Leveraging Technology to Address Social-Emotional Learning during the Pandemic: Findings from an Efficacy Trial
Kylie S. Flynn; Linlin Li; Chun-Wei Huang; Ruchita Patel; Kim Luttgen; Shuangting Yang; Eunice Chow (2024). Social and Emotional Learning: Research, Practice, and Policy v4 Article 100045. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED656217
-
examining1,294Students, grade3
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale Second Edition (BERS-2): Interpersonal Strength Subscale |
Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.38 |
14.69 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Social Skills and Behavioral Index (SSBI): Communication Skills Scale |
Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
32.66 |
31.97 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale Second Edition (BERS-2): Interpersonal Strength Subscale |
Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with socio-emotional challenges;
|
14.91 |
14.09 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Social Skills and Behavioral Index (SSBI): Communication Skills Scale |
Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with socio-emotional challenges;
|
31.78 |
30.46 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Direct student assessments on SEL learning (SELweb) |
Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.51 |
0.10 |
Yes |
|
||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Direct student assessments on SEL learning (SELweb) |
Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Students with socio-emotional challenges;
|
0.51 |
0.06 |
Yes |
|
||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
11% English language learners -
Female: 51%
Male: 49% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
California
-
Race Asian 24% Black 5% Other or unknown 41% White 30% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 31% Other or unknown 69% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 49% Other or unknown 51%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in 88 third-grade classrooms across 37 schools in four California public school districts. During the study, schools shifted to remote or hybrid instruction because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Study sample
The researchers randomly assigned 88 third-grade classrooms to either participate in the Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN intervention (44 classrooms) or receive business-as-usual instruction (44 classrooms). At the time of assignment, these classrooms included 1,734 students. After some classrooms and students did not participate, the final sample included 1,294 students across 85 classrooms. Approximately 20% of students reported social and emotional challenges.
Intervention Group
Teachers in intervention classrooms implemented Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN, a computer board game intended to develop students’ social and emotional skills. The intervention focused on social and emotional learning competencies aligned with the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) framework: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making. Teachers delivered one episode of the board game in each of 9 sessions over 11 weeks. An episode needed about 30–45 minutes of instructional time. The mode of delivery changed over the course of the two-year study due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The experiences of students who received the intervention during the first year therefore differed from those who received the intervention during the second year. Students received the intervention in person for most of the first year but received some later sessions remotely. During the second year, students received the intervention remotely.
Comparison Group
Classrooms continued their usual instruction on social and emotional learning and did not use Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN. Information about the social and emotional learning instruction provided in comparison classrooms was not provided in the study.
Support for implementation
To support implementation, the developer and research team provided teachers using Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN a 1-hour online training covering the program, facilitation of post-episode discussions, and classroom implementation strategies. The researchers maintained ongoing support and communication via weekly digital newsletters and online implementation logs, plus phone calls, texts, and emails to address timeline and technology questions.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Li, Linlin; Flynn, Kylie S.; DeRosier, Melissa E.; Weiser, Gary; Austin-King, Kelsey. (2021). Social-Emotional Learning amidst COVID-19 School Closures: Positive Findings from an Efficacy Study of "Adventures Aboard the S.S. GRIN" Program. Frontiers in Education v6 Article 683142.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).