Social and emotional learning (SEL) is increasingly embedded in Australian primary schools, yet the evidence base remains limited and heterogeneous. This systematic review aimed to identify evaluated SEL programs in Australian primary schools, examine effects across emotional, behavioural, and social outcomes, and map program content against the CASEL-5 competencies. Searches were conducted in ERIC, APA PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, and Scopus in August 2024, with supplementary searches of Be You-listed programs and KidsMatter Primary program names updated via Google Scholar in May 2026; the protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251117280). Eligible studies included Australian primary school-based SEL programs with a comparison condition, child-level social, emotional, or behavioural outcomes, and randomised, cluster-randomised, or quasi-experimental designs. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Findings were synthesised narratively, and content was coded using the CASEL framework. Fifteen studies involving 7814 students aged 5–12 years were included. Effects were predominantly null or mixed across emotional distress, problem behaviour, and positive social behaviour. Evidence was limited by heterogeneity in designs, measures, and content, as well as variable methodological quality. Competency mapping showed stronger emphasis on Self-Awareness and Self-Management than on Social Awareness, Relationship Skills, and Responsible Decision-Making. Australian primary school SEL evaluations provide inconsistent evidence of effectiveness and uneven competency coverage. These findings underscore the need for Australian SEL research and policy to more explicitly account for how program design, evaluation expectations, implementation conditions, and school delivery realities shape evidence of effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laine et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: