Search results

Many youth-serving organizations refer to social and emotional learning (SEL) as a process through which adults and young people develop the critical knowledge and skills one needs to be successful in school, work, and personal life (e.g., Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning – CASEL, 2020). SEL is a learning process and – as evidence from the science of learning and development would suggest – one that happens everywhere, both in and out of school. The science also suggests that young people and adults learn best in safe and supportive environments that are identity-safe and filled with developmentally rich relationships (Science of Learning and Development Alliance, n.d.). These finds highlight the importance of meaningful, intentional, and inclusive SEL practice that is grounded in equity and cultural competence. This has historically been the approach out-of-school time (OST) educators have taken to expanding learning opportunities for young people and these practices continue to evolve as the OST field moves toward more intentional SEL practice. OST practitioners are looking to the evidence, many of whom are doing so by partnering with researchers to reexamine and bolster their SEL practices. In this chapter, we explore why and how researcher–practitioner partnerships can foster equitable SEL in OST.

This paper aims to explore the important role boundaries play in back-office framing of environmental engagement. This is of particular interest because it is not clear how organizations in an industry without standardized environmental reporting navigate their boundaries behind the scenes and why they engage with the environment the way they do. This element of their environmental identity offers important insights into the emergence of sustainability reporting.

Guided by Miles and Ringham (2019) the authors conduct an ethnography of the Montana ski industry. The ethnography includes extensive on-site observations at nine Montana ski areas and interviews with 16 ski area executives, two regulators and a land development executive.

The authors find three key boundaries – accountability structure, degree of regulatory burden and impact measurement approach – that shape the back-office economic and environmental framing of ski executives (Goffman, 1959, 1974). From these back-office frames the authors identify four front-office cultural performances – community ecosystem, quantitative ownership, approval seeking and advocacy platform – that represent the environmental engagement strategies at these resorts.

Understanding the relationships between boundaries and environmental engagement is an important step in developing appropriate industry-wide environmental accountability and sustainability expectations. The study’s findings extend to other industries that are both highly dependent on the environment and are in the early stages of developing environmental reporting standards.

Ski resorts operate in an industry that is impacted by changes in the natural environment. The authors chronicle the process by which boundaries lead to framing which leads to environmental engagement in this weather-dependent industry. The authors explain the process of environmental identity building, the result of which both precedes environmental reporting and puts such reporting into context. In this sense, the authors show how boundaries are set and maintained in the ski resort industry, and how fundamental these boundaries are to the development of individual companies' environmental engagement strategies.

What does special education mean for general education teachers of students with disabilities? In this chapter, we share our approach to advancing values in the classroom placement of special education students in the general education setting. We will take the reader on a journey through time with “Jessie,” a special education student, as we examine the historical exclusion of students with disabilities to their inclusion in general education schools, environments and finally, general education classrooms. In doing so, we will examine the evolution of the general education teacher's role and how the historical perspective impacts current practices. Then, we will elucidate the benefits of inclusion, not only for the special education student but for the nondisabled peers as well. We will recommend values that should be maintained and practices that should be examined. This chapter will conclude with a connection between the values and recommendations of best practices for inclusive instruction.