It is possible to create a practice. It is not responsible to declare that the practice works simply because its components sound reasonable.
What can legitimately be created
Researchers and practitioners often synthesize established concepts into new frameworks, models, taxonomies, tools, or implementation processes. The contribution may be the sequence, language, operational definitions, target population, visual structure, or intended use. The responsibility is to identify what is borrowed, what is original, and what remains hypothetical.
Evidence-informed versus evidence-based
SSCC is evidence-informed because its component principles align with research on adult social-emotional competence, student-adult relationships, school connectedness, restorative and trauma-responsive practice, and implementation. It is not yet evidence-based as a complete intervention because the specific sequence has not been systematically tested.
The first questions are modest by design
Early studies should ask whether the practice is understandable, acceptable, appropriate, feasible, and usable. Researchers can examine whether adults apply it accurately to scenarios, whether they use it in practice, what barriers they encounter, and how they interpret each component. These questions prepare the practice for stronger outcome studies.
Proximal before distal outcomes
It would be premature to begin with claims about suspensions, violence prevention, achievement, or whole-school safety. Those outcomes are influenced by many conditions. Initial research should prioritize proximal outcomes such as knowledge, self-efficacy, scenario performance, reported use, fidelity, and participant or student perceptions.
The developer’s conflict of interest
Because I developed SSCC and may benefit professionally from its success, that interest should be disclosed. Independent collaborators, transparent methods, preregistration when appropriate, separation of marketing from research participation, and honest reporting of null or negative findings will strengthen the work.
What public scholarship can do
Publishing the idea publicly can invite critique, collaborators, and practice-based insight. It does not replace peer review, IRB review, measurement development, or empirical evaluation. Public interest is not evidence of effectiveness.
A practice becomes more credible not when its developer protects it from criticism, but when the practice is defined clearly enough to be tested, challenged, refined, and, if the evidence requires it, changed.
Until next time, keep building safer schools, one relationship at a time.
← Previous: Where Does SSCC Fit in MTSS? · Back to all articles · Next: A Call for Research on Everyday Adult-Student Interactions →