SocialEmotionalCognitive Design (SECD): A Hybrid Prototype Model for Adolescent Learning and Instructional Design to Increase SelfAwareness in High School Students Erin M. Giles University College University of Denver Capstone Project May 4, 2006 ______________________________ Paul Novak Capstone Advisor ______________________________ Denise Pearson, PhD. Academic Director of Professional Studies Upon the Recommendation of the Department: ______________________________ James R. Davis, PhD. Dean Gilesii Abstract The YESS (Youth Empowerment Support Services) Institute is a 501(c)(3) notforprofit located in Denver, Colorado, that specializes in youth, role model, educator and youth agency volunteer development. Through its EmoSmart™ Leadership program, the YESS Institute teaches emotional intelligence to atrisk youth, but its selfawareness curriculum needs appropriate assessment and redevelopment. Furthermore, the instructional design methodology for analyzing, designing and implementing emotional intelligence training with adolescents is lacking. Drawing on socialemotional learning principles and the cognitive training model, this Capstone Project creates, implements and discusses a prototype instructional design and learning model, the Social EmotionalCognitive Design (SECD), to increase the selfawareness of adolescents participating in the EmoSmart™ Leadership program at a Denverarea high school. Gilesiii Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………. ii List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………………… iv Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 Goals and Objectives……………………………………………………………………… 4 Benefits…………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 Literature Review……………………………………………………………………………………… 7 The Introduction of Emotional Intelligence…………………………………… 7 Social and Emotional Learning……………………………………………………… 8 Emotional Intelligence and SEL Development: Fad or Science?.. 10 Applicable Models for Learning……………………………………………………… 10 The Cognitive Training Model………………………………………………………… 11 Design of the Project…………………………………………………………………………………12 Assess……………………………………………………………………………………………… 14 Build………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18 Connect…………………………………………………………………………………………… 20 Define……………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 Explain with Examples…………………………………………………………………… 21 Facilitate a Forum………………………………………………………………………… 22 Guided Go……………………………………………………………………………………… 22 Help………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23 Intensification………………………………………………………………………………… 23 Justify……………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 “Karry” Out……………………………………………………………………………………… 25 Learn……………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 Implementation of the Project………………………………………………………………… 26 Results of the Project……………………………………………………………………………… 27 Pre and PostAssessment Results………………………………………………… 27 Class 1: Introduction to EmoSmarts…………………………………………… 30 Class 2: SelfAwareness Lesson 1………………………………………………… 32 Class 3: SelfAwareness Lesson 2………………………………………………… 34 Class 4: SelfAwareness Lesson 3………………………………………………… 36 Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………………….36 References………………………………………………………………………………………………… 72 Gilesiv List of Figures Figure 1: SocialEmotionalCognitive Design for Adolescents……………… 41 Figure 2: Quadrants of Emotional Intelligence Defined by Daniel Goleman & Cary Cherniss……………………………………………………………………….. 42 Figure 3: Quadrants of Emotional Intelligence Modified for the YESS Institute’s Development of Adolescent Role Models………………………………. 43 Figure 4: Emotional Intelligence Evaluation…….…………………………………… 44 Figure 5: Bloom’s Taxonomy…………………………………………………………………. 45 Figure 6: Participant Brainstormed Answers During Class 1……………..... 46 Figure 7: EmoSmart Leadership Participant Workbook………………………… 47 Figure 8: EmoSmart Leadership SelfAwareness PreAssessment………. 66 Figure 9: Multiple Choice Pre and PostAssessment Results………………… 68 Figure 10: Ranking EQ Pre and PostAssessment Results…………………… 69 Figure 11: Free Response Pre and PostAssessment Question Results..70 Figure 12: Temperamental Tree PostAssessment Results………………….. 71 Giles1 Introduction Statement of the Problem As an expanding nonprofit dedicated to empowering role models in the Denver community, the YESS (Youth Empowerment Support Services) Institute has educated hundreds of high school students through its EmoSmart Leadership program. Since the fall of 2001, the YESS Institute received its 501(c)(3) notforprofit status to offer affordable training to youth, educators and youth agencies. The YESS Institute is guided by its philosophy that emphasizes the importance of socialemotional intelligence as the primary indicator of academic and life fulfillment, and through its teachings, works to enhance positive skill, attitudinal and behavioral changes among community role models, including Denver high school students. As the YESS Institute works to accomplish its vision, to offer the most effective and comprehensive EmoSmart (or emotional intelligence) training and education in the United States, it becomes increasingly difficult to compete in the heavily saturated Denver nonprofit market. According to the Colorado Nonprofit Association, there are 15,243 charitable nonprofits in Colorado, excluding foundations and religious congregations (Doehrman, 2003). When the YESS Institute applies for funding to further its outreach of the EmoSmart Leadership program, it competes with these other organizations, often regardless of the nature of each nonprofit’s specialization. Additionally, federal funding for atrisk youth has reduced Giles2 substantially over the past several years (Doolittle & Ivry, 2003), which indicates that funding is competitive. The YESS Institute currently operates with limited resources, unreliable and limited cash flow and a small, but valuable, market presence. Therefore, it is critical that the YESS Institute offers and promotes the most refined, comprehensive and innovative products and services to continue sustainability by attracting potential donors. The YESS Institute recognizes the importance of emotional intelligence and a need for socialemotional learning (SEL) for adolescents. In the 1990’s, psychologists have been pinpointing emotional intelligence as the key indicator to successful and sustained leadership (Cooper, & Sawaf, 1997; Goleman, 1995, 1997, 1998; Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Weisinger, 1997). According to Daniel Goleman, a pioneer in the study of emotional intelligence, workplace success is roughly 80% based on emotional intelligence and 20% dependent on IQ, or cognitive intelligence (1997). As younger generations mature and become primary decision makers in the government, corporations, communities and familial relations, emotional intelligence education can help provide a healthy foundation for success. Between 15 and 22 percent of United States youth have social emotional difficulties (as cited in Elksnin & Elksnin, 2003); other studies show as many as half of American youth are increasingly vulnerable to health and social risks (as cited in Ross, Powell & Elias, 2002) that can be Giles3 prevented by building emotionally intelligent behavior (Elias, Lantieri, Patti, Walberg & Zins, 1999). Selfawareness, one quadrant identified in this Capstone as an emotional intelligence component, is the developmental foundation for the other three components: selfmanagement, community awareness and interpersonal management (Elias & Weissberg, 2000; Hippe, 2004). Given the YESS Institute’s need for a competitive EmoSmart curriculum, proven emotional intelligence guiding principles for adults in the workplace and socialemotional needs in adolescents, role model development agencies and school systems, such as the YESS Institute, need a methodology that combines socialemotional learning techniques for adolescents and superlative adult instructional design techniques that have improved emotional intelligence in organizations and can be converted to meet the developmental needs of youth. By designing a selfawareness curriculum that combines the cognitive training model with socialemotional learning, thus titled the social emotionalcognitive design (SECD), I contend that Denver high school students participating in the YESS Institute’s EmoSmart Leadership program will increase their selfconfidence, selfassessment and emotional awareness and consequently, their overall emotional intelligence quotient. The YESS Institute will increase its sustainability, generated mainly through augmented funding, and increase its community leverage among competing Giles4 Denverbased nonprofits by educating adolescents in this curriculum. Once this curriculum has been proven to be both reliable and valid within Denver public schools, the YESS Institute can begin promoting the EmoSmart Leadership program at a national level, reaching numerous high school students, thereby increasing emotionally intelligent behavior among younger generations nationwide. Goals and Objectives In this Capstone Project, I will analyze and design a hybrid prototype curriculum that combines socialemotional learning principles with the cognitive training model, as defined in the book Writing Training Materials That Work by Wellesley Foshay, Kenneth Silber and Michael Stelnicki. This curriculum will be composed of three fourhour modules for Denver high school mentors. The objective of the program is “to improve mentoring and leadership skills by enhancing emotional intelligence and becoming EmoSmart,” the definition of emotional intelligent behavior at the YESS Institute. In its entirety, the EmoSmart Leadership program seeks to enhance four primary components, or quadrants, associated with emotional intelligence. These quadrants are loosely based on Goleman’s emotional intelligence model (1998) and include selfawareness, selfmanagement, interpersonal (i.e. community) awareness and interpersonal management (see Figure 2). For the purpose of this Capstone, the SECD will focus on Giles5 developing only one of these socialemotional intelligent behaviors—self awareness—as a basis of the other three quadrants. The overall goal of the Capstone, then, is to increase selfawareness in Denver high school students by designing the SECD model that combines socialemotional learning with cognitive training and then applying it to the EmoSmart curriculum that improves three behaviors directly related to selfawareness: self confidence, selfassessment and emotional awareness. These behaviors are further defined in the EmoSmart Leadership program’s selfawareness component. Specific to the curriculum, at the end of the courses, the students will be able to: § List the four main areas of emotional intelligence § Define “selfawareness” § Give an example of a belief § Identify a belief in your “little red wagon” § Explain how experiences relate to behavior § Apply the Temperamental Tree to a reallife situation § Use all aspects of selfawareness to dissect a reallife situation Benefits The advantages of this Capstone are threefold. First, by creating a curriculum enhanced by the prototypical socialemotionalcognitive design, the YESS Institute will have a competitive advantage among other non profits, especially those also offering youth development services in Denver because the model combines both socialemotional learning best practices and Foshay et. al’s cognitive training model. After assessing the curriculum, the YESS Institute will then be able to defend and promote its program, Giles6 which, through grant writing, submission and acceptance, will increase program funding, eventually leading to state and national grant exposure. With augmented funding, the YESS Institute will be able to reach more high school students and begin to offer the program nationwide. Second, students who participate in the EmoSmart Leadership program will benefit directly from its teachings, especially with a superior curriculum designed using instructional design best practices. Following the YESS Institute’s program model, these high school students will then serve as mentors to at risk middle school students by meeting with their mentees once a week for a semester. At the highest level of role modeling, conscious unconscious competence expounding on W.C. Howell’s Learning Phases model (1982), mentors develop their mentees by unknowingly modeling positive EmoSmart behaviors that they have learned through the curriculum. The benefits of emotionally intelligent high school students, including the link to academic success, are further explored in this Capstone’s literature review. Finally, the community realizes a return on investment when high school students become more emotionally intelligent. According to the Teachers College, a division of Columbia University: “America loses hundreds of billions of dollars each year when young people fail to graduate from high school, with costs reflected in lost productivity and tax revenues, as well as additional burdens to the health Giles7 care, public assistance and criminal justice systems” (Columbia University, 2005, ¶ 1). By addressing the importance of selfawareness, I believe that the Denver community can save money related to homelessness, domestic violence and other societal risks. Literature Review To achieve these goals and objectives and fulfill the prospective benefits of this Project, I have examined the historical foundations, future implications and varying definitions of intelligence, emotional intelligence, socialemotional learning and instructional design. Based on this review, I have formulated my own definitions and uses of general intelligence, emotional intelligence, socialemotional learning and the cognitive training model to create the socialemotionalcognitive design (SECD) to construct the YESS Institute’s curriculum. th The introduction of emotional intelligence. In the early 20 century, psychologists began to question the existence of a type of intelligence beyond intellect. David Wechsler (1943) was the first to refer to a non cognitive aptitude that is essential to success by contending that “total intelligence [includes] some measures of nonintellective factors” (as cited in Cherniss, 2000, ¶ 5). However, until Howard Gardner defined his theory on multiple intelligences in his book titled Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983), many psychologists overlooked Wechsler’s Giles8 philosophy. Using Wechsler’s framework, Gardner theorized that, without productivity, intelligence (IQ) is inconsequential, so overall intellect must be more than just IQ. This enigma was finally coined emotional intelligence by psychologists John D. Mayer and Peter Salovey (1990, 1993, 1995) in a series of academic articles focused on social competence. They defined emotional intelligence (often dubbed EQ or EI) as “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide our thinking and action” (1990, p. 185). This significant analysis served as the catapult for Harvardtrained psychologist and New York Times writer Daniel Goleman’s first book, Emotional Intelligence (1995), which finally popularized the subject. However, theorists did not specifically apply emotional intelligence to organizational behavior until Goleman’s third book, “Working with Emotional Intelligence” (1998). In this analysis, he defines the competent worker as one who is both personally and socially aware: “Emotional intelligence refers to the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships” (Goleman, 1998, p.13). Goleman also identified sub competencies such as empathy, selfawareness, and motivation as stemming from both personal and social competence. Social and emotional learning. In conjunction with Goleman’s studies, socialemotional learning (often dubbed SEL) is a vehicle for teaching Giles9 emotional intelligence, usually in an academic setting (Norris, 2003; CASEL, 2004) unlike the studies of EQ, which are more often related to organizational behavior. The Center for Social and Emotion Education (CASEL) defines SEL as “the process of acquiring the skills to recognize and manage emotions, develop caring and concern for others, make responsible decisions, establish positive relationships, and handle challenging situations effectively” (2006, ¶ 1). Furthermore, CASEL identifies eight specific skill sets as integral to adolescent achievement: communication, cooperation, emotional selfcontrol and expression, empathy, optimism (including self awareness and strength identification), goal setting, conflict management and reflective lifelong learning (Elias & Weissberg, 2000). Similar to th emotional intelligence, SEL was a product of early researchers in the 20 century studying social competency. The first social psychology assessment for children was administered by Edgar Doll to measure socially intelligent behavior (1935). Perhaps one of the most important aspects of socialemotional learning integration is prevention. In Denver, the dropout rate of atrisk students is increasing (Callan, 2005). Goleman does not attribute academic challenges to this trend: “If you are a kid who wants to avoid depression or violence and not drop out, academics will have nothing to do with it” (as cited in Ratnesar, 1997, p. 1). Giles10 Emotional intelligence and SEL Development: Fad or science? Generally, publications including further definitions, commentaries, and implications of emotional intelligence are endlessly available. Yet, it is important to note that experts including, Goleman, Mayer, and Salovey, agree that the EQ field still needs further tangible evidence to prove both reliability and validity (Kierstead, 1999; Matthews, Roberts, Zeidner, 2003; Mayer & Cobb, 2000; Zeidner, Roberts & Matthews, 2002). Parents of students involved with socialemotional learning have expressed concern that it may cross the line and become therapy sessions to which they don’t consent (Ratnesar, 1997). Therefore, the socialemotionalcognitive design that I will create in this Capstone by combining socialemotional learning with the aforementioned models for learning could meaningfully serve the discipline and its stakeholders if its reliability and validity can be proven. Applicable models for learning. Many learning theories, including those behavioral or cognitivebased, are available for SEL teachers. I have chosen Foshay, et. al’s (2003) cognitive training model with references to Bloom’s taxonomy (1956) to build the socialemotionalcognitive design and increase the selfawareness of high school students. Benjamin Bloom developed a model (1956) that has been proven to be one of the more enduring models for building retention of information among learners. This taxonomy separates learners’ thought processes into six classifications that must be built upon one another for learners to reach the Giles11 highest level of understanding, retention and behavioral medication. These categories are represented in Figure 5 and include knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation with knowledge being the basis of the taxonomy and evaluation being the pinnacle. “Brain scans show that different parts of the brain are involved as the problemsolving task becomes more complicated” (p. 246, Sousa), therefore engaging learners to a higher degree compared to skill acquisition. Sousa elaborates: “…students are not thinking critically (because educators) have not exposed them consistently to models or situations in school that require them to do so. Schooling, for the most part, demands little more than convergent thinking. Its practices and testing focus on content acquisition through role rehearsal, rather than the processes of thinking for analysis and synthesis” (p. 249). Thus, applying all levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy is critical when creating and facilitating curriculum centered on taskorientation and behavioral change. The cognitive training model. Because I assert that retention is the key to successful instructional design, I have chosen the cognitive training model (Foshay, Silber & Stelnicki, 2003) to enhance the principles that support socialemotional learning, and thus, this selfawareness curriculum. The cognitive training model is based on cognitive psychology that asserts that perception, shortterm and longterm memory are critical to the Giles12 learning process. According to this methodology, the first task of the learners is to select the information they need. Foshay, et. al, recommend that the design process include appropriate attention getters; relevancy, or “what’s in it for me,” statements; and confidence, or “you can do it,” boosters during the first phase of the learning. Subsequently, Foshay, et. al. recommend helping the learners “relate” and “recall” how the information fits into the lives and mindsets of the participants and then organizing the data through chunking, text layouts or illustrations to build retention. Finally, the learned material needs to be assimilated to previous knowledge and then strengthened through “practice, feedback, summary, test (and/or) onthejob application” (p. 27). The primary application of Bloom’s Taxonomy for designing a curriculum for high school students is that it provides an overall structure to create behavioral change from cognitive understanding. On the contrast, the Foshay model focuses only on the cognitive development. Therefore, blending these models in conjunction with socialemotional learning criteria fills instructional design gaps by creating a hybrid model that combines cognitive theory, emotional intelligence competencies and scaffolding for behavioral change. Design of the Project Using the socialemotional learning needs, the cognitive training model and Bloom’s Taxonomy as my guides, I created the socialemotional Giles13 cognitive design to enhance emotional intelligence in adolescents. Additionally, principles within Davis & Davis’ “Effective Training Strategies” inspired me to create a model that combines different types of learners with a sequential process for supporting these learners’ needs: “A carefully worked out training program will probably call for many kinds of learning. The challenge is to define each type of learning and then select and manage exactly the right progression of strategies to meet the goals of the training in order to maximize learning” (p. 407). As instructional designers and performance improvement experts attest (Davis & Davis, 1998), successful learning and training, are not one time events. The SECD manifests this belief by cycling through each phase and connecting back at the beginning rather than allowing a “start” and “stop” to the process. Additionally, the design uses the scaffolding technique to support the learning process, where each component is built on the previous (Elias & Weissberg, 2000). The SECD is congruent to Davis & Davis’ (1998) training design recommendations in that it considers the learners, including their cognitive development, their motivation and the different learning styles, according to Kolb (1984), which will be further explored. The SECD model is built around a critical component of instructional design: retention. Foshay suggests chunking to help enable retention (2003). I applied this philosophy to the SECD model by categorizing each Giles14 phase of the process in an alphabetical progression. Thus, the structure of the socialemotionalcognitive design is as follows: Assess, Build, Connect, Define, Explain with Examples, Facilitate a Forum, Guided “Go,” Help, Intensification, Justify, Karry Out, Learn. Assess. To begin SECD, the environment and the participants need to be assessed by identifying the following four gaps: skill, behavioral, attitudinal and cultural. Elias & Weissberg (2000) from the Collaborative to Advance Social and Emotional Learning agree: “It is essential that the broader context of peer relationships, the classroom, the school, the family, and the community be considered when designing the SEL program” (p 186).” First, instructional designers and facilitators can directly link accurate skill gap measurement to the learning objectives of the course. The most effective and efficient method for identifying these gaps is through preand postassessments that support the two lower levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy: knowledge and comprehension. The designer should create questions that support the measurable learning objectives. For example, a learning objective for the selfawareness curriculum is to list the four main areas of emotional intelligence. The corresponding preassessment (and post assessment, once the training reaches the “Learn” stage) would ask the participants to list, identify, label or recall these four components, which directly supports the knowledge competency in Bloom’s Taxonomy. The Giles15 participant assessment for the selfawareness component of the EmoSmart Leadership Program is attached in Figure 8. To identify behavioral gaps in adolescents, I recommend using a one page competency evaluation as demonstrated in Figure 4. Participants can complete selfevaluations, and then facilitators can interview each participant oneonone to expand on the information. Key socialemotional questions can include: · Tell me about a time you handled a difficult situation. · Who is your biggest support system? · What do you want to do after high school? Why? · What helps you do well in school? Often, participants reveal this important information midway or toward the end of the training, and the instructor then does not have adequate time to meet participant expectations or to adjust the training to develop EQ opportunity areas. Early preassessments, as outlined in the SECD, help alleviate this problem. BarOn’s Emotional Intelligence Inventory: Youth Version (EQi: YV) is another proven tool that divides emotional intelligence into five components: intrapersonal, interpersonal, adaptability, stress management and general mood. This assessment would clearly identify the current emotional intelligence strengths and weaknesses of a participant to both the participant and the instructor. Giles16 During the behavioral gap evaluation, it is helpful to receive feedback from others involved in the lives of participants. This is especially true for adolescents who may not have the abilities to identify their own strengths and weaknesses. For the EmoSmart Leadership program at West High School, we distributed the same competency evaluations to teachers, and it would be even more advantageous to involve the parents of the students in the behavioral assessment process. Attitudinal evaluation is very similar to behavioral evaluation; however it specifically determines the potential mindsets that participants may have about the training content. The designer and/or facilitator should consider the following questions when conducting an attitudinal evaluation: · How is the content different from what the participants already know? · How is the content similar to what the participants already know? · What are the potential barriers that could inhibit the learning process? Potential barriers could include the expertise or appearance of the facilitator, the training environment or time, the existing beliefs of the participants or the conditions that influence each participant’s involvement with the training. Each of these barriers are obstacles to the SECD, to the facilitator and to the learner that need to be overcome through careful Giles17 questioning techniques, ice breakers or, simply, acknowledgment. Because the SECD will not be complete without overcoming these obstacles, the next stage of the SECD, Build, will openly address them. Finally, the SECD Assess stage requires an cultural assessment. This is one of the more complicated assessments to conduct because participants’ school and home environments are complex and difficult to define. To uncover school bureaucracy and participants’ family lives requires trustworthy probing, which is challenging at the beginning stages of the SECD. Therefore, it is imperative to conduct this analysis informally by observing the school culture and working with, developing relationships with and getting immediate feedback from the faculty. Furthermore, through the behavioral assessment the designer, with permission from the participant, can ask questions about his or her support system or role models. Based on the responses, the designer can deduce if future learned behavior could be positively or negatively reinforced by family members, teachers or peers. It’s important to note that designers cannot control or change environmental conditioning but can merely acknowledge what currently exists in each participant’s life. Again, at this stage in the process, it is beneficial to get behavioral feedback from parents and teachers, not just to further understand the participant’s emotional intelligence but to also understand his or her environment and get buyin from those that could potentially inhibit or support the development process outside of the classroom. Giles18 Assessment is critical to measuring the end result of the learning process by not only beginning the SECD cycle but also completing it. At the end of the workshop, the same measures should be taken by the designer to compare skill, behavioral, attitudinal and environmental gaps with the previous measurement. Not only does this appraisal encompass Kirkpatrick’s Level 1, attitudinal; Level 2, skill; and Level 3, behavioral and environmental evaluation, but it sets the foundation for the most important (and difficult) measurement in training evaluation: Level 4, or return on training investment. By quantitatively and qualitatively assessing all four of these areas, the designer can gather all of the information needed to make the design successful. In my experience, if the facilitator does not conduct a thorough, accurate and timely assessment prior to a training, then the learning objectives do not always support participants’ needs and will result in last minute modifications and an unstructured workshop. Thus, assessment is the foundation of all trainings, and the socialemotionalcognitive design cannot successfully continue without it. Build. After the designer actively assesses, then he or she can begin the building process. Building combines two critical components that occur outside and inside the classroom. First, the designer must build, or design and develop, the curriculum to fit the assessed needs of the participants. Then, the facilitator must build a safe, effective learning environment inside Giles19 the classroom. Foshay, et. al. (2003), comprehensively describe the building process in their cognitive training model by addressing three major elements: attention, “What’s in It for Me” (WIIFM) and “You Can Do It” (YCDI). First, the facilitator must get the audience’s attention and set the tone of the workshop. Designers should write attention getters into the curriculum so the facilitator can choose the most appropriate for the audience. I believe it is imperative to capture all four types of Kolb’s learners (1984) within the first five minutes of the workshop by addressing primary needs that affect each learner. Kolb identifies these learners on an axis of feeling versus thinking and watching versus doing. Facilitators can first get the attention of Accommodating, or Type 4, Learners by starting the workshop with a “what if” question. For example, I start all EmoSmart Leadership trainings with the question, “What if I told you that during this training I’m going to reveal to you the key to success in life?” After elaborating, I engage the Type 1 Learners by asking the audience to informally brainstorm qualities that lead to success in life. Then, to involve the Assimilating Learners (Type 2), I relate the brainstormed answers to statistics that support the content. Finally the Converging Learners, or Type 3, want to know how the content is practical, so I provide a brief, personal (or participant) example of what emotional intelligence looks like in daily life. This example must be applicable to high school students’ lives in order for it to have maximum impact as an attentiongetter. Giles20 Connect. Once the facilitator has captured the audience’s attention, the SECD model contends that the facilitator then must get buyin that the content is relevant to the participants needs and meet these needs based on the participants’ previous experiences. I considered the importance of constructivism in adolescent learning or cognitive and social psychologists’ perspective that learners create new information, knowledge and abilities from previous constructs rather than the peripheral environment, when creating the Connect phase. Huitt (2003) explains: “Advocates of a constructivistic approach suggest that educators first consider the knowledge and experiences students bring with them to the learning task. The school curriculum should then be built so that students can expand and develop this knowledge and experience by connecting them to new learning.” ¶ 6 “Connect” follows the cognitive training model’s assertion to design training tactics so students can recall past knowledge and relate it to future knowledge. Facilitators can do this by using metaphors to introduce complex, conceptual information. Furthermore, designers can connect knowledge to past schemas by uncovering the existing relationships that the students have with the previous knowledge. This is similar to unveiling the participant mindsets about a body of information, which adult learning theorists believe to be approximately 50% of adult learning (Gordon, 2002). Giles21 Define. After the facilitator builds a safe learning environment and the participants link the overall learning objective with previous knowledge, then the instructor can specifically define the key concepts. Robert Pike, a renowned training expert, proposes an important principle that supports the “Define” stage in his book “Creative Training Techniques Handbook” (1994). He contends that participants “don’t argue with their own data,” (p. 3) meaning that if individuals create their own definitions of a concept, then they buy into the information more easily than agreeing with an instructor’s definition. Explain with Examples. After the concepts are defined, the facilitator should give several examples to support the definitions. Examples are a higher level of Bloom’s Taxonomy that transitions the learner to the behavioral change stages. There are several different kinds of examples that a designer and facilitator could use to illustrate the main points. First, the instructor can start by using a basic, neutral example that is applicable to all aspects of the definition. Emphasizing this example is important to building retention around the concept. Then, the instructor can give a personal example that relates to the learning objective. With soft skill trainings, these personal examples suggest an acceptance for sharing information and anecdotes in the classroom, which once again, builds the safe learning environment. They also reveal how the instructor has used the information in his or her Giles22 personal or professional life, which builds credibility to the facilitator and the training and creates buyin. Finally, after the instructor has shared a personal example, then he or she can ask the audience how they have used the concept in their lives. This leads to the next stage of the SECD model. Facilitate a Forum. Next, given the personal and class examples of the training point, allow the class to discuss the advantages and disadvantages or positive and negative aspects of the concept as well as outline a personal example that a participant gives to support an objective. The facilitator’s job during this stage is to guide the discussion by probing further into insights that the class makes and to connect different participant points to each other. Guided “Go.” During the “Guided Go” phase of the SECD, the designer structures the curriculum so the participants can practice the skill in a safe learning environment. Elias & Weissberg agree: “Provide students with activities for practice…” (2000, p. 4). The most useful form of the “Guided Go” is through role play and observation(Elias & Weissberg, 2000). During a role play, learners are given artificial circumstances, such as a scenario, where they can implement a communication technique or other skill with another person or group. The class can observe the role play and then discuss what worked and didn’t work in the next stages of the SECD. Role playing gives participants the opportunity to implement the skills and safely make mistakes. Giles23 Although it’s important to implement the Guided Go stage when the participants have the support of a work group, it’s also important that the designer creates tactics for the facilitator to guide each participant individually as well. Sometimes, this is in the form of asking participants to complete exercises, questions or readings by themselves before discussing their results with a group. This allows all of Kolb’s learners, both those who learn from observation and those who learn from doing, to practice the skill using a method that works for them. Help. Positive reinforcement is critical for participants to transfer learned skills into the real world. However, in the classroom, the facilitator can use the class’ feedback during the “Help” stage to correct or reinforce behavior. Elias & Weissberg (2000) suggest “(establishing) prompts and cues that can help students use the skills outside the instructional setting” (p. 4). By emphasizing peercentered feedback in the classroom, the attitude is more likely to transfer into the school culture, thereby encouraging communicative behavior. Intensification. “Intensification” is the final stage that occurs inside the classroom. The remaining stages manifest cognitively and behaviorally after classroom instruction. Intensification involves questioning the concepts using the highest levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, synthesis and evaluation. At this point, the participants are expected to evaluate the feasibility of the training while still in the classroom. The facilitator can guide the Giles24 intensification by asking the participants to compare the training to other key concepts and then probe the participant explanations by asking them to assess their arguments. During the Intensification stage, the facilitator should also uncover the participants’ perceptions on the barriers that they will uncover when using this information in their environment. Then, the facilitator can guide the participants to solutions for implementation as well as support the participants by giving them confidence. Additionally, the facilitator needs to clarify any remaining confusion around the learning objectives. Often, he or she can alleviate misunderstood concepts during Facilitate a Forum, but the Intensification stage can also be used to simplify and refine the explanations. At the end of the Intensification stage, the facilitator should conclude the training session with two training techniques to thoroughly intensify what the participants learned. First, the designer should include exercises or activities to review the definitions. Although reviewing is critical throughout the SECD, it is still important to end the training by streamlining the key concepts for retention. Second, the facilitator should challenge the participants to commit to implementing the learning into their lives. This technique holds the participants accountable to the learning and the facilitator. Giles25 Justify. During “Justify,” the participant looks for cognitive clues in the world around him or her to support the emotional intelligence concepts that the design addressed. In other words, the student is consciously or unconsciously processing the learning and determining whether behavior should be changed as a result. Thus, given the opportunity to apply what was learned in the classroom, they begin to assess the value of the trained concepts. Hence, participants engage in the highest level of Bloom’s Taxonomy: Evaluation. Karry Out. If participants cognitively justify the trained concepts, then they have altered their mindsets to allow for the next phase: behavioral change. Using Howell’s Learning Phases Model (1982) as a reference, the “Karry Out” stage very specifically supports the transition from conscious negative behavior to conscious positive behavior. Here, the participant agrees to behave differently based on the learning objectives of the course. The most critical aspect for the “Karry Out” stage to succeed is that positive reinforcement and behavior modeling by adults or peers must take place to support the changed behaviors (Elias, Weissberg, 2000; Hippe, 2004; Lavoie, 2003). Learn. The final phase of the SECD contends that both cognitive and behavior change must take place before learning can occur. Bob Pike (1994) agrees and includes this theory as a law for training: “Learning has not taken place until behavior has changed” (p. 5). Participants in this stage Giles26 will have moved from Howell’s (1982) unconscious negative to conscious positive, unconscious positive or, at best, conscious unconscious positive when they are mentoring, or teaching, the behavior to others. Furthermore, as the learning continues, the participant will move back to the first stage of the SECD model where he or she is assessing if the learning is still relevant and valuable to their lives. Implementation of the Project Following the hybrid model described above, I designed the selfawareness curriculum prior to the implementation at West High School. The length of each class was approximately 40 minutes during the students’ lunch period on Wednesdays. The agenda was as follows: § Class 1, Wednesday, January 25: Introduction to EmoSmarts § Class 2, Wednesday, February 1: SelfAwareness Lesson 1 § Class 3, Wednesday, February 8: SelfAwareness Lesson 2 § Class 4, Wednesday, February 15: SelfAwareness Lesson 3 The YESS Institute heavily marketed the program prior to its commencement and 25 students attended the first session. These students included 11 freshmen, 4 sophomores, 2 juniors and 8 seniors. The ethnicity of this population was 16% white, 56% latino, 20% black and 8% asian. The final population included 18 students composed of 5 freshmen, 3 sophomores, 1 junior and 9 seniors. The ethnic breakdown was 11% white, 50% latino, 28% black and 11% asian. Giles27 Results of the Project Pre and PostAssessment Results. I administered the selfawareness pre assessment (Figure 8) prior to the first selfawareness course. I constructed these preassessment questions using socialemotional learning competencies, including the three components of selfawareness and how the curriculum will support these components. However, after the students’ responses and the implementation of the curriculum, I changed the post assessment questions to reflect what the students learned during the course compared to what I originally intended the students to learn before uncovering their needs. Some knowledge measurement questions remained as well as the section where students ranked their level of agreement with the following statements: § I can name the emotion that I’m feeling. § I know why I’m feeling that emotion. § I am comfortable with my anger. § I am comfortable with other peoples’ anger. § I am confident in my abilities. § I know what stresses me out. § I know what my friends would say is my biggest weakness. 22 students responded to the preassessment evaluations which included multiple choice, free response and ranking questions. 12 students responded to the postassessment evaluation. Giles28 The preassessment results (Figures 911) indicate that the participants perceived themselves as being very selfaware and emotionally intelligent but were unable to correctly answer specific, lower level Bloom’s Taxonomy questions such as the definition of selfawareness. Accordingly, on the preassessment 51% of students strongly agreed or agreed with the questions listed above. 22% of students did not agree or disagree and 11% of students either disagreed or strongly disagreed in the preassessment. Of these questions, the greatest positive response was 77.3% of participants strongly agreeing or agreeing that they are confident in their abilities. Based on this response, I was able to omit a majority of the training tactics to support selfconfidence, an element of selfawareness. On the other hand, the questions that generated the most negative responses were 27% of participants disagreeing or strongly disagreeing that they are comfortable with other peoples’ anger and 27% of students disagreeing or strongly disagreeing that their friends are able to name the participant’s biggest weakness. Additionally, about a fourth of participants’ responses were neutral to all of these questions. This may indicate that they are not aware, in general, as to their thoughts, feelings, attitudes and behaviors toward emotional intelligence. If this postulation is accurate, then I could contend that 75% of selfawareness is lacking among participants. In general, the postassessment results reveal that the students’ attitudes and perceptions towards emotional intelligence did not change. Giles29 25% of participants were once again neutral to agreeing or disagreeing with behavioral selfawareness statements (Figure 10). Furthermore, about the same amount of participants (53%) strongly agreed and agreed with the statements. Because this figure is similar to the preassessment results, I believe it to be an accurate depiction of students’ perception. However, it does indicate that, overall, behaviors did not change after curriculum implementation. This could be because of several evaluation challenges. First, I administered the postassessment 30 days after the training. This may have not been enough time to allow for behavioral change to take place (Kirkpatrick, 1998). Second, as with any learning evaluation, the training needs to be supported by the participants’ environment, including home, school and peer relationships. Finally, and most importantly, about six of the participants who completed the postassessment did not regularly attend the first four classes of the EmoSmart Leadership program, which included the selfawareness training. Although behavior and attitudes remained consistent, skill gaps firmly closed because of the selfawareness curriculum. Preassessment multiple choice and free response questions were not accurately answered. 47.06% of students were able to identify the definition of a value in the pre assessment compared to 100% of participants during the postassessment. Qualitative responses indicated that 0% of participants accurately named the four parts of emotional intelligence in the preassessment while 83.3% of Giles30 students correctly stated all four answers. Furthermore, 20.45% of students described selfawareness accurately during the preassessment while 70.83% of students correctly defined selfawareness on the post assessment. Finally, 18.18% gave an acceptable example of a belief statement on the preassessment compared to the 83.33% on the post assessment. Consequently, given these statistics, skill gaps closed by 70.4% after the selfawareness curriculum was implemented. Class 1: Introduction to EmoSmarts. The first EmoSmart class implementing the SECD was effective but timepressed. Students spent a third of the class completing the preassessment, which is vital to the SECD but detracts from the rest of the model. However, once they began to feel comfortable that the assessment was anonymous and was not going to be graded, the process quickened. The “Build” phase was probably most successful, and the most critical, during the first class. I included the WIIFM, attentiongetters and YCDI and the audience was thoroughly engaged. The ice breaker also worked, and one group emerged immediately as having the healthiest dynamic, thus successfully completing their puzzle in the least amount of time with ample communication with other groups. I am considering putting these participants together as an EmoTeam, and I observed the groups that did not have dynamics that worked. One group was compromised of all females with similar personality traits and three participants within this group did not engage in the activity. As a result, this Giles31 group performed the most poorly during the icebreaker and needed diversification for future classes. Most notably, as the class brainstormed the four components of emotional intelligence, an interesting trend emerged. The group focused solely on the “self” quadrants of the EQ grid (see Figure 4: Participant Brainstormed Answers during Class 1). Based on their answers, I deduce that the participants already have the basic levels of knowledge and comprehension on Bloom’s Taxonomy and future developmental focus needs to be on application and analysis of selfawareness and selfmanagement. Contrarily, community awareness and interpersonal management development require a primitive learning structure where the concentration adheres to the three lower levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Additionally, the “selffocused” responses clarify the theme that adolescents regard their internal locus of control as critical at this phase in their development since these reactions were derived from their perception of what it means to be successful in life. The results from this class indicate the specific levels of understanding that these adolescents have about emotional intelligence, which is further reinforcement from our oneonone interviews. However, it is especially clear that these participants have a strong sense of self and need developmental training tactics at the analysis, synthesis and evaluation Giles32 levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy to support positive selfawareness and self management cognition and behaviors. Class 2: SelfAwareness Lesson 1. The first lesson to selfawareness began with an icebreaker designed to allow the participants to get to know one another but also begin expressing personal interests and feelings within the classroom, a critical attribute of the “Build” phase. Each participant was asked to state his or her name and then identify one hobby. Then, the next participant will state the previous participant’s name and hobby until each participant is naming each individual’s hobbies. The icebreaker was timeconsuming but the students enjoyed it, especially since many of them already know each other from their school program. However, I had to improvise toward the end since we didn’t have time to get to each student. The purpose of the activity was twofold: First, we were beginning to build the safe, learning environment. Second, I used the exercise to introduce the concept of selfawareness by debriefing with hierarchical Bloom’s questions such as “What were you feeling when you were asked to name your previous classmates’ names and hobbies?” “Were you scared or anxious?” “Were you confident?” “Do you even know what you were feeling…are you able to name your emotion?” One student who successfully named everyone in the class and their hobbies shared that she was very confident in her ability. I used her response to discuss selfconfidence and Giles33 how it fits into the concept of selfawareness. Then, I led the class in creating their own definition of selfawareness: “Knowing yourself and how you fit into the world around you.” This definition became a learning objective that the students continually repeated and applied to different situations throughout the selfawareness curriculum. To “Explain with Examples” I designed a story for Lesson 1 about a fictitious high school character that encounters a difficult situation (Figure 7). Students were chosen to read each character of the story and then we debriefed (“Facilitate a Forum”) as an introduction to the “temperamental tree,” which also became a key learning objective of selfawareness. Given our limited timeframe due to the icebreaker during Class 2, I only introduced the temperamental tree by defining each part of it and using the character’s experiences in the story as simple, supporting examples. Thus, I established the concept but was unable to “Facilitate a Forum” and get buyin. Class 2 made me aware that the design of the selfawareness curriculum was strong but given the short class period and the attention span of the students, I would need to streamline the exercises and key concepts for the implementation to be successful. At this point, I redesigned the selfawareness curriculum to meet these needs (see Discussion for further elaboration). Giles34 Class 3: SelfAwareness Lesson 2. Class 3 began with several housekeeping agenda items that took a majority of the class time away from the actual selfawareness curriculum. During this class, we began to cement the group of students that were committed to the EmoSmart Leadership Program. The attendance had dropped dramatically, as anticipated, from the original information sessions, but the students who remained by Class 3 were mostly those who committed to the program. Prior to Class 3, I redesigned the curriculum to include the logistical information at the beginning of the class as a way to “Build” and “Connect” the students with the program. Notably, students defined ground rules for the remainder of the classes and discussed consequences if these rules were broken. This process was especially important to the “Build” SECD phase since it created relationships between the students as peers, learners and mentors. Additionally, this exercise allowed me to define my role as not the disciplinary teacher but rather the facilitator guiding the learning process, again a significant element to building a safe, learning environment. After the housekeeping items, I asked the students to name each part of the temperamental tree to test for retention. I was surprised at how much the group remembered and realized that the tree metaphor was the foundation for the “Connect” SECD phase therefore allowing the group to sequentially and innately name each item in the cycle: experiences lead to values, which lead to beliefs, which lead to thoughts and feelings, which lead Giles35 to behavior, which lead to consequences, which lead to new experiences. Therefore, the “knowledge” level of Bloom’s was surprisingly solid but the “comprehension” still needed work. So, to explore elements of the tree thoroughly, I had each student complete belief system statements individually in his or her workbook. These statements included phrases such as “At home, I am…” “At school, I am…” and “I should be more like.” Then, I asked the participants to discuss the statements in their groups or “Facilitate a Forum.” The purpose of the activity was to explore if a belief is “right” or “wrong” and then trace individual beliefs back to the value that supports it. Participants very successfully mapped beliefs to values and began to understand that belief systems are subjective, as are our temperamental trees. During the last part of the class, my cofacilitator trained the concept of the “little red wagon” using “Connect” (metaphorical representation of our values and belief systems), “Define” and “Explain with Examples.” His examples led to “Facilitate a Forum,” where the class discussed the core belief and red wagon of the situation. We then adjourned and asked the class to come prepared next week with an example of their own red wagon that they will map out with their EmoSmart group (“Guided Go”) on a flip chart. During the third class, the group began to share and relate to others more, indicating that we were accomplishing the “Build” phase. Two Giles36 metaphors were helping the class “Connect” to the learning objectives and the class was beginning to “Define” key concepts. In congruence with the SECD, the class and facilitators had shared many examples of self awareness and, although there was still room for growth, the group candidly discussed the ideas. Therefore, the SECD allowed me to successfully set the learners’ stage to apply the concepts in the last week of the selfawareness curriculum. Class 4: SelfAwareness Lesson 3. I devoted the final class to the “Guided Go,” “Help,” and “Intensify” stages of the SECD model. After reviewing the definitions of the temperamental tree, one member of each Emo Team shared his or her red wagon example. Then, with the “Help” of their groups, they mapped out their experiences on flip chart paper outlining their beliefs, values, thoughts and feelings, behavior and consequences of the behavior. As cofacilitators, we coached the groups individually to help them link each part of the temperamental tree to their reallife situation. Then, one group shared their experience with the large group, and we debriefed their experiences mapped on the flip chart together. Discussion The SECD model proved useful and efficient as a framework for creating soft skill instructional design. However, when implemented, it was difficult to include all aspects to enhance adolescent learning in each module. Given our limited timeframe with the students, I found that the Giles37 curriculum needed heavy adjustment to meet the learners’ pace. Thus, many of the activities I had planned to include were often pushed to the following week or omitted altogether if I found that the class grasped the concept and didn’t need further exploration. I made these adjustments by modifying the curriculum based on the preassessment results. These changes were key to meeting the most critical learning objectives. Furthermore, as the classes progressed I found that during the design process I had cluttered the curriculum with concepts and objectives rather than focusing on the key points of selfawareness. Again, both the stiff timeframe and the rate of participant retention and application alerted me to this pitfall. Therefore, I dropped two training points after the second self awareness lesson to allow the participants to focus on the temperamental tree (e.g. experiences, values, beliefs, thoughts & feelings, behavior) and its application to everyday life. I believe that this strategy was key to the learners’ retention and supports the essence of the SECD, although it was not my original intention. During the last selfawareness class, it was clear that the participants had absorbed the information and were mostly able to independently implement the learning into the “Guided Go” phase of the SECD with little “Help” from the class or the facilitators. As a reminder, designers and facilitators need to streamline learning objectives down to their simplest form for successful implementation, as I did when executing the SECD. Furthermore, it is clear now that rather than Giles38 teaching one objective thoroughly through each phase of the design during one class, it is even more acceptable to design a curriculum in a way that allows the same key SECD points to be taught over several class periods. Still, designers need to continually include “Build” and “Connect” at the commencement of every class period, regardless of the last SECD phase. More importantly, after “Build” and “Connect” it is critical to include a review phase to determine where to jump (or rather, where the class will allow the facilitator to jump) on the SECD model: “Define,” “Explain with Examples,” “Facilitate a Forum,” or “Guided Go.” After utilizing the SECD model in this way, I believe that this process determines the ultimate potential for each participant to successfully follow the remainder of the model, or “Justify,” “Karry Out,” and “Learn.” Additionally, many opportunity areas exist for the Youth Mentor Leadership Program and need to be explored for the program to become more successful. However, the purpose of this Capstone is to explore the SocialEmotionalCognitive Design’s feasibility, including advantages and disadvantages when applied to adolescents exploring selfawareness. Given the tenuous structure of the Youth Mentor Leadership Program at CIS, mostly the limited time with the students and the mindset distractions during the lunch period, it is important to note that the SECD needs adequate implementation time to resonate with the students and create behavioral change. This design only included emotional awareness and self Giles39 assessment, rather than thoroughly exploring another major component of selfawareness, selfconfidence. Therefore, future studies can further examine the SECD’s impact on enhancing selfconfidence. As with corporate training, the SECD model will only work in an environment that promotes emotionally intelligent behaviors and teachings. This means that peers, educators, and even parents need to positively reinforce the curriculum to continue the positive behavioral changes in the students (Norris, 2003). This could be a primary reason substantial behavioral change did not take place, as indicated in the pre and post assessment results. The SECD model needs to be assessed heavily for future studies. Skill gaps and behavioral gaps can be checked after 90 days, six months and one year to uncover which training objectives were retained the most by participants. Then, return on community investment can be tracked after several implementations of the curriculum. Furthermore, assessing the effectiveness of the model after other negative factors of the Youth Mentor Leadership Program are edified would be useful. For example, I believe the limited 40minute sessions during students’ lunch period greatly limited the impact of the curriculum. Applying the model to longer training sessions may increase its sustainability. The SECD model should also be implemented with different demographics to isolate its effectiveness and relation to adolescents. The Giles40 results of this study lead me to believe that the design of the model could be applicable to adults in a corporate training environment as well. The more the model is implemented, the more it can be modified to increase self awareness and other types of emotional intelligence. Giles41 Assess Build Connect Learn Define “Karry” Explain Out Retention with Examples Facilitate Justify a Forum Intensification Help Guided “Go” Giles42 Figure 2: Quadrants of Emotional Intelligence Defined by Daniel Goleman & Cary Cherniss (Eds.) The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace (2001) SelfAwareness Social Awareness · Emotional selfawareness · Empathy · Accurate selfassessment · Service Orientation · Selfconfidence · Organizational Awareness SelfManagement Interpersonal Management · Emotional selfcontrol · Developing Others · Trustworthiness · Influence · Conscientiousness · Communication · Adaptability · Conflict Management · Achievement Drive · Visionary Leadership · Initiative · Catalyzing Change · Building Bonds · Teamwork and Collaboration Giles43 Figure 3: Quadrants of Emotional Intelligence Modified for the YESS Institute’s Development of Adolescent Role Models SelfAwareness Community Awareness · Emotional awareness · Kindness · Accurate selfassessment · Empathy · Selfconfidence · Community Involvement SelfManagement Interpersonal Management · Emotional selfcontrol · Mentoring/Leadership · Trustworthiness · Influence · Conscientiousness · Communication · Stress Management · Conflict Management · Achievement Drive · Creating Change · Study Skills · Teamwork · Initiative Giles44 Figure 4 Emotional Intelligence Evaluation General Information Name: Date: Interviewer: Candidate Evaluation 1=Poor 2=Fair 3=Good 4=Excellent 0=Unsure SelfConfidence Accurate SelfAssessment Emotional SelfControl Achievement Drive Service Orientation Leadership Ability Communication/Listening Skills Stress Management Study Skills Interest in Program Total: Strengths: Weaknesses: Additional Comments: Recommendation Yes No Giles45 Figure 5: Bloom’s Taxonomy Level Demonstration of Learning Decide, assess value, make choices, criticize, 6 Evaluation justify What if, design, predict, combine, invent, 5 Synthesis use old ideas to create new ones Compare, outline, break into parts, clarify, 4 Analysis see patterns Show me by example that…,compute, use, 3 Application state a fact and support it Summarize, give examples, describe, 2 Comprehension paraphrase 1 Knowledge Tell, write, list, define, name Giles46 Figure 6: ParticipantBrainstormed Answers during Class 1 (SelfAwareness) (Community Awareness) · Values · Kindness · Knows what they want · Believes in themselves · Good perception · Selfawareness (SelfManagement) (Interpersonal Management) · Rich · Being aggressive · Positive attitude · Influential/Motivation/Inspiration · Nice Car · Creative · Responsible · Street Smart · Book Smart · Control · Common Sense · Achievement drive Giles47 Figure 7: EmoSmart Leadership Participant Workbook EmoSmart Leadership™ for Youth and Role Models Youth Mentor Leadership Program This workbook belongs to: Giles48 Putting the Pieces Together: Becoming EmoSmart CIS: What You Do CIS: What You’ll Get · Commit your time, energy and · A safe, supportive environment focus to becoming EmoSmart to discuss WHATEVER · Share your beliefs, attitudes, · An EmoTeam to support you in experiences and feelings WHATEVER · Respect others’ beliefs, attitudes, · A better understanding of experiences and feelings yourself · Help your EmoTeam · A better understanding of others · Serve your community · Skills to make you successful in LIFE The YESS Institute: What We Do The YESS Institute: What We Get · Use YOU as the experts · To hang out with YOU! · Treat you as adults · Build trust · Help you succeed · Teach LIFELONG skills · Make this FUN! Giles49 What does it mean to be EmoSmart? Each day, we are confronted with challenges and opportunities where we can use our EmoSmarts. It is emotional intelligence (EQ) that enables us to embrace positive opportunities and rise above life’s challenges. What do you think it means to be EmoSmart? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Your Map to Being EmoSmart: What’s Your EmoQ? Giles50 Try It Again: The Four Components of EmoSmart Leadership Giles51 EmoSmart Leadership™ for Youth and Role Models Youth Mentor Leadership Program Component I: SelfAwareness Lesson 1 This workbook belongs to: Giles52 Objective To improve mentoring and leadership skills by enhancing emotional intelligence and EmoSmarts Outcomes At the end of this module, you will be able to: q List the four main areas of emotional intelligence q Define “selfawareness” q Give an example of a belief q Apply the Temperamental Tree to a reallife situation q Identify “hot buttons,” “emotional dwarves” and each of their corresponding reactions q Recognize the emotional dwarf that you most relate with in difficult situations q Use all aspects of Component 1 to dissect a reallife situation Ground Rules __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Giles53 ¨ Exercise: The Name Game ¨ Review: What Does it Mean to be EmoSmart? ¨ What is SelfAwareness ¨ Nightmare on Emo Street: Chapter 1 ¨ The Temperamental Tree ¨ Lesson 1 Review ¨ EmoSmart Leadership Agenda Giles54 Your Map to Being EmoSmart SelfAwareness: Who Am I? Before you can begin to be a leader and work well with others, you need to first understand who YOU are. Selfawareness is _____________________________________________. It’s important to be aware of who you are because it helps identify why people respect you as a leader. This contributes to your selfworth. It’s also equally important to understand what qualities you need to improve upon so you are careful not to role model these actions to others. Giles55 Nightmare on Emo Street: Chapter 1 To help us understand selfawareness a little better, we’re going to take a trip to a street not so far away… Chapter 1 “Julia, get down here right this minute!” Julia’s mother shouted up the stairs of their apartment one Monday morning. “The bus is here!” Julia, a 16yearold year old native of Denver, annoyingly rolled her eyes at her mother’s voice. “It’s 6:30 in the morning,” she thought grimacing, “and my mom is already ordering me around.” Ever since Julia missed the bus two months ago, Julie thought that her mother was too uptight about Julia getting to school in time. Julia quickly scanned her messy bedroom she shared with her younger sister, Sasha, looking for any remaining school books. When she came across an open science book on her bed, she felt her heart skip a beat. “Science test,” she remembered fearfully. “If only I hadn’t stayed out so late last night,” she worried barely remembering falling asleep with the open book. “Julia! NOW!” her mother shrieked as she pounded on Julia’s bedroom door. Julia quickly threw the book in her bag and flung the door open, scared of the look on her mother’s face. “Mom, you don’t have to yell! You know that really bugs me in the morning. The bus comes everyday at the same time, ya know,” Julia replied racing past her mother and then down the stairs. “Don’t smartmouth me, young lady,” Julia’s mom retorted back, following her down the stairs. “And I’m glad you’ve decided to be responsible today, since you couldn’t be last night,” her mother called sarcastically after her as Julia headed out the front door. “Whatever, mom,” Julia mumbled, her heart sinking a little. Julia didn’t like thinking that her mother thought she was irresponsible. She just wished her mom understood how important hanging out with her friends was to her. “Julia!” her mother shouted back, standing in her bathrobe in front of the bus stop, “I said don’t smartmouth me!” Julia saw the bus driver snicker out of the corner of her eye. Julia quickly turned around to face her Giles56 mother. “Mom,” Julia murmured, her blood beginning to boil, “You are embarrassing me!” “Well, that is just too bad Julia Sanchez! Now, I want you back here right after school, no exceptions, do you understand me?” “But you know I have practice after school on Mondays!” Julia snapped, referring to her position on the track team. “Well, maybe you should have thought about that before missing your curfew last night,” her mother replied, turning her back and walking up to the apartment. “Let’s go, girl,” the bus driver bellowed down the bus stairs. “Now or never.” Julie felt her eyes well up with tears, “Sometimes…I…I just hate you, mama!” Julia shouted before heading up the stairs and flashing her pass to the driver. “I’ll show her,” Julia thought angrily, feeling her face turn different shades of red as she found her seat among the amused bus passengers. As Julia looked out the window at the fall trees blowing swiftly in the wind, she realized that she didn’t know what she was going to do today— but she WASN’T going to school. Giles57 It All Starts with an Acorn: Our Temperamental Trees _________________ _________________ & _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ Giles58 Your Temperamental Tree In your table group, label each part of the tree using someone’s personal example. Notice that you may not be able to label each part of the tree if the difficult situation hasn’t resulted in an outcome yet. _________________ _________________ & _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ Giles59 EmoSmart Leadership™ for Youth and Role Models Youth Mentor Leadership Program Component I: SelfAwareness Lesson 2 This workbook belongs to: Giles60 Objective To improve mentoring and leadership skills by enhancing emotional intelligence and EmoSmarts Outcomes At the end of this module, you will be able to: q List the four main areas of emotional intelligence q Define “selfawareness” q Give an example of a belief q Apply the Temperamental Tree to a reallife situation q Use all aspects of Component 1 to dissect a reallife situation Ground Rules __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Giles61 ¨ Housekeeping o YMLP Guidelines o Your EmoTeam o Community Service Project o Ground Rules ¨ Review: Your Map to Being EmoSmart ¨ What is SelfAwareness? o The Little Red Wagon ¨ Mapping SelfAwareness ¨ Your Temperamental Tree (time permitting) ¨ Lesson Review ¨ EmoSmart Leadership Agenda Giles62 Your Map to Being EmoSmart Giles63 What is SelfAwareness? Before you can begin to be a leader and work well with others, you need to first understand who YOU are. Selfawareness is _____________________________________________. Complete the following statements: ______________ ____________ __________________ Complete answers here: The best type of music is… When my best friend is mad at me, I… It’s so annoying when my parents… My teachers should… Everyone needs to be careful when they… People are crazy for… I should be more like… Before moving to Baker next year, CIS needs to… At home, I am… At school, I am… With my friends, I am… I am EmoSmart when I… _____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ Giles64 Mapping SelfAwareness Situation: You are driving with your friends when suddenly a car whips in front of you, narrowly missing the side of your car. What do you do first: A: Honk B: Ride up next to them and flip them off C: Wonder if they didn’t see you D: Laugh at them with your friends Behavior: Thoughts and Feelings: Belief: Value: Experience: Giles65 Your Temperamental Tree In your group, label each part of the tree using someone’s personal example. Notice that you may not be able to label each part of the tree if the difficult situation hasn’t resulted in an outcome yet. Behavior: Thoughts and Feelings: Consequences: Belief: Value: Experience: Giles66 Figure 8: EmoSmart Leadership SelfAwareness PreAssessment 1) Name the four main areas of emotional intelligence: A) __________________________________ B) __________________________________ C) __________________________________ D) __________________________________ 2) Describe selfawareness: ______________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 3) Things that are important to us are called: A) Thoughts B) Feelings C) Values D) Beliefs 4) All of the following are “emotional dwarves” EXCEPT: A) Vengy B) Crabby C) Stuffy D) Gossipy 5) In order to be a positive role model, what must FIRST be established? A) Openness B) Safety and trust C) Admiration D) Acceptance 6) Which of the following hot buttons leads to being afraid to make decisions? Giles67 A) Failure B) Not Liked/Unlovable C) Unimportant D) Disrespected 7) A coping behavior for the hot button “disregarded” is: A) Taking no responsibility B) Being outofcontrol on the inside C) Not setting boundaries D) Always striving for attention 8) The following statement is an example of what kind of agreement? “I have been making the coffee for the past couple of weeks, but would you all like to set a weekly schedule so we can all share the load?” A) Revisiting an agreement B) Confronting a perceived broken agreement C) Breaking an agreement D) Confronting an unspoken agreement Giles68 Figure 9: Multiple Choice Pre and PostAssessment Results PreAssessment Question Results Question A B C D Blank % Correct Things that are important to us are called: 6 6 16 5 1 34 47.06% In order to be a positive role model, what must FIRST be established: 5 14 1 5 1 26 53.85% Which of the following hot buttons leads to being afraid to make decisions? 14 4 5 7 1 31 45.16% The top of the Pyramid of Needs is called: 2 1 4 11 4 22 4.55% PostAssessment Question Results Question A B C D Blank % Correct Things that are important to us are called: 0 0 11 0 0 11 100.00% Giles69 Figure 10: Ranking EQ Pre and PostAssessment Results PreAssessment Results Strongly Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Blank Agree Disagree PreAssessment I can name the emotion that I'm feeling. 2 13 5 1 1 I know why I'm feeling that emotion. 1 14 7 I am comfortable with my anger. 2 10 4 5 1 I am comfortable with other people's anger. 1 8 7 3 3 I am confident in my abilities. 4 13 3 1 1 I know what stresses me out. 3 9 7 1 2 I know what my friends would say is my biggest weakness. 1 9 6 4 2 Total Number 14 76 39 14 6 5 Percentage 8% 43% 22% 8% 3% 3% PostAssessment Results Strongly Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Blank Agree Disagree PreAssessment I can name the emotion that I'm feeling. 4 5 4 I know why I'm feeling that emotion. 4 5 4 I am comfortable with my anger. 5 4 4 I am comfortable with other people's anger. 2 6 3 2 I am confident in my abilities. 3 4 6 I know what stresses me out. 7 1 4 1 I know what my friends would say is my biggest weakness. 1 4 1 6 1 Total Number 26 29 26 9 1 0 Percentage 25% 28% 25% 9% 1% 0% Giles70 Figure 11: Free Response Pre and PostAssessment Question Results Question PreAssessment PostAssessment % Correct % Correct Name the four areas of emotional intelligence. 0% 83.33% Describe selfawareness. 20.45% 70.83% Give an example of a belief statement. 18.18% 83.33% Giles71 Figure 12: Temperamental Tree PostAssessment Results % Answers: Tree Correct PostAssessment What we do in life. F Behavior 91.67% Emotions we have. E Feelings 91.67% What is important to us in life. B Values 83.33% Ideas that run through our heads. D Thoughts 100.00% What happens to us in life. A Experiences 91.67% What we think and feel to be true. C Belief 83.33% Acorn A Experiences 33.33% Roots B Values 50.00% Trunk C Belief 33.33% Branches D Thoughts 91.67% E Feelings 83.33% Leaves F Behavior 66.67% 75.00% Giles72 References Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst,E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, Toronto: Longmans, Green. Callan, P. (November 27, 2005). State’s future at risk. The Denver Post. Section E: Perspective. The Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning. (2006). Introduction to SEL: What is SEL? Retrieved January 10, 2006, from http://www.casel.org/about_sel/WhatisSEL.php. Columbia University. (November 7, 2005). The Price of Inequity. Retrieved January 10, 2006, from http://www.tc.columbia.edu/news/article.htm?id=5350. Cooper, R. K., & Sawaf, A. (1997). Executive EQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organization. New York: GrossetPutnam. Conlon, T. J. (2004). A review of informal learning literature, theory and implications for practice in developing global professional competence. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(2, 3, 4), 283295. Cherniss, C. (April 15, 2000). Emotional intelligence: What it is and why it matters. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA. Giles73 Day, N. (June 1998). Informal learning. Workforce, 77(6), 5. Retrieved September 30, 2004, from Business Source Premier. Dearborn, K. (Winter 2002). Studies in emotional intelligence redefine our approach to leadership development. Public Personnel Management, 31(4), 523528. Retrieved September 30, 2004, from Business Source Premier. Doehrman, M. (December 12, 2003). Colorado nonprofits get help from area foundation. Colorado Springs Business Journal. Retrieved January 10, 2006, from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4190/is_20031212/ai_n1 0044801. Doll, E. A. (1935). A generic scale of social maturity. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 5, 180188. Doolittle, F. & Ivry, R. (April 2003). Improving the economic and life outcomes of atrisk youth. MDRC. Retrieved January 10, 2006, from http://www.mdrc.org/publications/361/concept.html. Elias, M. J., Weissberg, R. P. (May 2000). Primary prevention: Educational approaches to enhance social and emotional learning. Journal of School Health, 70(5), 186190. Enos, M. D., Kehrhahn, M. T., & Bell, A. (Dec. 2003). Informal learning and the transfer of learning: How managers develop proficiency. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 369387. Retrieved Giles74 September 20, 2004, from http://media.wiley.com/assets/199/00/jrnls_HRDQ_JB_Enos1404.pdf. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam. Goleman, D. (1997). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam. Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam. Howell, R. (2003) [review of the book Skill wars: Winning the battle for productivity and profit] Journal of Industrial Teach Education, 40(2). Retrieved on October 2, 2004, from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v40n2/howell.html Howell, W. C. (1982). The four phases of learning: Information processing and decision making. Human Performance and Productivity. Retrieved February 24, 2006, from http://www.erinhoops.ca/ArticlesFolder/4_phases_of_learning.htm. Huitt, W. (2003). Constructivism. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved January 18, 2006, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/construct.html. Kierstead, J. (1999). Human resource management trends and issues: Emotional intelligence (EI) in the workplace. Research Directorate for Giles75 the Policy, Research and Communications Branch: Public Service Commission of Canada. Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs. (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: BerrettKoehler Publishers, Inc. Knowles, M. (1950). Informal adult education. New York: Association Press. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall. Lee, W. (n.d.) [review of the book Future training: A roadmap for restructuring the training function] Performance Improvement Quarterly, 9(3), pp. 8082. Retrieved on October 2, 2004, from http://www.pepitone.com/content/servprinftreview.pdf Livson, N. & Leino, V. (1985). Adolescent personality antecedents of adult cigarette smoking: A longitudinal study. Journal of Genetic Psychology 146(3) 343355. Matthews, G., Roberts, R.D. & Zeidner M. (2003) Development of emotional intelligence: A skeptical—but not dismissive—perspective. Human Development, 46, 109114. Marsick V., & Volpe M. (Eds.). (1999). Informal learning on the job. Baton Rouge, LA: AHRD. Marsick, V., & Watkins, K. (1999). Facilitating learning organizations: Making learning count. Aldershot: Gower Press. Giles76 Mayer, J.D. & Cobb, C.D. (2000). Educational policy on emotional intelligence: Does it make sense? Educational Psychology Review, 12, 163183. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the construction and regulation of feelings. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 4 (3), 197208. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1993). The intelligence of emotional intelligence. Intelligence, 17 (4), 433442. Mosher, B. (July 2004). The power of informal learning. Chief Learning Officer, 3(7), 2021. Retrieved on September 30, 2004, from Business Source Premier. Pike, R. (1994). Creative Training Techniques Handbook, Second Edition. Minneapolis: Lakewood Books. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence: Imagination, cognition, and personality, 9(3), 185211. Retrieved September 30, 2004, from Business Source Premier. Weisinger, H. (1997). Emotional intelligence at work: The untapped edge for success. New York: JosseyBass. Yang, B., & Lu, D. (2001). Predicting academic performance in management education: An empirical investigation of MBA success. Journal of Education for Business, 77(1), 1520. Giles77 Zeidner, M., Roberts, R.D. & Matthews, G. (2002). Can emotional intelligence be schooled: A critical review. Educational Psychologist, 37, 215231.