RESTORING ENGAGEMENT IN LITERACY 1
Journal Article Critique:
Restoring Engagement for Disengaged Learners through Literacy
and Relational Pedagogy
Monica Gibson
School of Education, Liberty University
Journal Article Critique:
Restoring Engagement for Disengaged Learners through Literacy
and Relational Pedagogy
In the article, “How social-emotional learning promotes reading achievement? A
systematic review of mechanisms and instructional design”, focuses on the relationship between
the effects of Social-emotional Learning (SEL) on the outcome of literacy skills. Additionally, the
RESTORING ENGAGEMENT IN LITERACY 2
research also focuses on understanding what instructional practices can be implemented by
teachers that support SEL in the classroom setting (Hua, Zhang, and Wang, (2025). The authors
presented an extensive review by analyzing current studies to identify the psychological factors
such as self-efficacy, belief in individual abilities, and in executive function that includes working
memory and self-control. This journal critique will be used to assess the strengths, weaknesses,
validity, and relevance from the results found. By analyzing this information, this critique will
argue that SEL is imperative for addressing the challenges of engagement in literacy.
Summary
Hua et al. utilized a methodology that consisted of a systematic framework to minimize
bias and establish thorough results from the data gathered. To narrow their studies, the authors
selected specific evidence-based research that aligned with their topic of studies to accurately
expound on the connections of SEL, and the cognitive capacity needed for full literacy
comprehension. Reading achievement across interdisciplinary studies were examined to
challenge this assertion. According to Hua et al. (2025), studies have determined that SEL
enhance reading achievement by supporting the emotional regulation of students (p. 5).
Students that attain higher boosts of intrinsic motivation are more inquisitive and resilient in
making and learning from their mistakes academically. For example, students that possess
stronger emotional skills when reading are more susceptible to making a mistake in
mispronouncing a word or reading aloud as part of the learning process, establishing a willing
mind for growth.
Critical Analysis
The key strength from the work of Hua et al. (2025), is based on a rigorous psychological
study known as Cognitive Load Theory (CLT). This theory addresses the challenges in learning
that include our working memory under the complex stressors and tasks from personal and
academic perspectives. By students having excessive cognitive overload and emotional stress,
learning is removed as a priority. Focusing on the instructional design was key of this research to
RESTORING ENGAGEMENT IN LITERACY 3
produce applicable guidance for educators to build, implement, and deliver instruction that will
best support students’ learning (Hua et al., 2025). Although this focus was highly beneficial, a
limitation in publication bias was evident.
Research was only studied through the publications of the successful results for SEL in
contrast with analyzing studies published that displayed minimal to no effect. In understanding
this, the researchers acknowledge that the variation in the information studied diluted the
relevance of their teaching practices. However, the key takeaway stands, and that is emotional
well-being enhances cognitive processing, resonating with present studies. According to P.J. et
al. (2025), emotional literacy should be the core curriculum, to cultivate student endurance, in
contrast to Hue et al. (2025), assertion of SEL being implemented in literacy practices. Both
studies acknowledge the significance that students’ emotional regulation supports their
cognition across disciplines, but instead of SEL being supplemented in sections throughout
learning, P.J. et al. (2025) argue that SEL is the foundation of the curriculum. Furthermore,
without the shift of this perspective, emotional engagement beyond literacy will continue to be
an ongoing issue in education.
While observing the claims from both studies, the underlying understanding is that
student engagement is just as much a cognitive issue as it is an emotional one. When students
build resiliency against societal and academic setbacks, they are more capable of adapting to
their conditions and readjusting their focus (P.J. et al., 2025). The data from Hua et al. (2025) is
concentrated on current research that focuses on specific implications of teachers, such as
teaching self-regulation and modeling independence to help students improve in reading.
However, the main weakness within this data is their reliance on the results of secondary data.
This can create errors by providing misinformation of current events, measurement errors, or
outdated sources. Ultimately, the research provides a strong, credible case that cognition and
literacy skills are fundamentally connected.
RESTORING ENGAGEMENT IN LITERACY 4
Conclusion
Although the studied group of this study’s focus pertained to middle-level education,
the ongoing concerns of engagement in learning is evident even in elementary school. In
several cases, I’ve observed moments when students are emotionally and mentally
overstimulated and feeling absent-minded during instruction. Despite various innovative reading
strategies implemented, students continue to emotionally disengage in their learning. The
information from this study is valuable in realizing the connection between SEL skills and the
more concrete reading skills we set goals for our students to obtain. More specifically, this study
reassures me in knowing that it requires connecting with students emotionally first, before I’m
truly able to engage and shape their minds. The Bible teaches us that we should “train up a child
in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (King James Version,
1769/2017, Proverbs 22:6). I believe that student engagement (mindset) can be changed with
the changing of the teacher’s perception and willingness. By accepting this change, we’re not
simply adapting content with the current times, but helping to prepare students to build their
future.
RESTORING ENGAGEMENT IN LITERACY 5
References
Hua, L., Zhang, Z., & Wang, H. (2025). How social–emotional learning promotes reading
achievement? A systematic review of mechanisms and instructional design. Frontiers in
Psychology, 16, 1631429. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1631429
King James Bible. (2017). King James Bible Online. Original work published 1769)
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/
P.J., J., Antony, R. V., Joseph, J., George, A., & Jacob, G. (2025). Emotional literacy as
curriculum: A new paradigm for resilient classrooms. Frontiers in Education, 10,
1610746. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1610746
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
