Exploring Solutions to Address Students' Social Competencies to Facilitate School Success: A Usability and Feasibility Study
Common, Eric Alan; Buckman, Mark Matthew; Lane, Kathleen Lynne; Leko, Melinda; Royer, David James; Oakes, Wendy Peia; Allen, Grant Edmund (2019). Education and Treatment of Children, v42 n4 p489-513. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1229803
-
examining21Students, grades2-3
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2022
- Single Study Review (findings for Positive Action Counselor Kit (PACK))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) Rating Scales Social Skills: teacher-reported |
Positive Action Counselor Kit (PACK) vs. Social Skills Improvement System—Intervention Guide (SSiS-IG) |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
92.00 |
89.20 |
No |
-- | |
|
Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS) Rating Scales Problem Behavior: teacher-reported |
Positive Action Counselor Kit (PACK) vs. Social Skills Improvement System—Intervention Guide (SSiS-IG) |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
111.74 |
115.18 |
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: 25%
Male: 75% -
Urban
-
- 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
Midwest
-
Race Asian 8% Black 4% Native American 4% Two or more races 13% White 71% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 13% Not Hispanic or Latino 88% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at four public elementary schools in a small city in the midwestern United States. The intervention was implemented by second and third grade teachers and by school counselors outside of class.
Study sample
The researchers randomly assigned 12 students to the intervention group and 12 students to the comparison group. Ten of the students were in second grade and 14 were in third grade. The students were at-risk for externalizing or internalizing behaviors. Six of the students were receiving special education services before the study began and three more were referred during the study. Seventy-five percent of the students were male. Seventy-one percent were White, 8% were Asian or Pacific Islander, 4% were Black, 4% were Native American, and 13% percent were of mixed race. Thirteen percent were Hispanic or Latino.
Intervention Group
As a supplement to the schoolwide Positive Action program, school counselors delivered Positive Action Counselor’s Kit (PACK) to small groups of students outside of classroom instruction twice a week in 25- to 30-minute sessions. The PACK curriculum consists of seven units totaling 42 lessons intended to support students’ socio-emotional development for students at high-risk for externalizing or internalizing behaviors. The units focus on teaching students how to manage their emotions and behavior. Lessons follow three steps. The first step presents a story related to a featured social skill. The second step uses activities and discussions related to the story and the third step includes a summary of the lesson to encourage students to connect the story and lesson with their own actions. Counselors taught between 19 and 22 sessions of the intervention. Counselors also taught two review sessions, one at the midpoint of the intervention and another towards the end. Classroom teachers implemented another part of the intervention that was integrated with PACK, called direct behavior ratings (DBR). Teachers rated student behavior during language arts instruction and used that information to inform student behavior interventions. DBR was used in both the intervention and comparison group.
Comparison Group
In addition to receiving the Positive Action program, the comparison group received the Social Skills Improvement System (SSiS) implemented using the SSiS Intervention Guide. The intent of SSiS was similar to PACK and was implemented by school counselors outside of class time. SSiS consists of 20 lessons covering seven domains, each representing a general social skill area and lessons within a domain cover specific skills (for example, speaking in an appropriate tone of voice). Lessons are scripted and use a six-part structure: tell, show, do, practice, monitor progress, and generalize. Supporting materials for the lessons include skills checklists and videos. Counselors taught between 17 and 21 sessions of the intervention. As in the intervention condition, the lessons were delivered during two 25- to 30-minute sessions each week, with two review sessions. Comparison students received the same DBR intervention during language arts instruction as intervention group students.
Support for implementation
The intervention was implemented by four school counselors, one at each school, who averaged 14.5 years of education experience. The researchers trained school counselors in a 90-minute training session to implement both curricula. Training included general procedures for socio-emotional skills instruction as well as specific procedures for each curriculum using a PowerPoint and curriculum manuals. Research assistants supported counselors’ communication with classroom teachers throughout the 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).