MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415370357 · doi:10.3390/bs15101426

Integrating Social and Emotional Learning into Mathematics Education: A Multiple Case Study of JUMP Math’s Approach to Creating Socially and Emotionally Supportive Learning Environments

2025· article· en· W4415370357 on OpenAlexafffund
Tonje M. Molyneux, Adele Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council
KeywordsSocial emotional learningEmotional competenceCurriculumCompetence (human resources)Mathematical anxietyPsychological resilienceAnxietySocial competence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating social and emotional learning (SEL) into academic instruction may improve well-being and achievement. In mathematics-where anxiety and negative attitudes often hinder learning-SEL may be especially useful. This multiple case study examined how a math curriculum that explicitly embeds SEL principles shapes learning environments and teacher/student experiences. Using a multiple case study design, we conducted classroom observations, teacher interviews, and check-ins in six Grade 5-7 classrooms implementing JUMP Math, a program that centers social-emotional well-being. Three themes characterized the SEL-integrated environment: (1) Teaching Energy-steady pacing, enthusiastic delivery, and humor; (2) Learning Harmony-progressing together, peer help, and the normalization of mistakes; and (3) Emotional Stability-supportive feedback, invitations to participate, and respectful, responsive interactions. Teachers reported greater confidence and reduced math anxiety; students showed higher engagement, cooperation, and resilience in problem-solving. Findings indicate that math curricula intentionally designed with SEL can create emotionally supportive classrooms that benefit both teachers and students, while advancing academic goals. The findings contribute to understanding how academic instruction can be leveraged to develop social and emotional competence while maintaining focus on academic achievement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral SciencesSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207