Introduction

Educational psychologists and Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) programs in Vietnam work together to encourage the development of soft skills among pupils in high schools. Educational psychologists are professionals in identifying student needs, developing solutions, and cooperating with teachers, whereas SEL programs offer specific instruction and chances for children to improve social and emotional skills. Schools can develop an intellectually and socially healthy environment for kids by integrating these activities. Nowadays, individuals are concentrating on developing themselves to become perfect in all aspects. Administrators and education systems are concerned with the comprehensive development of student’s academic knowledge and social abilities. In the current social context, the rapid expansion of technological devices leads adolescents and children to spend more time on these devices, resulting in an incremental loss of fundamental social skills. Adolescence is crucial for brain development and social-emotional and learningrelated soft skills [1]. Social-emotional learning as a safeguard and skill-building framework can promote healthy development and behavior [2]. Therefore, Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) education is crucial for students. SEL programs help students develop cognitive, social-emotional, positive behaviors, and interpersonal connections [3]. In addition, well-designed and implemented SEL programs would assist students and adults in overcoming working, studying, and life challenges to achieve success [4]. According to Zinsser et al., social-emotional learning is the process by which individuals acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and control emotion, establish and achieve positive goals, express empathy to others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and assume responsibility for their own decisions [5]. Social-emotional learning includes methods and techniques that promote mental health and resilience of emotional problems, preventing life negative affect through extracurricular programs, enhancing student strength, and preventing and detecting regular problems, including violence, substance abuse, and withdrawal [6].

Rutledge et al., emphasized the connection between social-emotional factors and academic activities, and the researcher showed the significance of SEL organization in high school [7]. In the study conducted by Newman and Dusenbury, it was found that students should do what they can to better themselves in the rapidly shifting and complex modern trends and that social-emotional skill are essential to achieving that. SEL provides schools with a framework for preparing students for the future [8]. SEL effectively fosters social competencies, decreases antisocial behavior, and positively affects adolescents’ attitudes, behaviors, and abilities. SEL programs help students develop their skills and attitudes, fostering a positive and respectful environment, and SEL positively impacts adolescents’ lives. Due to demand from educators, parents, students, and business leaders, have demonstrated that social and emotional competency education is an essential problem in education [9]. Promoting social and emotional competencies, such as understanding and managing emotions, achieving positive goals, demonstrating care and concern for others, developing and maintaining positive relationships, and making responsible decisions, is crucial for academic and life success. According to Weissberg and O’Brien, nearly all organizations address students’ social and emotional requirements, promote positive emotions and physical health development, and achieve the best academic performance [10]. SEL provided a conceptual framework for effectively addressing the requirements of students. Merrell et al., found that students exhibited positive changes after participating in SEL programs [11]. SEL is currently regarded as crucial and necessary for addressing school mental health problems. The findings indicated that enhancing students’ understanding of social behavior and positive emotions would aid them in making better decisions in the future when confronted with emotional and social challenges. Furthermore, Castro-Olivo and Merrell demonstrated that immigrant students experience numerous obstacles when adapting to new cultures and societies [12]. Social-emotional resiliency was investigated as a protective factor for students at risk for engaging in undesirable behaviors. The stress of culture can be reduced by SEL programs designed to help individuals adapt to their environments. The Jóvenes Fuertes program is an effective SEL program for secondary and high school students in modifying social and cultural standards and enhancing social-emotional and SEL knowledge [13]. Similarly, Cramer and Castro-Olivo found that engagement with SEL programs significantly increased mental problem resilience [14]. Adolescents require socialemotional support as they learn to manage positive and negative emotions in school and in their social lives [15].

According to research by Kurniawan and Farozin, social and emotional learning abilities are reflected in self-perception, self-management, social awareness, social-relationship skills, and responsible decision-making [16]. Successful SEL programs are beneficial in improving students’ cognitive abilities; making students more engaged in school; reducing inappropriate behavior and increasing positive development; enhancing academic performance; and improving students’ life and school success. Moreover, the teachers’ perceptions of social and emotional skills education impact the efficacy of implementing the social-emotional competency education program with students. Regardless of disparities in educational attainment and years of experience, teachers are aware of the need and challenges of implementing SEL in primary school classrooms [17]. From there, implement teaching methods compatible with students’ ability to develop their SEL capacity [18]. The research of Datu and Restubog demonstrated that perseverance and adaptability are positively associated with socialemotional learning and indirectly associated with positive emotions via social-emotional learning [19]. Chen et al., demonstrated that fostering SEL competencies substantially impacts preventing problematic Internet use among adolescents [20]. In the study of Panayiotou et al., social and emotional interventions directly and indirectly, affect adolescents’ mental health and academic performance [21]. The objective of school-based social and emotional literacy programs is to equip students with the skills they need to overcome the challenges of life, thereby enhancing their emotional and social well-being and outcomes academic performance and decreasing the risk of mental health issues. Dowling et al., concluded that the Mind Out program is an SEL-related program that has been effective in creating positive outcomes for students, improving mental health, and developing social and emotional skills, including reducing emotional inhibitions, increasing positive coping strategies, reducing avoidant coping, and increasing supportive social coping [22]. However, differences in implementation quality negatively impact these program effects, as Dowling and Barry found that the quantity of Mind Out programming varies among schools [23]. When implemented, participants, teachers, the school environment, and the organizational ability impact the program’s quality. Additionally, research conducted by Hoang and Vu suggested that both students and educators recognize the significance of social and emotional learning [24]. However, Dowling and Barry showed that SEL programs effectively produce positive student outcomes [25]. When the quality of implementation is inadequate, these programs frequently lose their efficacy and fail to produce the desired outcomes.

Social and emotional competency education programs have a further impact on the soft skill development of students. Educators implement a variety of SEL programs to train students in soft skills so that students can develop the skills necessary for career preparation. Hanley reported a shortage of information regarding strategies that promote empathy to reduce aggression and increase initiative in adolescents [26]. Employers in the United States are having difficulty hiring entry-level positions due to a widening skills disparity between those required of beginners and those acquired by high school students. Bosch demonstrated that online job readiness training enhanced scores in all eight soft skill categories: attitude, communication, collaboration, social skills, communication rules, planning and organization, critical thinking, and professionalism [27]. The study also revealed that students who participated in online training for job readiness improved their soft skills. According to research by Finch Brown, high school students face challenges; therefore, high schools are responsible for preparing students with sufficient skills for a rapidly changing economy [28]. The results also indicated that all students showed proficiency in applying soft skills, as determined by the faculty. Additionally, research by Pfeiffer and Prado demonstrated that SEL programs in schools positively benefit students, involve parents and teachers, and strengthen the school-home relationship [29]. In addition, Felton discovered that students who had the opportunity to develop SEL-related soft skills were more successful after graduation than the national norm [30].

The key to promoting success is to develop in students the soft skills necessary for achievement in the workplace and life. Soft skills are also known as non-cognitive abilities, employ ability, and 21^st-century skills [31]. It is not easy to define soft skills because the definition can vary depending on the context and because some skills can be classified as soft skills in specific fields [32]. The growing number of soft skills has contributed to this complexity. Soft skills have always been elusive [33]. Because of the nature of soft skills, they are difficult to observe and quantify. Therefore, there is no uniform definition of soft skills; each discipline, education sector, and nation define soft skills based on its requirements [34]. Soft skills are defined by Snell et al., as “skills, abilities, and characteristics related to personality, attitudes, and behaviors rather than formal or technical knowledge” [35]. Another definition of soft skills is internal and interpersonal skills, essential for personal development, social participation, and success in the workplace, distinguishing soft skills from hard skills [34]. Soft skills are referred to as necessary human abilities and include but are not limited to the following: soft skills for communication, critical thinking and problem solving, teamwork skills, conflict resolution, professional soft-skills in the workplace, adaptability, social intelligence soft skills, self-management skills, planning and organization skills, and workplace ethics [36]. Soft skills may differ, but according to Gibb, they all aim to enhance personal development, academic engagement, and career success [37]. Robles argued that if hard skills are technical expertise and knowledge necessary for a profession, soft skills are interpersonal qualities, also known as people skills [38]. Azim et al., concurred that hard skills are procedures, instruments, and techniques, while soft skills are problem-solving abilities humans possess [39]. Hard skills will affect students’ professional knowledge, while soft skills will help students develop their emotional stability and personal growth. Soft skills education programs provide students with skills concerning personality traits, nonverbal actions, and social communication that can be understood clearly through nonverbal behavior. Contrary to hard skills linked to specialized knowledge, soft skills are tied to an individual’s personal emotional experiences throughout their lifetime. The combination of soft-skills education and hardskills education will impact human development in the cultural environment of schools [40]. Okrah et al., concluded that school-based training programs teach students technical knowledge and some soft skills; however, this knowledge does not apply to the practical use employers frequently require in the workplace [41].

In Vietnam, parents and educators pay special attention to social skills. Currently, students are supported in developing soft skills from elementary through high school. Trung and Swierczek demonstrated that skills can be effectively developed through group exercises and learning approaches such as case studies, group discussions, and practice software implementation, particularly communication skills [42]. Developing skills is necessary for students to continue their education and be successful in work and life; however, traditional teaching methods, student passivity, and cultural factors have limited skill development among university students [43]. Currently, soft skills play an essential function in fostering economic growth, particularly in developing nations. Therefore, Truong and Laura argued that the emphasis on physical skills, while important, is insufficient to do justice to the variety of human resource skills currently regarded as crucial for effective global competition [44]. In the era of technology, students require a high level of competency training and training in developing soft skills. Vo et al., stated that soft skills are vital in the contemporary workplace, particularly Information Technology (IT), communication, and technical skills [45]. Teamwork and presentation skills are essential, but in the bachelor’s training program, students’ ability to develop these skills is generally limited. Yao and Tuliao found that lecturers provided practice opportunities for students to develop interpersonal skills [46]. Schools of higher education must consider curricula that foster the development of students’ soft skills, create conditions for students to engage in group work, and deliver presentations to enhance their skills.

However, SEL implementation programs are limited despite the significance of the SEL model for implementing soft skills in secondary school students. This study examined the perceptions of high school students regarding implementing the SEL model in soft skills education. In addition, we investigate the obstacles to implementing the SEL model in education for soft skills.

Methodology

Participants

A quantitative research methodology was conducted. A total of 350 high school students (from grade 10 to grade 12) were randomly collected in Vietnam. The sample includes 124 students in grade 10 (35.4%), 86 in grade 11, and 140 in grade 12 (40%). There are 159 boys (45.4%) and 191 girls (54.6%). The time to learn soft skills of students were collected, with 221 students (63.1%) having studied soft skills for less than one year, 94 students (26.9%) having learned soft skills from 1-3 years, 20 students (5.7%) have studied soft skills for 4-6 years and 15 students (4.3%) have studied soft skills for more than six years (Table 1).

Measurements

The social-emotional learning scale Vietnam version is adapted from Huynh et al. The 26- item eraser scale is based on the original scale of Buchanan et al., developed with 35 items [47]. The Likert 5 scale is used (1=Not at all, 2=Slightly, 3=Moderately, 4=Very, and 5=Extremely) to examine the students’ perception of implementing the SEL model in soft skills education. The scale includes 4 sub-scales, including:

1. The level of students’ perception of the necessity of applying SEL to soft skills education;

2. The importance of SEL application in soft skills education;

3. The level of interest in applying the SEL model to soft skills education;

4. The influencing factors for the application of SEL model in soft skills education.

Procedure

The study aimed to investigate students’ perception of implementing the SEL model on soft-skills education in high school. The survey was sent to students online. Before taking the survey, students will be asked about their voluntary consent to participate in the study. The purpose and significance of the study will be made available to the participants. Participants will be assured of anonymity and confidentiality when taking the survey, and they can stop taking it at any time if they feel uncomfortable or unsafe. The study then provided participants with guidance on how to conduct the survey. Finally, the participant conducts a survey, and the research team will explain if the participant has any questions about the topic. The information demographics were required in this research, including age, gender, grade, and time to be taught soft skills. Participants took 5-10 minutes to complete the survey. This is a supplement to the primary research findings of our project.

Results

The level of students’ awareness of the importance of applying the SEL model to building soft skills education documents is shown in Table 2.

In which, with an average score of 2.70 (SD=1.15), the content is on “Responsible Decision Making (RDM)” was the highest rated. Followed by “Self-mastery” (Mean=2.67, SD=1.12), “Selfawareness” (Mean=2.62, SD=1.16), “Social awareness” (Mean=2.57, SD=1.16). And the content rated by students at the lowest level is “Mastering relationships” (Mean=2.55, SD=1.13) (Table 3).

Table 3 showed students’ interest in the application of the SEL model in soft skills education. Students rated the content “Responsible decision making” the highest with an average score of 2.59 (SD=1.16). Following that is “Self-mastery” (Mean=2.57, SD=1.11); “Self-awareness” (Mean=2.51, SD=1.14); and “Mastering relationships” (Mean=2.50, SD=1.11). Finally, the content about “Social awareness” (Mean=2.47, SD=1.08) is rated as the lowest level by students in applying the SEL model to soft skills education (Table 4).

Table 4 showed the factors affecting the application of the SEL model in building soft skills educational materials for students. Students evaluated highly the contents of “Pressure on academic performance” (Mean=2.37, SD=1.15) and “Students are unaware of the SEL model” (Mean=2.37, SD=1.19) in the factors affecting implementing the SEL model in soft skills education. Other contents are also considered, such as: “Teachers lack knowledge of implementing the SEL model for developing soft skills education for students” (Mean=2.34, SD=1.17); “Schools lacking strategies for implementing the SEL model in soft skills education” (Mean=2.33, SD=1.12); “Teachers lack the capacity to implement the SEL model to teach students soft skills” (Mean=2.29, SD=1.20); “Schools have not considered implementing the SEL model to develop students’ soft skills as essential and necessary” (Mean=2.26, SD=1.18); “The implementation of the SEL model to develop soft skills education for students does not concern teachers” (Mean=2.26, SD=1.16); In contrast, students assessed the factors “Parents do not expect students to learn soft skills based on SEL model implementation” (Mean=1.91, SD=1.27) and “Students have no expectation of SEL model implementation in social skills education” (Mean=2.12, SD=1.23) is at the lowest level among the factors affecting the application of SEL model in soft skills education (Table 5).

Table 5 showed the differences between the grade level in the perception of the importance and interest of students and the factors affecting the application of the SEL model in soft skills education. Kruskal Wallis is considered a rank- based a non-parametric alternative to the one- way analysis of variance to allow for comparison of more than two independent groups [48,49]. The results indicated that there are significantly different statistics in PISM (X²=12.607, p<0.05), IISM (X²=15.127, p<0.05), FO (X²=6.395, p<0.05) among grade level in high school. That mean, grade 11 students have higher scores (Mean Rank=201.75) in PISM than grade 10 students (Mean Rank=181.14) and grade 12 students (Mean Rank=154.38), as well as grade 11 have higher scores (Mean Rank=207.26) in IISM than grade 10 (Mean Rank=177.35) and grade 12 (Mean Rank=154.35). Additionally, in Factors Obstacle (FO) the grade 11 students have higher score (Mean Rank=199.26) than grade 10 students (Mean Rank=166.77) and grade 12 students (Mean Rank=168.64). Therefore, there are significant differences among grade levels in Importance of Implementing the SEL Model (PISM), Interest in the Implementation of the SEL Model (IISM), and Factors Obstacle (FO).

Discussion

This study aims to investigate how high school students perceive the implementation of the SEL model in soft skills education. Students were aware of the necessity and significance of implementing the SEL model into education for soft skills. In addition, the results revealed the students’ interest in implementing the SEL model in soft skills education as well as the obstacles to implementing the SEL model. Students’ perceptions of the importance, necessity, and interest in implementing the SEL model in soft skills education vary significantly according to grade level.

The findings indicated that students are aware of the importance and necessity of implementing the SEL model in soft skills education and are also interested in implementing the SEL model in soft skills education. Similar to this finding, Morgan et al., reported that social and emotional learning skills are required for college and career readiness, as lacking these skills is frequently associated with negative behavior and academic deficits [50]. The implementation of SEL in classrooms is effective in enhancing students’ soft skills, thereby enhancing their ability to grow in life and realize their complete potential. According to research by Felton, students who were given opportunities to develop SEL-related soft skills were better prepared for following graduation success. Employers and educational institutions are emphasizing soft skills or non-cognitive skills that are essential for education and work in the twenty-first century and predict success in these fields [51]. Employers seek candidates with soft skills strengthened through SEL programs to optimize collaboration and work coordination [52]. Prior research by Kyllonen highlighted the significance of soft skills for success in the workplace and the role of SEL skills in post- secondary success [53]. It also emphasizes that concentrating on these skills will positively affect a person’s emotional and social skills. Social and emotional competency education programs also influence the development of students’ soft skills. Educators implement a variety of SEL programs to educate students in soft skills to acquire the skills necessary to prepare for future careers. Bosch demonstrated that those who participated in online job readiness training scored higher in all eight soft skill categories: attitude, communication, collaboration, social skills, communication norms, planning and organization, critical thinking, and professionalism. After participating in online job readiness training, students were able to overcome soft skill problems, according to the study. Research by Pfeiffer and Prado suggested that school SEL programs positively benefit students, involve parents and teachers, and foster a stronger relationship between school and home.The results highlighted the factors that influence the implementation of the SEL model in soft skills education. Similar to this study’s findings, Elliott and Mihalic reported that although teachers regard SEL programs, lacking a national curriculum guideline on social and emotional development makes this approach challenging [54]. Each school’s SEL program is different and primarily dependent on their interests and motivations, which will impact the efficacy of instruction. In addition to teaching, the teacher is responsible for developing effective learning situations [55]. Schonert-Reichl et al., further showed that while most teachers believe that SEL is a component of instruction, most teacher preparation programs in the United States do not adequately educate teachers to be SEL educators [56]. The support of school administrators for the SEL program in instruction will positively influence teachers’ perceptions of such programs’ value [57]. Teachers mentioned a lack of time to implement socialemotional learning measures and content as a significant barrier to implementing the SEL model in high schools. However, other influential factors regarding humans (such as parents, administrators, and policymakers) and factors (such as risk factors, socioeconomic status, race, and culture) have the potential to influence the adoption of the SEL model [58]. The results also showed that students’ perceptions of the importance, necessity, and interest in implementing the SEL model to soft skills education vary significantly in grade level. Previous research supported the need for educational programs and methods to develop SEL skills in secondary schools [59,60]. Programfocused SEL initiatives typically do not prioritize SEL skills in elementary and high schools. However, high school students should prioritize SEL. In addition, Wetzel analyzed the difference between the SEL results of students in the Fall of 2019, Fall of 2020, and Fall of 2021 [61]. High school students reported the lowest levels of social awareness among the three grade levels in each of the three years. High school students consistently reported having difficulties with social awareness and anxiety compared to students in the other two grade levels. There are differences in SEL performance across grade levels because each classroom has its own set of standards based on the task at hand and the student’s stage of development.

In this study, several limitations were analyzed. As this is a self-reported study that reflects the level of opinion, biases may affect the study’s objectivity. In addition, since research is conducted using selfreported questionnaires, participants’ sincerity should be considered. Future research should conduct additional empirical studies or in-depth interviews to investigate further the application of the SEL model to the education of soft skills. Because this was a cross-sectional study, the results were not evaluated for causality; experimental studies must clarify. This study examines only students’ awareness of the significance of the SEL model and the barriers to implementing the SEL model in soft-skills education. The level of effectiveness and the soft skills students acquire through the SEL program should be examined. However, the study’s results do contribute to theory and practice. The study added evidence to the global scientific database regarding the admission of high school students to the SEL model. Although there have been numerous studies on the efficacy of SEL implementation, minimal is known about the obstacles to SEL implementation in soft-skills instruction. It also implies that school administrators should implement the SEL model and support, monitor, and evaluate program effectiveness to ensure that program objectives are met and that students acquire social and emotional skills. There is a need for national policies that elevate the significance of SEL and place the SEL model at the center of education to integrate it with existing educational priorities. In addition, the study suggested that the SEL model should be implemented with students as early as possible to promote long-term improvements in adolescent development. This study sheds light on the obstacles impeding the successful adoption of the SEL model. The study’s findings revealed the significance of instituting effective, research based SEL programs in high schools.

Conclusion

The majority of studies indicated that social and emotional learning programs aid high school students in reducing tension, adapting to new social environments, and coping with life’s challenges. Simultaneously, SEL programs help students develop soft skills essential in the modern economic environment, increasing job opportunities and preparing students for success in the workplace and life. This research aims to investigate the perceived need, significance, and barriers to implementing the social-emotional learning model in soft skills education.

The results indicated that students are aware of and interested in implementing the SEL model in soft skills education and that several factors impede its effective application. Research indicated that educators and school administrators must effectively implement the SEL model in teaching social skills. The study is also concerned with implementing interventions and supports to eliminate the barriers to SEL model implementation in soft skills education. From there, assist students in acquiring new-age skills and achieving success.

Acknowledgement

This research is funded by the Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training under grant number B2021-SPS-07.

References

1. Barrasso-Catanzaro C, Eslinger PJ. Neurobiological bases of executive function and social‐emotional development: Typical and atypical brain changes. Family Relations. 2016;65(1):108-119.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

2. Weissberg RP, Cascarino J. Academic learning + social-emotional learning=national priority. Phi Delta Kappan. 2013;95(2):8-13.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

3. Durlak JA. Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice. Guilford Publications. 2015.

   [Google Scholar]

4. Domitrovich CE, Durlak JA, Staley KC, Weissberg RP. Social‐emotional competence: An essential factor for promoting positive adjustment and reducing risk in school children. Child Development. 2017;88(2):408-416.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

5. Zinsser KM, Weissberg RP, Dusenbury L. Aligning Preschool through High School Social and Emotional Learning Standards: A Critical and Doable Next Step. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. 2013.

   [Google Scholar]

6. Greenberg MT, Weissberg RP, O'Brien MU, Zins JE, Fredericks L, et al. Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist. 2003;58(6-7):466-474.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

7. Rutledge SA, Cohen-Vogel L, Osborne-Lampkin LT, Roberts RL. Understanding effective high schools: Evidence for personalization for academic and social emotional learning. American Educational Research Journal. 2015;52(6):1060-1092.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

8. Newman J, Dusenbury L. Social and Emotional Learning (SEL): A framework for academic, social, and emotional success. In Prevention science in school settings: Complex relationships and processes. 2015;pp.287-306.

   [Google Scholar]

9. Mahoney JL, Weissberg RP, Greenberg MT, Dusenbury L, Jagers RJ, et al. Systemic social and emotional learning: Promoting educational success for all preschool to high school students. American Psychologist. 2021;76(7):1128-1142.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

10. Weissberg RP, O’Brien MU. What works in school-based social and emotional learning programs for positive youth development. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2004;591(1):86-97.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

11. Merrell KW, Juskelis MP, Tran OK, Buchanan R. Social and emotional learning in the classroom: Evaluation of strong kids and strong teens on students' social-emotional knowledge and symptoms. Journal of Applied School Psychology. 2008;24(2):209-224.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

12. Castro-Olivo SM, Merrell KW. Validating cultural adaptations of a school-based social-emotional learning programme for use with Latino immigrant adolescents. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion. 2012;5(2):78-92.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

13. Castro-Olivo SM. Promoting social-emotional learning in adolescent Latino ELLs: A study of the culturally adapted Strong Teens program. School Psychology Quarterly. 2014;29(4):567-577.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

14. Cramer KM, Castro-Olivo S. Effects of a culturally adapted social-emotional learning intervention program on students’ mental health. Contemporary School Psychology. 2016;20:118-129.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

15. Yeager DS. Social and emotional learning programs for adolescents. The Future of Children. 2017:73-94.

    [Google Scholar]

16. Kurniawan L, Farozin M. Assessment Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) Competence in Senior High School (SMA). Indonesian Journal of Learning Education and Counseling. 2019;2(1):46-51.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

17. Van Huynh S, Tran-Chi VL, Nguyen TT. Vietnamese Teacher's Perceptions of Social-Emotional Learning Education in Primary Schools. European Journal of Contemporary Education. 2018;7(4):874-881.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

18. Van Huynh S, Giang VT, Nguyen TT, Tran L. Correlations between Components of Social Emotional Learning of Secondary School Students in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. European Journal of Contemporary Education. 2019;8(4):790-800.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

19. Datu JA, Restubog SL. The emotional pay-off of staying gritty: Linking grit with social-emotional learning and emotional well-being. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling. 2020;48(5):697-708.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

20. Chen C, Yang C, Nie Q. Social-emotional learning competencies and problematic internet use among Chinese adolescents: A structural equation modeling analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(6):3091.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

21. Panayiotou M, Humphrey N, Wigelsworth M. An empirical basis for linking social and emotional learning to academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2019;56:193-204.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

22. Dowling K, Simpkin AJ, Barry MM. A cluster randomized-controlled trial of the mind out social and emotional learning program for disadvantaged post-primary school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2019;48:1245-1263.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

23. Dowling K, Barry MM. Evaluating the implementation quality of a social and emotional learning program: A mixed methods approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(9):3249.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

24. Hoang MK, Vu TQ. Teaching social and emotional skills to students in Vietnam: Challenges and opportunities. AsTEN Journal of Teacher Education. 2016;1(1):1-9.

    [Google Scholar]

25. Dowling K, Barry MM. The effects of implementation quality of a school-based social and emotional well-being program on student’s outcomes. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education. 2020;10(2):595-614.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [Pub Med]

26. Hanley AA. Characteristics of Aggression in Male Children and Youth: Cognitive and Affective Empathy as Antidotes for Proactive and Reactive Aggression Submitted. 2015.

    [Google Scholar]

27. Bosch SA. An examination of the impact of online socio-emotional skills training on student work readiness. 2017.

    [Google Scholar]

28. Finch Brown T. The IMPACT Program: Increasing Employability Skills of High School Students Through Adventure Based Learning. 2019.

    [Google Scholar]

29. Pfeiffer SI, Prado RM. Strengths of the heart and social-emotional learning. Journal of Psychology and Education. 2021;3:1-24.

    [Google Scholar]

30. Felton E. When social and emotional learning is key to college success. The Atlantic. 2016.

    [Google Scholar]

31. Balcar J. Soft skills and their wage returns: Overview of empirical literature. Review of Economic Perspectives. 2014;14(1):3-15.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

32. Schulz B. The importance of soft skills: Education beyond academic knowledge. 2008;6:146-154.

    [Google Scholar]

33. Grugulis I, Vincent S. Whose skill is it anyway? ‘soft’ skills and polarization. Work, employment and society. 2009;23(4):597-615.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

34. Kechagias K. Teaching and assessing soft skills. 2011.

    [Google Scholar]

35. Snell S, Snell-Siddle C, Whitehouse D. Soft or hard boiled: Relevance of soft skills for IS professionals. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications. 2002:pp. 403-408.

    [Google Scholar]

36. Mahasneh JK, Thabet W. Rethinking construction curriculum: A descriptive cause analysis for the soft skills gap among construction graduates. In 51st ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings. 2015;35(4);1-8.

    [Google Scholar]

37. Gibb S. Soft skills assessment: Theory development and the research agenda. International Journal of Lifelong Education. 2014;33(4):455-471.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

38. Robles MM. Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today’s workplace. Business Communication Quarterly. 2012;75(4):453-465.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

39. Azim S, Gale A, Lawlor‐Wright T, Kirkham R, Khan A, et al. The importance of soft skills in complex projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. 2010;3(3):387-401.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

40. Gurjanov AV, Zakoldaev DA, Shukalov AV, Zharinov IO. The high industrial Education 4.0 soft skills and hard skills. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2020;1691(1):012022.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

41. Okrah AK, Ampadu E, Yeboah R. Relevance of the Senior High School Curriculum in Ghana in Relation to Contextual Reality of the World of Work. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching. 2020;9(1):1-4.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

42. Trung TQ, Swierczek FW. Skills development in higher education in Vietnam. Asia Pacific Business Review. 2009;15(4):565-586.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

43. Tran TT. Limitation on the development of skills in higher education in Vietnam. Higher Education. 2013;65(5):631-644.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

44. Truong TT, Laura RS. The effects of educating for soft skills on success in career development among graduates at universities of economics and business Administration in Vietnam. Postgraduate Research in Education, Sydney: The University of New South Wales. 2013:105-18.

    [Google Scholar]

45. Vo HP, Berglund A, Daniels M. A perspective from Vietnamese students on teaching of soft skills. In 2017 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTICE). 2017;pp.23-24.

    [Google Scholar]

46. Yao CW, Tuliao MD. Soft skill development for employability: A case study of stem graduate students at a Vietnamese transnational university. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning. 2019;9(3):250-263.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

47. Buchanan R, Gueldner BA, Tran OK, Merrell KW. Social and emotional learning in classrooms: A survey of teachers’ knowledge, perceptions, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology. 2009;25(2):187-203.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

48. Hong Y, Lee S. Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance based on linear placements. Bulletin of the Korean Mathematical Society. 2014;51(3):701-716.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

49. Ihom PA, Abella AS, Abua E, Ogbodo J. Kruskal-Wallis Test as analytical tool for key components of a newly developed core mixture. Leonardo Electronic Journal of Practices and Technologies. 2011;10(18):114-122.

    [Google Scholar]

50. Morgan JJ, Hsiao YJ, Dobbins N, Brown NB, Lyons C. An observation tool for monitoring social skill implementation in contextually relevant environments. Intervention in School and Clinic. 2015;51(1):3-11.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

51. Duckworth AL, Seligman ME. Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science. 2005;16(12):939-944.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

52. Millett CM. Perspectives on social and emotional learning in tertiary education. ETS Research Report Series. 2020;2020(1):1-4.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

53. Kyllonen PC. Soft skills for the workplace. Change: The magazine of higher learning. 2013;45(6):16-23.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

54. Elliott DS, Mihalic S. Issues in disseminating and replicating effective prevention programs. Prevention Science. 2004;5:47-53.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar][PubMed]

55. Black P, Wiliam D. Classroom assessment is not (necessarily) formative assessment (and vice-versa). Teachers College Record. 2004;106(14):183-188.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

56. Schonert-Reichl KA, Hanson-Peterson JL, Hymel S. SEL and preservice teacher education. Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning: Research and practice. 2015:406-21.

    [Google Scholar]

57. Martínez L. Teachers’ voices on social emotional learning: Identifying the conditions that make implementation possible. The International Journal of Emotional Education. 2016;8(2):6-24.

    [Google Scholar]

58. Bailey R, Stickle L, Brion-Meisels G, Jones SM. Re-imagining social-emotional learning: Findings from a strategy-based approach. Phi Delta Kappan. 2019;100(5):53-58.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

59. DePaoli JL, Atwell MN, Bridgeland JM, Shriver TP. Respected: Perspectives of youth on high school social and emotional learning. A report for CASEL. Civic & Hart Research Associates.

    [Google Scholar]

60. Durlak JA, Weissberg RP, Dymnicki AB, Taylor RD, Schellinger KB. The impact of enhancing student’s social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. Child Development. 2011;82(1):405-432.

    [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

61. Wetzel C. Social Emotional Learning (SEL) matters: Differences in student perceptions of SEL before and during COVID-19. 2022.

    [Google Scholar]

Citation: The Perception Of Implementing Social-Emo Tional Learning In Soft Skills Among Vietnam Ese High School Stud ASEAN Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 24 (7) July, 2023; 1-12