This paper has highlighted the following problems with SEL:

1. No expert consensus on the definition of SEL;
2. Contradictory or poor-quality research underlying its
efficacy;
3. Mixed or negative research about the supposed benefits
with respect to academic achievement, reduced suicide,
etc.;
4. Infusion of SEL into Common Core, resulting in
psychologically manipulative standards rather than the promised clear, rigorous academic math and English standards;
5. Linking of SEL to violence and suicide prevention via mental-health screening, which can lead to improper diagnosis and over-treatment with potentially harmful medications;
6. Use of SEL and accompanying personality profiling in competency-based education/personalized learning to influence students’ post-secondary plans based on government- and business-determined needs, instead of the aspirations and desires of students and their families;
7. Erosion of student data privacy by collection of highly sensitive social-emotional information, in many cases without consent, and resulting in non-consensual exposure of such data to either authorized or unauthorized third parties;
8. Possibility of indoctrination and erosion of freedom of conscience via government-established SEL norms for the attitudes, values, and beliefs of freeborn American citizens.  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED593789.pdf

Excerpts -

SEL is becoming a key component of the “personalized” learning or competency-based education (CBE) craze. CBE digitally documents the attainment of various skills, including SEL skills.

This raises a multitude of questions about SEL subjectivity, measurement, data collection, use of SEL data to affect accountability for teachers and schools, and future effects on students.

An interim “brain science” report and the final report from the Commission continue to promote questionable brain science to support having public schools,
corporations, or private foundations set norms for and assess the values, attitudes, beliefs, and emotions of students from cradle to career.

This uncertainty surrounding the diagnosis and treatment of mental or emotional problems, even by highly trained physicians, suggests significant problems with having lesser-trained or even untrained personnel delve into and act upon such issues with students.

CASEL is one of many organizations working on SEL assessment. An extreme example is the September 2018 announcement by ACT, the owner of the college-entrance examination, that it’s developing a “Moral Education Standardized Assessment (MESA)”
for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as part of that country’s Moral Education program.

These technological SEL assessments raise a multitude of concerns, ranging from the privacy protections for this highly sensitive data to the propriety of government’s “nudging” individual students into its mold for an ideal citizen.

Via the 2012 gutting of regulations under the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), this data might also be disclosed to entities in other states or countries and to unlimited researchers who are interested in the emotional makeup of children and adolescents.

The bottom line is that any data, SEL or otherwise, included in an SLDS or in the custody of corporate vendors is likely to remain there potentially forever and might be disclosed to all manner of other entities with their own agendas and often without consent.

This description makes it clear that these assessments represent an expansion of student surveillance beyond the school and into the home and family life. Noteworthy also is the admission that the sensitive data gathered from this surveillance will be used to impose government-favored SEL standards and skills on families: