Many emotion regulation assessments have been developed for research purposes, but few are frequently used in schools despite the rapid growth of social and emotional learning programs with an explicit focus on emotion regulation in schools. This systematic review provides an overview of emotion regulation assessments that have been utilized with children and adolescents of grades 1–12 or ages 6–18 in school-based research or practice within the USA over the past two decades. Qualitative analyses on the operational definition, administration and feedback, sampling characteristics, and psychometric evidence of the assessments were carried out to illuminate factors that may bridge the gap between researchers in assessment development and educators in assessment use. Emotion regulation assessments were identified via searches in educational research, psychological assessment, and social–emotional learning databases. Measure development and validation studies were then sought using academic search engines. A total of 25 assessments and 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. Results revealed divergent conceptualizations of emotion regulation, trade-offs between methodological rigor and practicality, limited transformation of raw data into actionable information, under-sampling of marginalized or disadvantaged groups, and insufficient psychometric evidence across assessments. More work is needed to enhance the scientific rigor (e.g., evidence-based recommendations and limitations for assessment use), practical relevance (e.g., sustainable use and perceived utility for students and educators), and equitable reach (e.g., accessibility and fairness for diverse student populations) of emotion regulation assessments for educational purposes.

许多情绪调节评估已被开发用于研究目的，但很少有学校经常使用，尽管社交和情绪学习项目快速发展，明确关注学校的情绪调节。本系统综述概述了过去二十年来美国在学校研究或实践中对 1-12 年级或 6-18 岁儿童和青少年进行的情绪调节评估。对评估的操作定义、管理和反馈、抽样特征和心理测量证据进行了定性分析，以阐明可能弥合评估开发研究人员与评估使用教育工作者之间差距的因素。情绪调节评估是通过教育研究中的搜索确定的，心理评估和社会情感学习数据库。然后使用学术搜索引擎寻求测量开发和验证研究。共有 25 项评估和 55 项研究符合纳入标准。结果揭示了情绪调节的不同概念、方法严谨性和实用性之间的权衡、原始数据转化为可操作信息的有限、边缘化或弱势群体的抽样不足以及评估中的心理测量证据不足。需要做更多的工作来提高科学严谨性（例如，基于证据的建议和评估使用的限制）、实际相关性（例如，可持续使用和对学生和教育工作者的感知效用）和公平覆盖范围（例如，