Teaching social skills to preschool children in a special education program.
Ferentino, S. C. (1991). Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(08B), 223-4490.
-
examining65Students, gradePK
Social Skills Training Intervention Report - Early Childhood Education for Children with Disabilities
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2013
- Randomized controlled trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Social Skills Training.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence- Revised (WPPSI-R): Comprehension subtest |
Social Skills Training vs. Unknown |
Posttest |
Preschoolers;
|
9.35 |
8.76 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Classroom Edition: Socialization domain |
Social Skills Training vs. Unknown |
Posttest |
Preschoolers;
|
50.44 |
32.58 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Interview Edition: Socialization domain |
Social Skills Training vs. Unknown |
Posttest |
Preschoolers;
|
65.76 |
62.05 |
No |
-- | |
|
Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 4-16 and 2-3, parents' ratings (CBCLP 4-16; CBCLP 2-3) |
Social Skills Training vs. Unknown |
Posttest |
preschoolers;
|
49.13 |
47.55 |
No |
-- | |
|
Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 4-16 and 2-3, teacher's ratings (CBCLT 4-16; CBCLT 2-3) |
Social Skills Training vs. Unknown |
Posttest |
Preschoolers;
|
43.75 |
45.79 |
No |
-- | |
|
Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children: Face Recognition subtest |
Social Skills Training vs. Unknown |
Posttest |
Preschoolers;
|
9.73 |
11.06 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 31%
Male: 69% -
Suburban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Northeast
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in a special education school in a suburban metropolitan area of the northeastern United States.
Study sample
The eligibility criteria for this study included (a) the ability of the child to function in a class of eight to nine children and (b) parental consent to participate. Given these eligibility criteria, 100 participants in 12 classrooms were eligible from a population of 177 preschool children in a special education school. There were two other children in the school intervention group (S) that were dropped from the study as outliers. Nearly all participants had speech and language impairments; 25% had various other primary disabilities. The 12 classrooms in the study were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (a) Four classrooms (n = 32 children) were assigned to a social skills training program to be administered in the school (S), (b) Four classrooms (n = 33 children) were assigned to a social skills training program that would be implemented in both the school and at home (S + H), and (c) Four classrooms (n = 33 children) were assigned to a waiting-list comparison group (C). For the purpose of this WWC report, the evidence of the social skills training program is identified by comparing the school-only group (S) against the waiting-list comparison group (C). Additional comparisons of the remaining groups are presented in Appendices D.2 and D.3.
Intervention Group
The classrooms receiving the social skills training program (both the S and the S + H groups) used the “My Friends and Me” curriculum. The program uses group activities and materials intended to enhance the personal identity and social development of preschool children. The following materials are included: an activity manual; hand puppets; magnets in geometric, human, and doll shapes; activity pictures of a classroom, a city, a single-family home, and a shopping center; an illustrated story book; song cards and recorded songs; an activity board and liquid-chalk pens; and 30 take-home activity sheets (for the school and at-home group). In the school-only group, children participated in 30 half-hour sessions conducted by their teacher over the course of four months. In the school and at-home group, children participated in 15 half-hour sessions conducted by their teacher and 15 additional sessions at home conducted by their parents.
Comparison Group
Children in the comparison group (C) participated in special arts and crafts projects for the 30 half-hour sessions. These children may have received incidental social skills training.
Outcome descriptions
The primary outcomes in this study were in the cognition and socio-emotional development and behavior domains. One outcome was assessed in the cognition domain: (a) the Comprehension subtest of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence–Revised (WPPSI-R). Five outcomes were assessed in the socio-emotional development and behavior domain: (a) Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Classroom Edition–Socialization domain (VABS-C); (b) Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Interview Edition, Survey Form–Socialization domain (VABS-I); (c) the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 4–16 and 2–3, teachers’ ratings (CBCLT 4–16; CBCLT 2–3); (d) the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 4–16 and 2–3, parents’ ratings (CBCLP 4–16; CBCLP 2–3); (e) the Face Recognition subtest of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC). For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendix B.8
Support for implementation
Two workshops were held to train teachers and parents (for the school and at-home group) on the “My Friends and Me” intervention.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).