The Approach of Socioemotional Education in Didactic Materials

Camila De Pieri Fernandes; Ricardo Henrique Pucinelli

DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202602751

Article derived from a Final Course Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the E&S Magazine with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by the Pecege Institute for textual synthesis and organization.

Abstract

Socioemotional education has gained centrality in the Basic Education curriculum, making didactic materials fundamental to enabling the guidelines of the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC). The study comparatively analyzed the socioemotional approach in two distinct didactic materials for the Initial Years of Elementary School, considering their pedagogical proposals, didactic transposition strategies, curricular organization, and guidance for teachers, in light of educational neuroscience and theoretical frameworks such as Vygotsky and Wallon. The research was characterized as qualitative, applied, descriptive, and comparative. The Phases material, aimed at private schools and which integrated socioemotional learning into curricular components, and the Espaço de SER material, distributed in the public State network of São Paulo and which presented it as a specific curricular component, were included. The analysis was based on the interpretation of the contents, activities, pedagogical guidance, and suggested monitoring methods. The results showed differences in the conception of socioemotional education, in the progression of skills, and in the evaluation processes, identifying possibilities for expansion in the articulation of activities, in the evaluation criteria, and in the support offered to teachers. It was concluded that the effectiveness of socioemotional work was directly related to pedagogical intentionality, coherence in the organization of activities, progression of skills, and the existence of guidance to monitor learning, highlighting the need to expand studies in educational neuroscience to support the development of didactic materials.

Keywords: Socioemotional skills; School curriculum; Educational neuroscience.

1. Introduction

The development of socio-emotional skills has been increasingly recognized as a fundamental pillar for the integral formation of students in the contemporary educational scenario. This approach seeks to prepare individuals to consciously deal with their emotions, establish healthy interpersonal relationships, and make responsible decisions. In Brazil, the homologation of the National Common Curricular Base (Brasil, 2017) reinforced this perspective by establishing ten general competencies that promote cognitive, social, emotional, physical, and cultural development. Thus, the socio-emotional dimension has gained centrality in the Basic Education curriculum, integrating curricula, teaching materials, and assessment processes, and encompassing aspects such as self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making, according to the CASEL Model (Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning). The incorporation of these competencies in the classroom can contribute to the reduction of school dropout rates, greater student engagement, and broader academic, personal, and social development.

Historically, the school was predominantly understood as a space dedicated to cognitive development, where reason was seen as controlling emotions. Leite (2012) points out that this dualistic conception, which separated cognition and affectivity, permeated educational institutions for many years. However, theorists such as Vygotsky (2007) and Wallon (2007) were crucial for overcoming this view. Vygotsky (2007) argues that the individual is constituted as a socio-historical being through culture and social interactions, where learning is not a simple acquisition of information, but a result of the relationship with the world and with people. Wallon (2007), in turn, argues that emotion is the first and strongest bond with the environment and with people, and that emotion and cognition coexist in the individual at all times.

The need to overcome this dichotomy was also pointed out in international documents, such as the Delors Report (UNESCO, 1996), which proposes an education based on four pillars: learning to know, learning to do, learning to be, and learning to live together. After its publication, several studies sought to map how these pillars could be achieved, so that students and teachers ceased to be seen as mere receivers and transmitters of existing knowledge, as described by Santos and Primi (2014). Contemporary research, such as that highlighted by Santos and Primi (2014) and a study conducted in 2013 by the Ayrton Senna Institute with 24,065 elementary and high school students, shows that well-developed socio-emotional skills correlate with better school performance, especially in Portuguese Language and Mathematics, and with professional success and personal well-being.

In this context, teaching materials emerge as essential tools for the implementation of curricular guidelines in the classroom. However, although the National Common Curricular Base establishes the general guidelines for the development of competencies, there are still limitations in the pedagogical proposals that reach teachers. These limitations are manifested in the coherence between theoretical foundation, didactic practices, and evaluation processes. The absence of consistent evaluation parameters, such as assessment rubrics, and the lack of a structured progression of skills can hinder the effectiveness of socio-emotional work and lead to subjective interpretations of student development. Educational neuroscience, in turn, offers important subsidies for the understanding and improvement of socio-emotional education, by indicating that the development of these competencies is directly related to executive functions and emotional regulation, processes associated with the maturation of the prefrontal cortex (Diamond, 2013; Damasio, 2012; Siegel, 2017). However, the need to expand studies in this field to support the elaboration of teaching materials that guide effective pedagogical practices is still evident.

Faced with the need to qualify the development of teaching materials and strengthen pedagogical mediation, this study is justified by its contribution to the school community, offering subsidies to teachers, managers, and public policy makers so that they can reflect on pedagogical choices more aligned with both curricular guidelines and neuroscience evidence on the relationship between emotion, cognition, and learning. The present study aimed to comparatively analyze the socioemotional approach in two distinct teaching materials for the Early Years of Elementary School, considering their pedagogical proposals, didactic transposition strategies, curricular organization, and guidance for teachers, in light of educational neuroscience and theoretical frameworks such as Vygotsky and Wallon, seeking to identify how these pedagogical resources support teachers’ work in the classroom and assist in the development of students’ socioemotional competencies.

2. Material and Methods

This research was characterized as a qualitative investigation, of an applied, descriptive, and comparative nature. The applied approach sought to produce knowledge aimed at understanding concrete educational practices related to socioemotional development in basic education. Regarding the objectives, the study was predominantly descriptive, as it analyzed and described the characteristics, pedagogical proposals, and structure of different didactic materials. Additionally, it presented explanatory elements, by seeking to understand the theoretical and curricular frameworks that underpinned the adopted approaches.

The research design adopted a comparative character, analyzing two distinct didactic materials, both aimed at the segment of the Initial Years of Elementary School, specifically the 4th year. The first material, Phases, is intended for the private network and integrates the development of socio-emotional skills into regular curricular components. The second, Espaço de SER, is distributed in the public State network of São Paulo and organizes socio-emotional work as a specific curricular component, called Project of Coexistence.

The selection of these materials was based on criteria such as explicit alignment with the general competencies of the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC), wide use in distinct educational contexts (private and public networks), and the adoption of pedagogical proposals with differences in how they are inserted into the curricular matrix. This choice allowed for a contrastive analysis of socio-emotional approach strategies in different contexts and curricular models.

Regarding the technique and instruments for obtaining information and data, the research was framed as documentary. The analysis corpus was composed of the selected didactic materials and their respective pedagogical documents, such as teacher manuals and curriculum guides. Data collection was complemented by a bibliographic search, which included books and scientific articles addressing socioemotional education and the contributions of neuroscience to learning.

The data analysis was organized based on three main criteria, grounded in the principles of backward design proposed by Wiggins and McTighe (2019) and the active learning perspective of Bacich and Holanda (2020). The first criterion referred to the explicit statement of intended learning outcomes, verifying how the objectives were presented clearly and progressively. The second addressed the planned learning evidence, analyzing the assessment mechanisms and the existence of observable criteria for monitoring student development.

The third analysis criterion was related to the planning of learning experiences, considering the type of activities proposed, the methodologies employed, and their coherence with the learning objectives. Additionally, we sought to analyze the potential of the activities to promote active and meaningful learning, investigating to what extent the proposals favored student engagement and stimulated continuous processes of action and reflection.

The data were analyzed in line with the study’s objectives and the adopted theoretical framework, which included contributions from Vygotsky (2007), Wallon (2007), and evidence from educational neuroscience (Diamond, 2013; Damasio, 2012; Siegel, 2017). This approach allowed for the identification of convergences and divergences between the analyzed materials regarding conceptions of socioemotional education, pedagogical strategies, and the alignment of these proposals with the BNCC guidelines.

For each didactic material, the contents, activities, pedagogical guidelines, and suggested monitoring methods were interpreted. Interviews, questionnaires, or direct observations were not conducted, with the analysis focusing exclusively on the documents and didactic materials. The analytical process therefore sought to describe and compare the methodological approaches, without presenting empirical findings or conclusions about the effectiveness of the proposals.

3. Results and Discussion

The analysis of the didactic materials was organized based on methodological criteria that considered the principles of backward design, as proposed by Wiggins and McTighe (2019), and the perspective of active learning, advocated by Bacich and Holanda (2020). The study sought to understand how the materials articulate their pedagogical objectives and organize the progression of socio-emotional competencies, how the proposed activities and methodologies favor meaningful and intentional learning, and what evidence of learning and assessment mechanisms are foreseen to monitor student development. Subsequently, these findings were discussed in light of neuroscience contributions to learning, seeking to identify convergences and divergences between the materials’ approaches.

Description of the analyzed materials

The Phases teaching material, developed for the private school network, integrates socioemotional work with regular curricular components, specifically in the Portuguese Language workbook for the Early Years of Elementary School. The socioemotional learning content and objectives are conditioned by the discipline’s themes and knowledge objects. The Teacher’s Manual describes this complementary material as a set of activity suggestions that employ active methodologies, aiming at the development of protagonism and 21st-century skills. The didactic proposal establishes a correlation between the discipline and socioemotional work, with thematic units that, in addition to cognitive development, propose activities that explore socioemotional aspects, identified by the “+Action” icon.

The Phases material adopts a pedagogical approach of meaningful learning, which stimulates curiosity and enthusiasm, recognizing the importance of developing cognitive, motor, affective, and social capacities in the teaching phase. Its theoretical references include the guidelines of the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC), Jean Piaget’s Theory of Learning, which emphasizes change through action, Lev Vygotsky’s (2007) proposal, which understands learning in a cultural and social context, and David Ausubel’s meaningful learning. The material seeks to explore games that promote emotional and imaginative freedom, assisting in the acquisition of autonomy, initiative, playfulness, language, affectivity, and socialization, by contextualizing socio-emotional activities within the curricular content.

As an example, in the 4th year of Elementary School, Unit 7 of the Phases material, titled “Between Dream and Reality”, uses the text “Don Quixote” to explore issues of interpretation and figures of speech, typical of the Portuguese curricular component. In the “+Action” section, the text’s theme is expanded to encourage students to share their dreams for the future and how they plan to achieve them. The activity suggests broadening the discussion about achieving dreams, encouraging empathy by listening to colleagues and building a “Dream Panel” with texts about their aspirations and actions to reach them.

A complementary activity in the Phases material proposes that each student receive a balloon and a toothpick to write and keep their dreams inside the balloon. Although there is no explicit incentive to pop a colleague’s balloon, the presence of the toothpick suggests this possibility, leading to reflection on “Why pop a colleague’s balloon? Why not take care of another’s dream? How did I feel when they popped my balloon?”. After constructing the Dream Panel, students are guided to write motivational phrases for their colleagues and to participate in a discussion circle to share feelings about the support received, promoting reflection on respect for plurality and the importance of caring for others’ dreams.

Unit 8 of the Phases material, which addresses Northeastern culture through a cordel (a type of popular Brazilian poetry), proposes in the “+Action” section that students research cultures from different regions. This activity aims to promote information investigation, teamwork, and problem-solving, expanding the national cultural repertoire and fostering respect for differences. Learners are expected to develop a respectful and valuable stance towards cultural diversity. The complementary material suggests exercises for students to reflect on their lifestyles and culture, comparing research data with eating habits, clothing, language, music, and climate, seeking to develop a sense of belonging and security by identifying similarities, and a sense of appreciation and respect for diversity by observing differences. The final delivery consists of the collaborative production of a cordel that represents the local culture, valuing the contribution of each group member.

In contrast, the SER Space material, distributed in the public State network of São Paulo, addresses socioemotional work through projects, constituting a specific curricular component called Project of Coexistence. In the 4th year, the material presents projects such as “The world in me” in the first semester, and “Collaborative game” (GAIA Expedition) and “Listening attentively” in both semesters. The methodology is based on the importance of interaction and affectivity, dialoguing with the theories of Vygotsky, Wallon, and Edgar Morin, who emphasize the interconnection between the socioemotional and the cognitive. The material is also guided by the ten competencies of the BNCC and the theories of Daniel Goleman and Peter Senger, who associate socioemotional development with academic success, indicating an 11% increase in school performance in schools with socioemotional development proposals.

The organization of the “Espaço de SER” material, with the socio-emotional component as a specific curricular component and one weekly class dedicated to it, aims to give greater relevance to the development of skills for educators and families. The classes use playfulness and gamification, employing active learning methodologies. In the first semester, the “The world in me” project begins in class 1 with the presentation of the proposal and the gathering of expectations, followed by a student presentation activity. In class 2, students, divided into groups, discuss similarities and differences among themselves, addressing topics such as birthday celebrations, names, family programs, food, and preferences at home, as an initial work to explore different cultures, customs, and feelings.

In class 3 of the SER Space material, students participate in an activity of describing objects without naming them, followed by a discussion on the importance of naming. In groups, they receive cards with cultural practices from various countries and peoples to assemble a puzzle, correctly associating the practices with their respective places of origin. The conclusion of these activities emphasizes that naming is paramount for recognition. In class 4, knowledge about differences is deepened through food experimentation, where students name the foods and, in groups, describe the memories and feelings these foods evoke, connecting the sensory experience with the emotional dimension.

Class 5 of the SER Space material proposes an interview dynamic between two students about friendship, with the objective of practicing empathy and attentive listening. In class 6, students reflect on what is essential in a home and identify places that represent personal refuge. Class 7 expands the discussion to the school environment, presenting exhibitions from schools in different parts of the world and encouraging students to describe their dream school. In class 8, students share family stories, with a warning to teachers about the delicacy of the topic, compare their colleagues’ stories, and write a letter to a family member, addressing something learned or common traits.

The last class of the SER Space material’s curriculum focuses on the theme of tradition, inviting students to reflect on different traditions, which ones they would like to perpetuate, and to record a lived moment they wish to propagate to other classes. Throughout this curriculum, students receive a passport where they paste stickers corresponding to advancements and record learnings, allowing for a concrete verification of their development throughout the year. Families also receive digital material that explores topics such as internet usage, complementing the work done in the classroom.

Characterization of teaching materials

The comparative analysis of the didactic materials Phases and Espaço de SER revealed two distinct proposals for curricular organization for the development of socioemotional skills. The Phases material adopts a transversal approach, integrating specific socioemotional activities into the thematic units of the Portuguese Language curricular component, without constituting its own curricular component. The socioemotional proposals emerge linked to disciplinary content, which requires the teacher to have the ability to articulate the two fields of knowledge in a cohesive and intentional manner.

In contrast, the SER Space material presents socio-emotional education as a specific curricular component, with weekly classes dedicated exclusively to this development. This longitudinal curricular organization, which extends from Early Childhood Education to High School, clarifies formative objectives for each stage of the school journey, giving greater visibility and systematization to the work. This structural difference directly impacts how socio-emotional learning is operationalized in the materials, influencing the recurrence of activities, the progression of skills, and the role of socio-emotional education in the integral formation of students.

Learning objectives and skills progression

In the Phases material, the pedagogical objectives related to socio-emotional skills appear linked to the themes of the Portuguese Language units. The skills are mobilized from the texts, discursive genres, and knowledge objects of the discipline, allowing for significant relationships to be established between cognitive and socio-emotional aspects. However, it was observed that the skills do not follow a clearly defined progressive sequence, as the themes vary according to the disciplinary content, which may hinder the construction of a continuous path and the consolidation of socio-emotional abilities over time. Despite this, the socio-emotional activities are well-contextualized, allowing learners to attribute more complex meanings to the texts read and broaden their view of the knowledge objects studied, without dissociating cognitive aspects from socio-emotional ones.

In the SER Space material, there was a greater explicitation of learning objectives and a progressive organization of developed competencies. The classes are structured in projects that present continuity throughout the semester, allowing certain skills to be revisited and deepened at different times. This organization approaches the first principle of backward design, by making the intended learning outcomes more evident and guiding the selection of pedagogical experiences based on these objectives. The material, by being elaborated for a specific curricular component, presents an epistemological organization of the teaching area, which facilitates the logical sequencing of content and its appropriation by students.

Significant activities and teaching methodologies

The didactic transposition strategies for socioemotional learning in the Phases material are directly linked to the themes of the Portuguese Language units. The proposed activities start from literary texts, narratives, news, and other textual genres, using them as triggers for reflections on empathy, respect, self-knowledge, and interpersonal relationships. The recurrent use of group dynamics, conversation circles, and collective productions is observed, favoring social interaction and dialogue among students. However, the activities tend to occur episodically, without explicit articulation or systematic conceptual linkage between the different proposals throughout the material, which may hinder the consolidation of the socioemotional skills addressed.

In the SER Space material, pedagogical strategies are organized into projects, collaborative games, and activities mediated by concrete objects, such as stuffed animals, board games, and tracking passports. A greater intentionality is observed in the construction of a pedagogical path, although some activities present limited thematic articulation among themselves. For example, lesson 3, which asks to describe objects without naming them to emphasize the importance of naming feelings, and lesson 4, which explores food experimentation to describe memories and feelings, have naming as an intersection point, but the themes do not always relate directly, which can generate a sense of fragmentation of content. Both materials, however, present potentially significant proposals, although their effectiveness depends, to a large extent, on the intentionality of the teacher’s mediation, according to Bacich and Holanda (2020).

Evidence of learning and development monitoring

Regarding the evaluation processes, both materials present significant limitations. In the Phases material, no specific instruments for monitoring socioemotional development were identified. The proposed activities prioritize reflection and practical experience, but do not indicate observational criteria or systematic records to assist the teacher in identifying students’ progress or difficulties. This absence of consistent evaluation parameters, such as assessment rubrics, can lead to subjective interpretations of socioemotional development, hindering systematic monitoring and informed pedagogical decision-making.

The SER Space material presents a larger number of follow-up resources, such as learning passports and symbolic participation records, which favor the visualization of the student’s journey. However, these instruments do not explicitly state clear indicators that allow for an objective assessment of the development of competencies such as empathy, self-regulation, and active listening. In both cases, the lack of clear observational criteria and systematized instruments for monitoring the socio-emotional development of students represents a gap, which may compromise the effectiveness of pedagogical proposals and the teacher’s ability to intervene in a qualified manner.

Relations with neuroscience

The analysis of the didactic material Phases evidences a structured and intentional proposal, aligned with the BNCC guidelines and references from development education and psychology. The material contemplates central dimensions of emotional intelligence, such as self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, and interpersonal relationships, in addition to socio-emotional skills related to the integral formation of students. From the perspective of neuroscience, these dimensions are directly related to the development of executive functions, which encompass skills such as inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, and emotional regulation, processes associated with the maturation of the prefrontal cortex (Diamond, 2013). The analyzed data indicate that the material implicitly recognizes the importance of these functions by proposing socially mediated and emotionally significant activities, although not always in a progressive and articulated manner.

Although the Phases material presents a defined path throughout the academic year, it was observed that the themes do not always connect explicitly, resulting, in some cases, in isolated activities. From a neuroscientific point of view, learning related to emotions and social interactions demands repetition and consolidation to promote lasting modifications in the neural circuits involved in emotional regulation and social behavior (Siegel, 2017). The absence of systematic reviews may, therefore, limit the internalization of the socio-emotional skills worked on. Regarding the assessment of socio-emotional development, although the material specifies formative objectives for each class, no clear observational instruments or indicators were identified to help the teacher monitor progress more systematically. Neuroscience points to the need for consistent observational criteria to avoid simplified interpretations of students’ socio-emotional development. According to Leite (2012), only when assessment data are used to benefit the student is it possible to guarantee one of the main conditions for establishing an affectively positive relationship between the subject and the object.

The Phases material also showed the recurrent use of pedagogical metaphors as a strategy for socio-emotional reflection. However, studies in neuroeducation indicate that symbolic activities demand explicit pedagogical mediation to establish connections between lived experience, awakened emotions, and their application in different contexts of daily life. Without this mediation, there is a risk that the activity will be limited to task execution, without promoting the intended socio-emotional learning. It is also highlighted that the material assumes a high level of teacher preparedness to deal with emotionally sensitive topics, such as identity, belonging, and family relationships. Considering that, in childhood, the neural systems responsible for emotional regulation are still developing, situations that evoke intense emotions require careful and well-founded pedagogical interventions (Damasio, 2012). On the other hand, preliminary results show positive aspects, such as the use of playful and collaborative strategies and the inseparability from cognitive work, allowing for a broader perspective on the same object of study. These elements dialogue with neuroscience evidence that understands learning as an essentially social and emotional process, in which interaction and affective engagement play a central role in consolidating learning (Vygotsky, 2007; Siegel, 2017).

The analysis of the SER Space material evidences a pedagogical proposal intentionally oriented towards socioemotional development, in line with the BNCC guidelines and with references from developmental psychology. From the neuroscience perspective, the analyzed proposals dialogue with processes related to the development of executive functions and emotional regulation, especially regarding the naming of emotions, listening to others, and reflecting on personal experiences. For example, lesson 3, by emphasizing the importance of naming objects, people, and feelings, mobilizes cognitive processes associated with emotional language. Studies indicate that the ability to name emotions favors the organization of emotional experience and the control of impulsive responses, particularly in children in the phase of prefrontal cortex maturation (Diamond, 2013; Damasio, 2012).

It is observed that, just as in the Phases material, the assessment of socioemotional development is a point to be considered in the SER Space. Although the material explicitly states, at the end of each class, which skills were mobilized, there are no clear observational criteria or systematized instruments to assist the teacher in monitoring students’ progress over time. Considering that skills such as empathy, active listening, and self-knowledge manifest contextually and variably, neuroscience and developmental psychology indicate the importance of consistent qualitative evaluative references, in order to avoid simplified or subjective readings of socioemotional development. It is also highlighted that the material assumes a high capacity for teacher mediation, especially in activities involving intense emotional experiences, family memories, and identity issues. In 4th-grade children, whose neural systems for emotional regulation are still developing, situations that evoke deep affects require sensitive, intentional, and well-founded pedagogical interventions, at the risk of generating emotional overload or dispersion of formative objectives (Damasio, 2012).

Finally, the analysis results indicate that the SER Space material shows strong alignment with neuroscience evidence by understanding learning as a socially and emotionally situated process. The use of playful, collaborative, and sensory strategies favors students’ affective engagement and creates conducive conditions for building bonds, a central aspect for consolidating learning in childhood (Vygotsky, 2007; Siegel, 2017). Nevertheless, expanding the progressivity, the articulation between classes, and the monitoring instruments could enhance the material’s effects on long-term socioemotional development. The performed analysis allows us to infer that the way curriculum is organized exerts a decisive influence on socioemotional development. Proposals that do not present structured progression may not achieve the consolidation of learning, as they hinder the construction of meaning and the retrieval of knowledge over time. On the other hand, when there is an intentional and sequenced organization, the gradual construction of skills is favored, respecting students’ developmental pace.

The transversal approach, although powerful for integrating cognitive and socio-emotional dimensions, requires greater care in articulating activities, under the risk of dispersing educational objectives. The structuring as a specific curricular component, on the other hand, contributes to greater visibility and systematization of the work, even though it demands efforts to ensure meaningful connections between the proposed experiences. It is also evident that the explicit definition of the socio-emotional education concept is a central element for the coherence of pedagogical practices. When this concept is not clearly defined, activities tend to become isolated, limiting the deepening of learning. In contrast, proposals anchored in more explicit theoretical foundations favor the construction of more consistent educational pathways. In this context, teacher mediation proves to be indispensable, not only to enable activities but also to give meaning to experiences, promote reflection, and broaden students’ understanding. This mediation becomes even more relevant when considering the specificities of the age group, as proposals that are not well-adjusted to the developmental level can compromise the achievement of the intended objectives.

Another relevant aspect refers to the need for recurrence and chaining of learning experiences. The development of socio-emotional skills does not occur immediately or in isolation, demanding continuity, deepening, and multiple opportunities for experience and reflection. The absence of these elements tends to limit the internalization of learning, reducing its formative potential. Similarly, fragility in assessment processes directly impacts the effectiveness of proposals. The lack of clear criteria and systematized instruments makes it difficult to monitor student development and restricts the possibility of more qualified pedagogical interventions, making assessment excessively subjective. It should also be noted that affective engagement and social interaction constitute structuring elements of the learning process, reinforcing the inseparability between cognitive and emotional dimensions. Activities that mobilize bonds, significant experiences, and active participation tend to enhance the development of socio-emotional skills. In this sense, the incorporation of neuroscience evidence presents itself as a promising path to qualify the elaboration of didactic materials, by offering subsidies for the organization of practices more coherent with learning and development processes.

Given the findings, it is inferred that the effectiveness of working with socioemotional skills is directly associated with pedagogical intentionality, coherence between proposals, structured progression of skills, and the presence of more consistent evaluation processes. The articulation between these elements allows not only for greater clarity in the formative path but also for greater security in teaching practice. Thus, the qualification of didactic materials, combined with the strengthening of pedagogical mediation, constitutes a determining factor for the consolidation of socioemotional development in the school context, responding to the objective of analyzing how these resources support teaching work and the socioemotional development of students.

4. Conclusion

This study comparatively analyzed the socio-emotional approach in two teaching materials for the Early Years of Elementary School, in light of educational neuroscience and frameworks such as Vygotsky and Wallon, seeking to understand how these resources support teaching work and the development of students’ socio-emotional skills. It was found that the curricular organization of the teaching materials decisively influenced the way the socio-emotional aspect was operationalized, with the Phases material adopting a transversal approach, integrated into the curricular components, and the Espaço de SER material presenting it as a specific curricular component. It was observed that, in both materials, the proposed activities were potentially significant, but the progression of socio-emotional skills was not always explicit or systematic, and the evaluation processes presented significant limitations, with the absence of clear observational instruments and criteria for monitoring student development. The effectiveness of socio-emotional work was directly related to pedagogical intentionality, coherence in the organization of activities, progression of skills, and the existence of guidelines for monitoring learning.

The main contribution of this study lies in offering subsidies to teachers, managers, and public policy makers for reflection on pedagogical choices more aligned with curricular guidelines and neuroscience evidence on the relationship between emotion, cognition, and learning. However, a limitation identified was the need for greater articulation between activities and the explicit statement of consistent evaluative criteria in the materials, in addition to the demand for high teacher preparedness for the mediation of emotionally sensitive topics. It is suggested to expand studies in the field of educational neuroscience to support the development of didactic materials that guide effective pedagogical practices, focusing on the progressivity of skills, the articulation between classes, and the development of more robust monitoring instruments, enhancing the material’s long-term effects on socio-emotional development.

Bibliographic References

Bacich, Lilian; Holanda, Leandro (org.). STEAM em sala de aula: a aprendizagem baseada em projetos integrando conhecimentos na educação básica. Porto Alegre: Penso, 2020.

Brasil. Ministério da Educação. Base Nacional Comum Curricular. Brasília, 2017. Disponível em: http://basenacionalcomum.mec.gov.br/. Acesso em: 19 abr. 2026.

Damasio, A. 2012. O erro de Descartes: emoção, razão e o cérebro humano. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.

Diamond, A. 2013. Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, v. 64, p. 135–168. Disponível em: https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750. Acesso em: 8 fev. 2026.

Leite, S. A. 2012. Afetividade nas práticas pedagógicas. Temas em Psicologia, Ribeirão Preto. V. 20, n. 2: p. 355-368. Disponível em: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/5137/513751440006.pdf. Acesso em: 19 abr. 2026.

Santos, D.; Primi, R. 2014. Desenvolvimento socioemocional e aprendizado escolar: uma proposta de mensuração para apoiar políticas públicas. São Paulo: Instituto Ayrton Senna.

Siegel, D. J. 2017. Mindsight: a nova ciência da transformação pessoal. São Paulo: Editora nVersos.

UNESCO, 1996 [Referência completa não encontrada no documento original]

Vygotsky, L. S. 2007. A formação social da mente. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.

Wallon, H. 2007 A evolução psicológica da criança. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.

Wiggins, Grant; Mctighe, Jay. Planejamento para a compreensão: alinhando currículo, avaliação e ensino por meio da prática do planejamento reverso. 2. ed. Porto Alegre: Penso, 2019.

Article originating from a Final Course Work on Neuroscience and Learning in Education

To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform