostly operated publicly. These schools are often one-room, one-teacher establishments employing multigrade teaching methods (students of different ages and grades in the same class), as reported in the K Electric Report (2014). Agriculture is the primary occupation and transport options are very limited. Gadap town was selected for this research due to the documented higher prevalence of socioemotional problems among children from low-income households, as evidenced by various studies (Benson et al., 1999; Feil et al., 2000; Gross et al., 1999; Hemmeter et al., 2006; Qi & Kaiser, 2003; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000; Schmitt et al., 2018).

Research Design

The research employed quantitative methods utilizing a quasi-experimental design. Randomizing students at an individual level into intervention and control groups within the same classroom was not feasible. Instead, one Pre-K class from each participating school was selected for inclusion. In schools with multiple Pre-K classes, one was chosen randomly. Therefore, the randomization unit was the school itself (Terrell, 2015). Intervention schools underwent the treatment, which involved SEL teacher training, while the control group continued with regular practices.

Sample Size

The sample size calculation involved achieving 80% statistical power to detect a difference ranging from .1 to .15 between the groups. The prevalence of behavioral problems among children was estimated to be between .4 and .5 (Syed & Hussein, 2009). A two-sided test with a .05 level of significance and an intracluster coefficient ranging from .0001 to .0005 was considered. Initially, an estimated sample size of 180 was determined, with a 10% inflation to account for nonresponse and loss to follow-up, resulting in a total of 198 children in both the treatment and control groups. This number was then evenly distributed across 13 clusters or schools, with 30 participants (children) in each cluster. The detectable effect size of the actual difference between proportions was .503. The calculations were based on two one-sided Likelihood Score Tests (Farrington & Manning, 1990), with an intracluster correlation of .0020 and a significance level of .050.

Sample Selection

Gadap Town comprises eight Union Councils (UCs), with UC-3 randomly chosen for the study. Among the 17 schools accessible within UC-3, 13 were selected based on the following eligibility criteria:

The school must be registered with government authorities for a minimum of 3 years.

A functional Pre-K classroom with two full-time teachers is available.

The school management consented to participate in the research study.

The school is not involved in any other intervention study that may influence research outcomes, directly or indirectly.

Sampling details are depicted in Figure 2 and Figure 3.

Figure 2.

School selection sampling framework.

Figure 3.

Sample size distribution during research study.

Instruments

Two instruments were utilized to evaluate social–emotional competence and classroom environment, alongside one tool to capture school profiles. For assessing classroom environment, the focus was on teacher–student interaction, measured using the Classroom Assessment and Scoring System (CLASS). Social–emotional competence, in terms of behavioral problems, was assessed using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), the Urdu version being validated with the Pakistani population (Samad et al., 2005).

SDQ is a brief screening instrument comprised of 25 questions based on attributes related to five subscales: emotional problems, conduct problems, hyperactivity, peer problems, and prosocial behaviors. CLASS is an observational measure developed to evaluate classroom quality from Pre-K through third grade; CLASS captures classroom quality across three major domains: emotional support, classroom organization, and instructional support. Within these domains, there are ten dimensions: positive climate, negative climate, teacher sensitivity, regard for students’ perspectives, behavior management, productivity, instructional learning formats, concept development, quality of feedback, and language modeling.

CLASS has been used in several large-scale studies, establishing the validity of CLASS with more than 3,000 classrooms (Hamre & Pianta, 2005). Further, CLASS validity has been tested with the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, showing stronger correlations to instructional and interactional factors (La Paro et al., 2004). The CLASS Emotional Support domain was also found to be associated with a decrease in teacher-reported behavior problems (Howes et al., 2008; Mashburn et al., 2008).

Training on Instruments

Prior to administering the SDQ, all teachers underwent training on the instrument. Although there is no standardized literature available for conducting the SDQ training, researchers conducted two 4-hr sessions to train teachers on the Urdu version of the SDQ (SDQ U). Standard procedures were followed for CLASS training.

Data Collection Procedure

Before assigning schools to intervention and control groups, a baseline assessment was conducted utilizing the tools of the school profile, CLASS, and SDQ. The researcher collected the school profile data, while a Master of Education (M.Ed.) student from a reputable university conducted the CLASS data collection. The SDQ was administered by the Pre-K class teacher. After the baseline, schools were randomly allocated by tossing a coin into intervention and control groups. Endline assessments on CLASS and SDQ were done for both intervention and control schools to capture change between the two groups.

Baseline data collection for both school profile and CLASS observations occurred concurrently on the same day; school authorities were notified one day before the school visit. Upon entering each classroom, the observer carefully selected a position in the back corner to minimize disruption while still allowing for comprehensive observation and listening to classroom interactions. Observations commenced with the observer documenting behaviors related to each domain and dimension using the prescribed CLASS assessment-recording sheet. Scoring of CLASS was conducted immediately following each observation cycle to reduce recall bias. The same observation procedure was maintained across all schools. Following observations and scoring, composite scores for each CLASS dimension were computed. This involved averaging individual dimension scores across all cycles. Subsequently, composite domain scores for emotional support, classroom organization, and instructional support were calculated using a designated summary scoring sheet. To ensure consistency, domain composite scores were recorded and averaged as positive numbers, with the score for the negative climate dimension reversed. Higher scores in any domain or dimension were indicative of more positive classroom characteristics. The entire process adhered to guidelines outlined in the CLASS manual (Pianta et al., 2008).

Teachers completed the Urdu SDQ paper-based survey for each child. Each survey took approximately 10 to 15 min. Teachers completed all surveys in their respective classes within a 2-week period. The research team was available for support for any difficulties encountered during this time over the phone or in person. Upon completion, the researcher collected all SDQ forms from teachers. Subsequently, the researcher reviewed and edited all questionnaires, contacting teachers via phone for corrections in case of errors and missing values. For discrepancies that remained unresolved, school visits were scheduled to address and rectify these issues.

Data Management

All data were collected using paper questionnaires and subsequently edited and double-entered into SPSS version 19 by the researcher. Data entry took place on the researcher's personal computer, with any identifying information replaced with codes to maintain respondent confidentiality. Hard copies of the data were securely stored in box files and kept under lock and key for added security. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 19.

SEL PD of Teachers

Based on the literature review, there is no existing SEL curriculum specifically developed for the context of developing countries, particularly one tailored for the Pakistani Pre-K population. Weisz et al. (1997) highlighted that replicating interventions without considering the unique context of developing countries is problematic, as behavioral issues are significantly influenced by factors such as age, gender, and cultural, contextual, and environmental differences. The SEL curriculum used in this research was conceptualized and developed in December 2017 with a group of teachers and heads from Pre-K public and private sector schools in Pakistan. This group of experts, drawn from six different cities, participated in a 5-day workshop on SEL. During the workshop, the participants, along with the workshop leader (the researcher of this study), engaged in discussions about the social–emotional development of preschool children in Pakistan. They developed a definition of social–emotional development that reflected the Pakistani cultural context and identified SEL traits and competencies aligned with this definition. This led to the creation of a structure and outline for the SEL curriculum, which was then expanded into themes and evolved into a 48-hr (three credits) teacher training program on SEL.

The training program covered various topics, including classroom management, lesson planning, daily routines and transitions, positive discipline, creative projects, and strategies for communicating with and involving Pre-K parents. Additional content was later incorporated based on requests from teachers who participated in the SEL training. The SEL curriculum was first offered to the intervention group teachers and subsequently to the control group at the end of the intervention period, following positive study outcomes (for the detailed SEL curriculum, see Supplemental Material).

The treatment consisted of a 48-hr (equivalent to three credits) course aimed at the SEL PD of teachers. This course was structured into 12 sessions, each lasting 4 hr, held every Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. over a period of 3 months.

During the SEL training for teachers, a crucial aspect was the implementation of learned SEL content in their classrooms throughout the week following each session. At the beginning of each new session, teachers engaged in reflections, sharing what strategies worked well, what did not, and their individual experiences, including any new approaches they had tried during the previous week.

An integral component of the SEL training was the provision of on-site mentorship to each Pre-K teacher from the intervention group. This coaching initiative commenced alongside the teachers’ training and continued for a duration of 4 months. The coaching primarily involved regular visits to Pre-K classrooms, occurring at least once a month, where observations of instructional practices were conducted, and feedback was provided as needed. Meanwhile, teachers from the control schools continued with routine practices; they received training after the intervention phase using a waitlist approach.

Ethical Considerations

The research adhered to overarching principles of academic integrity, honesty, and respect for individuals throughout its execution. A transparent procedure for obtaining informed consent was implemented, wherein participants were clearly informed of their right to withdraw from the study without facing any negative consequences. Participants were also assured that their decision to abstain from answering questions would be respected. To facilitate communication, the consent form was translated into Urdu. Confidentiality of all collected information was strictly maintained at every stage of the research process. Steps were taken to minimize risks and potential harm associated with data collection.

Data Analysis

Baseline and endline analysis involved a comparative examination between the intervention and control groups concerning age, gender, CLASS, and SDQ variables through frequency distribution tables. Mean scores and standard deviations were reported for CLASS variables, while proportions with percentages were presented for SDQ variables. The analysis considered the treatment and control groups as clusters. Independent samples t-tests were utilized to assess whether the mean scores of the two groups exhibited any significant differences before and after treatment, both for CLASS and SDQ measures. For categorical outcome variables, such as SDQ categories (abnormal, borderline, and normal), proportions were compared between the treatment and control groups using the chi-square test.

Results

The analysis presented encompasses data from 12 schools: six in the intervention group and six in the control group. Among these, one school was a community school, while the remainder were public schools. All schools operated in the morning shifts. Table 1 outlines the enrollment of Pre-K students for each of the participating schools. On average, the Pre-K class size was approximately 43–44 students (±19.33). The difference in class size between intervention and control schools was statistically insignificant (p > .05).

Table 1.

Frequency Distribution of Enrollment of Intervention and Control Schools, Pre-K Classrooms, and Sample Size at Baseline and Endline (N = 12 Schools).

S. No	Intervention /Control Schools	School Proxy Identification	School Level	School Enrollment	No. Pre-K Classes	Pre-K Enrollment	Sample Size of Students Before/After Study
1	Treatment schools	School A	Elementary	156	3	60	35/35
2		School B	Secondary	208	1	60	36/35
3		School C	Elementary	187	1	38	36/35
4		School D	Primary	134	2	39	29/33
5		School E	Secondary	370	2	63	31/35
6		School F	Elementary	211	2	99	29/34
7	Control schools	School G	Primary	156	1	40	33/35
8		School H	Primary	191	1	71	33/34
9		School I	Secondary	385	1	78	30/30
10		School J*	Secondary	299	1	20	17/34
11		School K	Elementary	186	1	46	36/36
12		School L	Secondary	299	2	93	30/34

Note. *Girls-only school.

Teachers’ Characteristics

The study included a total of 24 Pre-K teachers, two teachers from each of the 12 participating schools. All the teachers were female and lived in nearby communities. They were relatively young, typically in their late 20s to early 30s, with bachelor's and master's level qualifications.

Students’ Characteristics

At Baseline

The total Pre-K enrollment for all 12 schools was 707, as indicated in Table 1. At baseline, the sample size comprised 375 students: 205 students in the intervention group and 170 in the control group. The mean age of the students was 5.58 years (±1.49), with a minimum age of 2.03 years and a maximum age of 9.42 years. Of these students, 198 (52.8%) were boys and 177 (47.2%) were girls. Statistical analysis revealed that there was no significant difference in age (p > .05) or gender distribution (p > .53) between the intervention and control groups. Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences between intervention and control schools for School Profile, CLASS, and SDQ.

At Endline

At the endline, there were 410 students across 12 schools. The intervention group comprised 206 students (50.2%), while the control group had 204 students (49.8%). The gender distribution among the students was 201 boys (49.0%) and 209 girls (50.9%). The variance in gender between the intervention and control groups was not statistically significant (p > .05). The mean age of students was 6.03 (±1.57) years; the age difference between the intervention and control groups was highly significant (p > .001).

Classroom Environment (CLASS): Baseline and Endline Comparison

Table 2 illustrates the difference in mean scores for CLASS domains and dimensions between the baseline and endline assessments. Statistical analysis revealed significant improvement in mean scores for the intervention group as compared to the control group for both overall CLASS scores and individual CLASS domains. Notably, intervention schools showed the most substantial improvement in the instructional organization domain, followed by classroom organization and emotional support. Among the CLASS dimensions, the most significant changes were observed in concept development, followed by language modeling, quality of feedback, and teacher sensitivity.

Table 2.

Classroom Assessment and Scoring System (CLASS) Comparing Intervention and Control Schools After the Intervention (N = 12 Schools, Six Intervention and Six Control).

CLASS Domains and Dimensions^	InterventionM	GroupSD	ControlM	GroupSD	t	p	Cohen's d
Emotional support	4.896	1.062	3.680	.621	2.419	.036*	1.215
Positive climate	4.750	1.083	2.916	.540	3.708	.004**	1.833
Negative climate	5.583	1.231	6.383	1.200	−1.139	.281	−.800
Teacher sensitivity	4.958	1.077	2.750	.632	4.330	.001**	2.208
Regards for student perspective	4.291	1.391	2.625	.467	2.782	.019*	1.666
Classroom organization	4.346	1.285	2.348	.799	3.233	.009**	1.997
Behavior management	4.208	1.065	2.375	.918	3.192	.010**	1.833
Productivity	4.416	1.586	2.375	.904	2.738	.021*	2.041
Instructional learning Formats	4.416	1.329	2.291	.620	3.548	.005**	2.125
Instructional support	4.790	1.086	1.928	.618	5.604	.000**	2.861

Notes. ** Significant ≤ .01 level; *Significant ≤ .05 level; ^Possible scores on each dimension range from 1 to 7 on a Likert scale.

These findings led to the rejection of the null hypothesis, indicating that SEL teacher training positively impacted the quality of the classroom environment as assessed by the CLASS tool. Additionally, independent samples t-tests conducted for all CLASS domains and dimensions (except negative climate) between the intervention and control groups showed statistically significant differences with large effect sizes, as measured by Cohen's d.

Behavioral Problems: Baseline and Endline Comparison

At baseline, a huge number of Pre-K students were found in the abnormal and borderline categories of behavioral problems. More than half, 54% (203) of the Pre-K students were found in the abnormal category, and 22% (83) were in the borderline category. Looking at the gender distribution of SDQ total difficulty score, more boys (122, 61.6%) were found in the abnormal category as compared to girls (81, 45.8%) and the difference was also found statistically significant (p ≤ .05). The proportions of SDQ subscales found for this research were: for emotional problems—23% (27.8% boys and 17.5% girls), for conduct problems—40.3% (47.5% boys and 32.2% girls), for hyperactivity—15.2% (17.2% boys and 13% girls), for peer problems—32.3% (36.9% boys and 27.1% girls), and for prosocial—27.2% (21.8% boys and 22% girls) were found in abnormal category.

Table 3 displays the endline results for the SDQ across intervention and control groups. The percentage of students classified as abnormal based on the total difficulties score was 35.9% in the intervention group and 61.8% in the control group, indicating a significantly higher proportion of behavioral problems in the control group schools (p ≤ .001). Similar trends were observed in the SDQ subscales for peer problems and prosocial behavior, where control schools had a higher proportion of abnormal students, with statistically significant differences. While there was a reduction in the proportion of abnormal students for conduct problems in intervention schools (42.7%) compared to control schools (52.5%), this difference was not statistically significant. The difference in hyperactivity between intervention (16.5%) and control (15.7%) schools for the abnormal category was marginally positive, yet statistically insignificant (p > .05). Likewise, the proportion of students classified as abnormal for emotional symptoms was 18.4% in intervention schools and 15.7% in control schools, with an insignificant reduction (p > .05). These findings suggest a significant improvement in intervention schools for the SDQ total difficulties score and subscales related to peer problems and prosocial behavior. However, SEL teacher training did not lead to significant reductions in emotional symptoms, conduct problems, and hyperactivity subscales. Table 4 presents data on gender distribution posttreatment, revealing an insignificant gender difference between intervention and control groups.

Table 3.

After-Intervention Results for Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) for Intervention and Control Groups (N = 410).

	Intervention Schools (N = 206)			Control Schools (N = 204)
SDQ Domains	Normal (%)	Borderline (%)	Abnormal (%)	Normal (%)	Borderline (%)	Abnormal (%)	p-Value
Total difficulties score	60 (29.1)	72 (35.0)	75 (35.9)	38 (18.6)	40 (19.6)	126 (61.8)	.001**
Emotional symptoms	148 (71.8)	20 (9.7)	38 (18.4)	137 (67.2)	35 (17.2)	32 (15.7)	.081
Conduct problems	91 (44.2)	27 (13.1)	88 (42.7)	69 (33.8)	28 (13.7)	107 (52.5)	.087
Hyperactivity	139 (67.5)	33 (16.0)	34 (16.5)	128 (62.7)	44 (21.6)	32 (15.7)	.354
Peer problems	105 (51.0)	29 (14.1)	72 (35.0)	63 (30.9)	40 (19.6)	101 (49.5)	.001**
Prosocial behavior	171 (83.0)	19 (9.2)	16 (7.8)	82 (40.2)	45 (22.1)	77 (37.7)	.001**

Notes. ** Significant ≤ .01 level; *Significant ≤ .05 level.

Table 4.

Gender Distribution for the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) After Treatment Between Intervention and Control Schools (N = 410).

	Males (201)			Females (209)
SDQ Domains	Normal (%)	Borderline (%)	Abnormal (%)	Normal (%)	Borderline (%)	Abnormal (%)	p-Value
Total score							.671
Intervention	27 (26.4)	36 (35.2)	39 (38.2)	33 (31.7)	36 (34.6)	35 (33.6)
Control	12 (12.1)	23 (23.2)	64 (64.6)	26 (24.7)	17 (16.1)	62 (59.0)
Emotional problems							.608
Intervention	72 (70.6)	12 (11.8)	18 (17.6)	76 (73.1)	08 (7.7)	20 (19.2)
Control	67 (67.7)	16 (16.2)	16 (16.2)	70 (66.7)	19 (18.1)	16 (15.2)
Conduct problems							.096
Intervention	38 (37.3)	17 (16.7)	47 (46.1)	53 (51.0)	10 (9.6)	41 (39.4)
Control	28 (28.3)	14 (14.1)	57 (57.6)	41 (39.0)	14 (13.3)	50 (47.6)
Hyperactivity							.963
Intervention	68 (66.7)	17 (16.7)	17 (16.7)	71 (68.3)	16 (15.4)	17 (16.3)
Control	56 (56.6)	22 (22.2)	21 (21.2)	72 (68.6)	22 (21.0)	11 (10.5)
Peer problems							.439
Intervention	49 (48.0)	13 (12.74)	40 (39.21)	56 (53.8)	16 (15.3)	32 (30.7)
Control	36 (36.3)	21 (21.2)	42 (42.4)	27 (25.7)	19 (18.0)	59 (56.1)
Prosocial							.807
Intervention	83 (81.4)	10 (9.8)	09 (8.8)	88 (84.6)	09 (8.7)	07 (6.7)
Control	38 (38.4)	21 (21.2)	40 (40.4)	44 (41.9)	24 (22.9)	37 (35.2)

Notes. ** Significant ≤ .01 level; *Significant ≤ .05 level.

Table 5 displays the mean scores for the SDQ total difficulties score and its subscales. The mean score for the intervention group was 14.68 (±5.66), whereas for the control group, it was 16.50 (±4.61). The independent samples t-test conducted for the SDQ total difficulties score post-SEL teacher training revealed a statistically significant effect, t (408) = −3.556 (p > .05). This indicates a significant difference between the intervention and control groups regarding the SDQ total difficulties score. Cohen's d was calculated as −1.815, representing a large effect size according to Cohen's (1988) guidelines.

Table 5.

Endline Results for Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) Between Intervention and Control Schools (N = 410).

CLASS	Treatment	Group	Control	Group	t	p	Cohen's d
Domains and Dimensions	M	SD	M	SD
Total difficulties score	14.689	5.663	16.504	4.614	−3.556	.000**	−1.815
Emotional symptoms	3.038	2.404	3.730	1.883	−3.239	.001*	−.691
Conduct problems	2.927	1.884	3.568	2.063	−3.288	.001*	−.641
Hyperactivity	4.966	1.642	4.794	1.683	1.047	.296	.171
Peer problems	1.839	.915	2.186	.879	−3.908	.000**	−.346
Prosocial behaviors	7.174	1.847	5.049	2.090	10.911	.000**	2.125

Notes. ** Significant ≤ .01 level; *Significant ≤ .05 level.

Similarly, Table 5 illustrates that for the SDQ variables—emotional problems, conduct problems, peer problems, and prosocial behavior subscales—the mean score difference between the intervention and control groups post-SEL teacher training was statistically significant. However, for the SDQ subscale hyperactivity, the mean score difference between intervention and control groups was found to be statistically insignificant. Likewise, the estimated Cohen's d for the SDQ total difficulties score and subscales indicated better effect sizes, except for hyperactivity, based on Cohen's d.

Discussion

The results of this study suggest that SEL teacher training can have a significant positive impact on the classroom environment and can help decrease behavioral issues in public Pre-K settings. The findings indicate that the SEL teacher training program is effective in fostering positive changes in classroom dynamics and in addressing specific behavioral challenges within a relatively short intervention period of just 4 months.

The effectiveness of PD initiatives for teachers has been a topic of varied perspectives in the literature. Haymore-Sandholtz (2002) concluded that workshops may not be an effective approach for teacher development due to factors such as unclear and irrelevant content, a lack of connection to classroom realities, limited follow-up support, and passive learning methods.

Baker-Henningham et al. (2009) conducted an assessment of the effects of SEL training for preschool educators in Jamaica, employing the Incredible Years (IY) curriculum. Their study revealed significant enhancements in student behavior within public schools located in disadvantaged areas. Another evaluation, carried out by Pianta et al. (2008), demonstrated promising outcomes from PD initiatives focusing on instructional and emotional support provided by trained preschool educators when compared to those who did not undergo such training. Similarly, Garbacz et al. (2014) discovered that teacher training in relationship skills was strongly linked to a decrease in behavioral issues among children with limited social skills.

The majority of teacher participants in this study were not trained on SEL. The concepts and skills introduced during the training were well-received and practiced in Pre-K classrooms. Additionally, in-class mentorship and support helped teachers implement the training effectively. Interventions that combined training and mentorship were found to offer substantial benefits (Raver et al., 2008). The current research employed similar methods to enhance the classroom environment and reduce behavioral problems among Pre-K students. The results of this study indicated that improvements are possible in public schools in marginalized areas. However, some components of behavioral problems, such as emotional support, conduct issues, and hyperactivity, did not show significant improvements after the intervention, suggesting a need to adjust the SEL teacher training program to strengthen these areas.

Humphries et al. (2018) argue that a majority of SEL programs often lack cultural or contextual relevance to students’ backgrounds. A significant finding of the present study is that teachers widely agreed on the importance of integrating SEL concepts that align with the cultural context. Educators involved in crafting the course content strongly advocated for ensuring that the SEL curriculum reflects cultural values. Several other research studies support this notion, asserting that the expression of social–emotional abilities is intricately tied to the cultural characteristics of children (Carlo, 2006; Garner, 2010). Humphries and Keenan (2006) underscored the importance of SEL programs being sensitive and responsive to cultural contexts to enhance effectiveness and garner support from teachers, students, and families.

Teacher–student interaction stands as the cornerstone of classroom quality, with its benefits particularly impactful for children facing vulnerability and disadvantage, such as those from low socioeconomic status and minority cultural backgrounds (Burchinal et al., 2008; Hamre & Pianta, 2005). In the current study, baseline results from the CLASS revealed low scores. These scores were notably lower compared to findings from other countries such as the United States (La Paro et al., 2004), Finland (Pakarinen et al., 2010), Germany (Von Suchodoletz et al., 2014), China (Hu et al., 2016), and Chile (Leyva et al., 2015).

The lowest scores in the CLASS assessment were observed in the domain of instructional support, indicating a need for significant improvement in rural Pre-K classrooms to enhance instructional support aimed at fostering critical thinking, creativity, and the development of complex language skills. In the Pakistani Pre-K context, particularly within the public-school system, whole-group instruction prevails as the predominant teaching method. Active learning pedagogies and group activities are not prioritized, leading to a focus on academic learning through rote memorization, rather than encouraging concept development, higher-order thinking, and language proficiency. This could help explain the low scores for instructional support observed in the participating schools.

Regarding the CLASS domain of classroom organization, previous research has shown that teachers in well-organized classrooms contribute to a positive learning environment by establishing clear behavioral expectations and implementing established routines. These teachers tend to adopt a proactive approach rather than reacting to behavioral issues (Yates & Yates, 1990).

The baseline results from the CLASS assessment suggest that the current environment for teacher–student interaction in public Pre-K classrooms in rural Pakistan falls short of optimal standards. This underscores an urgent need to enhance and enrich teachers’ knowledge and skills to create a more conducive classroom environment, ultimately resulting in improved social competence among children.

The most important finding after the intervention is the significant difference between treatment and control schools. The postintervention CLASS results show a statistically significant increase in treatment schools, with scores rising to moderate levels (3, 4, and 5) across all CLASS domains, indicating relatively positive effects on these schools. Notably, instructional support demonstrated the highest gains. The Pre-K experiences found in this study were quite similar to those reported in other research worldwide (NICHD ECCRN, 2002; Pianta et al., 2002). High instructional quality has been linked to increased student engagement in the classroom (Bogner et al., 2002; Dolezal et al., 2003; Downer et al., 2007; NICHD ECCRN, 2002; Wharton-McDonald et al., 1998) and more positive interactions with teachers and peers (NICHD ECCRN, 2002).

The other two domains, emotional support and classroom organization, also showed a statistically significant increase. Additionally, all CLASS dimensions demonstrated a statistically significant increase, except for negative climate. Negative climate showed very low scores from the beginning, suggesting minimal variation in this variable across participating Pre-K classrooms. This dimension may not be adequately differentiable among the schools in this study. These findings on negative climate are consistent with those of La Paro et al. (2004) and Pakarinen et al. (2010). The postintervention results indicate an improvement in the classroom environment in public Pre-K classrooms in rural Pakistan. This confirms that the SEL intervention successfully brought about changes in process indicators of Pre-K classrooms. Furthermore, the intervention helped enhance and enrich teachers’ practices, leading to a better classroom environment. The endline findings from the CLASS indicate that adopting more student-centered teaching approaches could lead to better scores across all CLASS domains and dimensions.

An important finding of this research is the prevalence of behavioral problems among Pre-K students in the study population in rural Pakistan. Comparable results were also found for high incidence and prevalence of behavioral problems among vulnerable and marginalized communities (Benson et al., 1999; Feil et al., 2000; Gross et al., 1999; Hemmeter et al., 2006; Qi & Kaiser, 2003; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000). Based on this evidence, it seemed more appropriate to support Pre-K education, especially SEL, in those areas. Boys had a higher prevalence compared to girls. Similar results were reported by previous research studies, which found that girls tend to display lower levels of behavioral problems as compared to boys (Coie & Dodge, 1998; Kaiser et al., 2002; Syed & Hussein, 2009).

The after-intervention results observed a decline in behavioral problems in treatment schools as compared to control schools. A statistically significant reduction was found in the SDQ total difficulty score and SDQ peer problems, along with an increase in prosocial behavior among preschool children. However, the lack of significant change in the mean scores for the SDQ subscales of conduct problems, peer problems, and hyperactivity is somewhat unexpected. The decrease in behavioral problems aligns with findings by Blair (2002), who observed that SEL interventions in preschool classrooms were strongly correlated with reductions in behavioral problems. A meta-analysis of school-based SEL interventions conducted by Durlak et al. (2011) also demonstrated a reduction in aggressive behavior and social–emotional skills. The authors reported an 11 percentile-point increase in social–emotional indicators across the entire school, spanning from kindergarten to 12th grade (Durlak et al., 2011). Similar results were found by Pickens (2009).

It seems reasonable that SEL intervention with teachers should bring about positive changes, as indicated in previous studies. The increased difference in effect size for classroom environment quality and reduction in behavioral problems in this study could be attributed to the poor quality of preservice and in-service teacher training, particularly for public Pre-K teachers in the study population.

There are several reasons for the poor state of teacher training in Pakistan, especially regarding SEL training. Wang et al. (1993) argued that a teacher's social–emotional competence is crucial for the quality of interaction between teachers and students. However, teachers rarely receive training in SEL (Buchanan et al., 2009). Furthermore, teacher–student interactions and behavior management are significantly influenced by a teacher's ability to implement SEL programs. The results of this study strongly support this assertion. Teachers in Pakistan are implicitly and explicitly acknowledged as crucial stakeholders in delivering quality education. However, the reality surrounding teacher training, curriculum development, and the provision of classroom materials necessary for effective learning and instruction paints a different picture. In the absence of comprehensive teacher training programs, ECE teachers’ practices are heavily influenced by their personal beliefs and experiences, significantly shaping teacher–student interactions.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The findings of this research demonstrated that there is a great potential to affect the social–emotional outcomes of Pre-K students. Results also indicate that teacher PD program efforts can improve classroom environment quality and can facilitate a reduction in behavioral problems among Pre-K students. Perhaps rather than only focusing on structural aspects of the Pre-K classroom, teachers and policymakers now have enough evidence to focus on process indicators. The findings further indicate that Pre-K teachers’ training needs to have a clear focus on teacher–student interactions so that these teachers have knowledge and skills to create a better environment to support the social competence of Pre-K students.

Like many public Pre-K schools in the majority of developing countries, Pakistan also has a high teacher–child ratio, low levels of teachers’ credentials, fewer opportunities for teacher training, few classroom resources, and a poor physical environment (Barker-Henningham & Walker, 2009). Besides, the implementation of interventions in developing countries is quite challenging as compared to developed countries (Barker-Henningham & Walker, 2009). Despite these situations, the teacher training on SEL was associated with a positive impact on the classroom environment and social–emotional competence of Pre-K students. The results of this study further endorse the idea that it is possible to conduct a school-based intervention in resource-poor settings.

Early childhood education demands extensive teacher training worldwide. However, the current environment in Pakistan has failed to meet these demands. As a result, teachers are not adequately prepared to work with young children, and SEL training is notably missing. Most ECE teachers prioritize completing the curriculum as expected by government education departments. There are very few opportunities for ECE teachers to engage in preservice and in-service training and development. Furthermore, ECE certification is not available, and according to recent criteria set by government education departments, anyone with an undergraduate degree in any subject can become an ECE teacher in public schools. Recently, federal and provincial education departments have been working toward creating an entrance test for the recruitment of ECE teachers, but its implementation remains to be seen.

There is a significant demand for ECE teacher training in Pakistan. Presently, the majority of teachers are ill-prepared to effectively engage with young children, and there is a glaring absence of SEL teachers’ training. Opportunities for both preservice and in-service training and development for ECE teachers are scarce.

The findings of this research highlight that efforts invested in SEL training for teachers can enhance the quality of the classroom environment and contribute to a reduction in behavioral problems. This suggests that policymakers should not only concentrate on the structural aspects of Pre-K classrooms but also prioritize process indicators. Moreover, the research underscores the importance of incorporating SEL training into Pre-K teacher education, ensuring that teachers possess the necessary knowledge and skills to create supportive environments that foster the social competence of young students.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-roe-10.1177_20965311261421647 - Supplemental material for Preschool Teacher Professional Development for Promoting Social–Emotional Learning in Pakistan: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-roe-10.1177_20965311261421647 for Preschool Teacher Professional Development for Promoting Social–Emotional Learning in Pakistan: A Quasi-Experimental Study by Seema Lasi, Michael Ndemanu, Jill Bradley-Levine, Eva Zygmunt, Khushal Khan and Karen Ford in ECNU Review of Education

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Seema Lasi

Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from Aga Khan University, Pakistan (0000-AAA-ERC-00 5311).

Author Contributions

Dr Seema Lasi led the project from its initial conceptualization through to the finalization of the manuscript. Dr Michael Ndemanu and Dr Jill Levine-Bradley provided supervision and guidance at all stages of the work. Dr Eva Zygmunt contributed to the design and implementation of the SEL intervention. Khushal Khan supported the delivery of the intervention and assisted Dr Seema Lasi with data collection and analysis. Dr Karen Ford contributed to refining the study's conceptualization and supported the development of the literature review.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the University Research Council, Aga Khan University.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Annual Status of Education Report ASER-PAKISTAN. (2019).

Baker-Henningham

Walker

(2009). A qualitative study of teacher’s perceptions of an intervention to prevent conduct problems in Jamaican pre-schools. Child: Care, Health and Development, 35(5), 632–642. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2009.00996.x

Baker-Henningham

Walker

Powell

Gardner

J. M.

(2009). A pilot study of the Incredible Years Teacher Training programme and a curriculum unit on social and emotional skills in community pre-schools in Jamaica. Child: Care, Health and Development, 35(5), 624–631. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2009.00964.x

Benson

P. L.

Scales

P. C.

Leffert

Roehlkepartain

E. C.

(1999). A fragile foundation: The state of developmental assets among American youth. ERIC.

Blair. (2002). School readiness: Integrating cognition and emotion in neurobiological concept-utilization of children’s functioning at school entry. American Psychologist, 57(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.2.111

Bodrova

Leong

D. J.

(2006). Tools of the mind. Pearson Australia Pty Limited.

Bogner

Raphael

Pressley

(2002). How grade 1 teachers motivate literate activity by their students. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6(2), 135–165. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0602_02

Brophy

(1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist, 41(10), Article 1069. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1069

Buchanan

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

10.

Burchinal

Howes

Pianta

Bryant

Early

Clifford

Barbarin

(2008). Predicting child outcomes at the end of kindergarten from the quality of pre-kindergarten teacher–child interactions and instruction. Applied Development Science, 12(3), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888690802199418

11.

Carlo

(2006). Care-based and altruistically based morality. In Handbook of moral development (pp. 569–598). Psychology Press.

12.

Cicchetti

Rogosch

F. A.

(2002). A developmental psychopathology perspective on adolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.70.1.6

13.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

14.

Cohen

(2001). Caring classroom/intelligent schools: The social emotional education of young children. Teachers College Press.

15.

Coie

J. D.

Dodge

K. A.

(1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. In Damon

Eisenberg

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 779–862). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

16.

Cunha

Heckman

J. J.

(2010). Investing in our young people. NBER Working Paper No. 16201. National Bureau of Economic Research.

17.

Darling-Hammond

Baratz-Snowden

(2005). A good teacher in every classroom: Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve (Vol. 6). Jossey-Bass.

18.

Dolezal

S. E.

Welsh

L. M.

Pressley

Vincent

M. M.

(2003). How nine third-grade teachers motivate student academic engagement. The Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 239–267. https://doi.org/10.1086/499725

19.

Downer

J. T.

Rimm-Kaufman

S. E.

Pianta

R. C.

(2007). How do classroom conditions and children’s risk for school problems contribute to children’s behavioral engagement in learning? School Psychology Review, 36(3), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2007.12087938

20.

Durlak

J. A.

Weissberg

R. P.

Dymnicki

A. B.

Taylor

R. D.

Schellinger

K. B.

(2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

21.

Essau

C. A.

Qadir

Maqsood

us Sahar

Bukhtawer

Ozer

B. U.

... Gilvarry

(2017). Factor structure of the Urdu version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in Pakistani adolescents. Acta Psychopathologica, 3(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.4172/2469-6676.100076

22.

Farrington

C. P.

Manning

(1990). Test statistics and sample size formulae for comparative binomial trials with null hypothesis of non-zero risk difference or non-unity relative risk. Statistics in Medicine, 9(12), 1447–1454. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780091208

23.

Feil

E. G.

Walker

Severson

Ball

(2000). Proactive screening for emotional/behavioral concerns in Head Start preschools: Promising practices and challenges in applied research. Behavioral Disorders, 26(1), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290002600103

24.

Garbacz

L. L.

Zychinski

K. E.

Feuer

R. M.

Carter

J. S.

Budd

K. S.

(2014). Effects of teacher–child interaction training (TCIT) on teacher ratings of behavior change. Psychology in the Schools, 51(8), 850–865. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21788

25.

Garner

P. W.

(2010). Emotional competence and its influences on teaching and learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 297–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9129-4

26.

Gilliam

W. S.

Shahar

(2006). Preschool and childcare expulsion and suspension: Rates and predictors in one state. Infants & Young Children, 19(3), 228–245. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001163-200607000-00007

27.

Gross

Sambrook

Fogg

(1999). Behavior problems among young children in low-income urban day care centers. Research in Nursing & Health, 22(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199902)22:1<15::AID-NUR3>3.0.CO;2-2

28.

Hamre

B. K.

Pianta

R. C.

(2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development, 76(5), 949–967. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00889.x

29.

Haymore-Sandholtz

(2002). Inservice training or professional development: Contrasting opportunities in a school/university partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(7), 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00045-8

30.

Hemmeter

M. L.

Ostrosky

Fox

(2006). Social and emotional foundations for early learning: A conceptual model for intervention school. Psychology Review, 35(4), 583–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2006.12087963

31.

Howes

Burchinal

Pianta

Bryant

Early

Clifford

Barbarin

(2008). Ready to learn? Children’s pre-academic achievement in pre-kindergarten programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23(1), 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.05.002

32.

Fan

Yang

(2016). Applicability of the classroom assessment scoring system in Chinese preschools based on psychometric evidence. Early Education and Development, 27(5), 714–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1113069

33.

Huaqing Qi

Kaiser

A. P.

(2003). Behavior problems of preschool children from low-income families: Review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23(4), 188–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214030230040201

34.

Humphries

M. L.

Keenan

K. E.

(2006). Theoretical, developmental & cultural orientations of school-based prevention programs for preschoolers. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 9(2), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-006-0005-1

35.

Humphries

M. L.

Williams

B. V.

May

(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

36.

Hussein

S. A.

Vostanis

(2013). Teacher training intervention for early identification of common child mental health problems in Pakistan. Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties, 18(3), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2013.819254

37.

Javed

M. A.

Kundi

M. Z.

Khan

P. A.

(1992). Emotional and behavioral problems among school children in Pakistan. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 42(8), 181–183.

38.

Jones

D. E.

Greenberg

Crowley

(2015). Early social-emotional functioning and public health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and future wellness. American Journal of Public Health, 105(11), 2283–2290. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302630

39.

Jones

S. M.

Bouffard

S. M.

(2012). Social and emotional learning in schools: From programs to strategies. Social Policy Report, 26(4), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2012.tb00073.x

40.

K-electric annual report. (2014).

41.

Kaiser

A. P.

Cai

Hancock

T. B.

Foster

E. M.

(2002). Teacher-reported behavior problems and language delays in boys and girls enrolled in Head Start. Behavioral Disorders, 28(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290202800103

42.

La Paro

K. M.

Pianta

R. C.

Stuhlman

(2004). The classroom assessment scoring system: Findings from the prekindergarten year. The Elementary School Journal, 104(5), 409–426. https://doi.org/10.1086/499760

43.

Lasi

S. Z.

Kayani

Afzal

(2023). Sleep and behavioral problems among preschool children: Correlations from Pakistan urban. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 7(7), 2215–2227. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2023.70875

44.

Leckman

J. F.

Panter-Brick

Salah

(2014). Pathways to peace: The transformative power of children and families (Vol. 15). MIT Press.

45.

Leyva

Weiland

Barata

Yoshikawa

Snow

Treviño

Rolla

(2015). Teacher–child interactions in Chile and their associations with prekindergarten outcomes. Child Development, 86(3), 781–799. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12342

46.

Mahoney

J. L.

Weissberg

R. P.

Greenberg

M. T.

Dusenbury

Jagers

R. J.

Niemi

Schlinger

Schlund

Shriver

T. P.

VanAusdal

Yoder

(2021). Systemic social and emotional learning: Promoting educational success for all preschool to high school students. The American Psychologist, 76(7), 1128–1142. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000701. Epub 2020 Oct 8. PMID: 33030926

47.

Mashburn

A. J.

Pianta

R. C.

Hamre

B. K.

Downer

J. T.

Barbarin

O. A.

Bryant

Burchinal

Early

D. M.

Howes

(2008). Measures of classroom quality in prekindergarten and children’s development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79(3), 732–749. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01154.x

48.

Moffitt

T. E.

Arseneault

Belsky

Dickson

Hancox

R. J.

Harrington

Houts

Poulton

Roberts

B. W.

Ross

Sears

M. R.

Thomson

W. M.

Caspi

(2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(7), 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108

49.

Murano

Sawyer

J. E.

Lipnevich

A. A.

(2020). A meta-analytic review of preschool social and emotional learning interventions. Review of Educational Research, 90(2), 227–263. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320914743

50.

NICHD ECCRN. (2002c). The relation of global first-grade classroom environment to structural classroom features and teacher and student behaviors. The Elementary School Journal, 102(5), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1086/499709

51.

Pakarinen

Lerkkanen

M.-K.

Poikkeus

A.-M.

Kiuru

Siekkinen

Rasku-Puttonen

Nurmi

J.-E.

(2010). A validation of the classroom assessment scoring system in Finnish kindergartens. Early Education and Development, 21(1), 95–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280902858764

52.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. (2021). Sixth population and housing census 2017: Final results. Government of Pakistan. https://www.pbs.gov.pk/censusarchive/

53.

Payton

Weissberg

R. P.

Durlak

J. A.

Dymnicki

A. B.

Taylor

R. D.

Schellinger

K. B.

Pachan

(2008). The positive impact of social and emotional learning for kindergarten to eighth-grade students: Findings from three scientific reviews. Technical Report, Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. 815 West Van Buren Street Suite 210, Chicago, IL 60607.

54.

Pianta

R. C.

La Paro

K. M.

Hamre

B. K.

(2008). Classroom assessment scoring system™: Manual K-3. Paul H Brookes Publishing.

55.

Pianta

R. C.

La Paro

K. M.

Payne

Cox

M. J.

Bradley

(2002). The relation of kindergarten classroom environment to teacher, family, and school characteristics and child outcomes. The Elementary School Journal, 102(3), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1086/499701

56.

Pickens

(2009). Socio–emotional programme promotes positive behaviour in preschoolers. Child Care in Practice, 15(4), 261–278. 10.1080/13575270903149323

57.

Poulou

M. S.

(2009). Classroom interactions: Teachers’ and students’ perceptions. Research in Education, 82(1), 103–106. https://doi.org/10.7227/RIE.82.9

58.

Pradhan

N. A.

Jamali

Bhamani

S. S.

Ali

T. S.

Karmaliani

(2018). Out-of-school children: Examining the reasons in semi-urban setting in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 5(2), 45–60.

59.

C. H.

Kaiser

A. P.

60.

Raver

Jones

LiGrining

Metzger

Smallwood

Sardin

(2008). Improving preschool classroom processes: Preliminary findings from a randomized trial implemented in Head Start settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 63, 253–255.

61.

Raver

C. C.

Knitzer

(2002). Ready to enter: What research tells policymakers about strategies to promote social and emotional school readiness among three-and four-year-old children. National Center for Children in Poverty. https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D82V2QVX

62.

Rimm-Kaufman

S. E.

Pianta

R. C.

Cox

M. J.

(2000). Teachers’ judgments of problems in the transition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006(00)00049-1

63.

Samad

Hollis

Prince

Goodman

(2005). Child and adolescent psychopathology in a developing country: Testing the validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (Urdu version). International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 14(3), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.3

64.

Schmitt

S. A.

Pratt

M. E.

Korucu

Napoli

A. R.

Schmerold

K. L.

(2018). Preschool classroom quality and social-emotional functioning: Findings across geographic regions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 43, 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.11.002

65.

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

(2017). Social and emotional learning and teachers. The future of children. Social and Emotional Learning, 27(1), 137–155.

66.

Sheridan

S. M.

Edwards

C. P.

Marvin

C. A.

Knoche

L. L.

(2009). Professional development in early childhood programs: Process issues and research needs. Early Education and Development, 20(3), 377–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802582795

67.

Shonkoff

J. P.

Phillips

D. A.

(2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. National Academy Press.

68.

Syed

E. U.

Hussein

S. A.

(2009). Prevalence of emotional and behavioral problems among primary school children in Karachi, Pakistan—Multi informant survey. The Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 76(6), 623–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-009-0072-7

69.

Terrell

S. R.

(2015). Writing a proposal for your dissertation: Guidelines and examples. Guilford Publications.

70.

United Nations Population Fund. (2025). World population dashboard: Pakistan. https://www.unfpa.org/data/world-worldpopulation/PK.

71.

Vandell

D. L.

McCartney

Owen

M. T.

Booth

Clarke‐Stewart

(2003). Variations in child care by grandparents during the first three years. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(2), 375–381.

72.

Von Suchodoletz

Fäsche

Gunzenhauser

Hamre

B. K.

(2014). A typical morning in preschool: Observations of teacher–child interactions in German preschools. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29(4), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.05.010

73.

Vostanis

Humphrey

Fitzgerald

Deighton

Wolpert

(2013). How do schools promote emotional well-being among their pupils? Findings from a national scoping survey of mental health provision in English schools. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 18(3), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3588.2012.00677.x

74.

Walker

S. P.

Wachs

T. D.

Grantham-McGregor

Black

M. M.

Nelson

C. A.

Huffman

S. L.

Baker-Henningham

Chang

S. M.

Hamadani

J. D.

Lozoff

Meeks Gardner

Powell

C. A.

Rahman

Richter

(2011). Inequality in early childhood: Risk and protective factors for early child development. The Lancet, 378(9799), 1325–1338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60555-2

75.

Wang

M. C.

Haertel

G. D.

Walberg

H. J.

(1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249–294. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543063003249

76.

Webster-Stratton

Gaspar

M. F.

Seabra-Santos

M. J.

(2012). Incredible years–parent, teachers and children’s series: Transportability to Portugal of early intervention programs for preventing conduct problems and promoting social and emotional competence. Psychosocial Intervention, 21(2), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.5093/in2012a15

77.

Webster-Stratton

Herman

K. C.

(2010). Disseminating incredible years series early intervention program: Integrating and sustaining services between school and home. Psychology in the Schools, 47(1), 36–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20450

78.

Weissberg

R. P.

Cascarino

(2013). Academic learning + social-emotional learning = national priority. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171309500203

79.

Weisz

J. R.

Thurber

C. A.

Sweeney

Proffitt

V. D.

LeGagnoux

G. L.

(1997). Brief treatment of mild-to-moderate child depression using primary and secondary control enhancement training. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(4), Article 703. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.65.4.703

80.

Wharton-McDonald

Pressley

Hampston

(1998). Literacy instruction in nine first-grade classrooms: Teacher characteristics and student achievement. Elementary School Journal, 99, 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1086/461918

81.

Winton

E. C. T. P. J.

Snyder

P. A.

(2015). Beyond the status quo: Rethinking professional development for early childhood teachers. In Handbook of early childhood teacher education (pp. 72–86). Routledge.

82.

Yates

G. C. R.

Yates

S. M.

(1990). Teacher effectiveness research: Towards describing user-friendly classroom instruction. Educational Psychology, 10(3), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341900100304

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.03 MB

0.00 MB