Prescription or Flexibility? the Implementation of Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) in Secondary Schools in England and the Implications for the Fidelity-Adaptation Debate

 The extent to which schools should implement prevention and promotion interventions with full fidelity is much debated in the implementation literature. Whilst some argue that high levels of fidelity are essential for the achievement of the expected outcome, others argue that school-level adaptations are inevitable and may even be beneficial if these are superficial and enhance ‘goodness-of-fit’  between a programme and its setting, potentially enhancing ownership and ultimately the sustainability of an intervention. On this basis, it has been proposed that a less prescriptive model may be appropriate, where this requires programme developers to specify essential components that must be implemented as prescribed, with more adaptability and flexibility allowed for less critical elements.   

Most school-based prevention and promotion programmes designed to address mental health and well-being take a prescriptive or manualised approach. An exception to this is the Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) programme which has been implemented in secondary schools in England since 2007. SEAL proposes a more flexible framework, which allows schools more autonomy in implementation, allowing them to adapt SEAL to meet the needs of the setting and its pupils. 

The national evaluation of SEAL examined its impact on social and emotional competence on pupils in 22 schools and explored the processes of implementation of SEAL in nine diverse, case-study schools over a two year-period.  This paper reports on the implementation strand of SEAL and explores the extent to which a flexible model may be implemented successfully and achieve the expected outcomes. It considers the implications of the SEAL evaluation for the fidelity-adaptation debate and the design of future interventions.