Social Skills Interventions for Individuals with Learning Disabilities

Social skill deficits have become a defining characteristic of students with specific learning disability (SLD). Attempts have been made to enhance social functioning through structured training approaches. The effectiveness of these efforts was evaluated in a quantitative research synthesis (meta-analysis), which revealed a “small” effect with very few differences among teachers, peers, or students with SLD themselves who judged the efficacy of training. The relatively modest effects are discussed in relation to a number of theoretical psychometric and design issues that might account for the limited treatment outcomes. KENNETH A. KAVALE, Ph.D., is professor, Regent University. MARK P. MOSTERT, Ph.D., is professor, Regent University. Volume 27, Winter 2004 31 During the 1970s, increased attention was directed at the social-emotional side of “specific learning disability” (SLD). It soon became evident that students with SLD were characterized by social skill deficits surrounding the ways individuals (a) view themselves, (b) are viewed by others as socially competent, (c) are viewed as effective in social interactions, and (d) behave in social situations (Bryan, 1991). Social skill deficits assume importance because of their potential to adversely affect, not only the social domain but also the achievement domain (LaGreca & Stone, 1990). Thus, the complex interactions may produce significant difficulties (Gresham & Elliot, 1989) that persist beyond the elementary and secondary school years (Gerber & Reiff, 1994). Social Skill Deficits and SLD Several comprehensive reviews have described the social functioning of students with SLD (e.g., LaGreca & Vaughn, 1992; Pearl, 1992; Swanson & Malone, 1992). In concluding their review, Hazel and Schumaker (1988) suggested that, “social problems are a reality for a significant number of LD youths” (p. 337). The potential problems cover a wide spectrum and may include difficulties in social competence (Gresham, 1988); social cognition (Maheady & Sainato, 1986); social behavior (Thompson & Kronenberger, 1990); social relationships (Pearl, Donahue, & Bryan, 1986); peer status (Wiener, 1987); self-concept (Chapman, 1988); interpersonal skills (LaGreca, 1987); social adjustment (Bruck, 1986); classroom behavior (Bender & Smith, 1990); communicative competence (Donahue, Pearl, & Bryan, 1983); motivation (Licht & Kistner, 1986); anxiety (Margalit & Zak, 1984); and locus of control (Bryan & Pearl, 1979). Kavale and Forness (1995) found this array of social skill deficits to be a prominent feature of SLD, with about 75% of students with SLD manifesting deficits in the social skill area that differentiate them from their non-SLD counterparts. The levels of differentiation were consistent across evaluators (teachers, peers, and students with SLD themselves) and across individual social skill deficit. However, while social skill deficits appear to be significant correlates of LD, difficulties remain in specifying the nature of the relationship between social skills and SLD because of limited insight into how cognition, language, memory, and perception interact to influence social ability. Fortunately, the investigation of social skill deficits as primary and secondary influences on school performance continues with enhanced understanding about the role of social skill deficits in the SLD construct (e.g., Bryan, 1997; Sridhar & Vaughn, 2001; Vaughn, LaGreca, & Kuttler, 1999). The increased recognition of social skill deficits in describing SLD led the Interagency Committee on Learning Disabilities (see Kavanagh & Truss, 1988) to include social skill deficits as a primary form of SLD: “Learning disabilities is a generic term that refers to a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning, or mathematical abilities, or of social skills” (p. 550). Although the merits of including social skill deficits in the definition of SLD are open to question (see Forness & Kavale, 1991), social skill deficits have become a primary target for remediation. Consequently, social skills training has become a major intervention activity for students with SLD. Social Skills Training The rationale for social skills training is predicated on its importance for academic and vocational success as well as long-term adjustment (Vaughn, 1985). Social skill deficits may occur either because a skill has not been learned and thus cannot be performed, or because a competing deficit (e.g., anxiety) inhibits the acquisition or performance of a particular social skill. To promote more effective social functioning, a number of structured social skill training programs have been developed. To assess the validity of these programs, Schumaker, Pederson, Hazel, and Meyen (1983) advocated asking the following questions: (a) Does the program promote social competence? (b) Does the program accommodate the learning characteristics of students with SLD? (c) Does the program target the social skill deficits of students with SLD? (d) Does the program teach skills in a situational context? and (e) Does the program incorporate instructional methodologies found to be effective for students with SLD? Further, to help select appropriate social skills training programs, Sugai and Fuller (1991) developed a decision model that uses a series of questions to evaluate background, assessment, and instructional features. Examples of social skill training programs are listed in Table 1. Social skill training programs typically include a comprehensive assortment of skills that cover areas such as social problem solving, friendship, conversation, planning, and dealing with feelings. Table 2 lists Learning Disability Quarterly 32 Table 1 Examples of Social Skills Programs ASSET: A Social Skills Program for Adolescents with Learning Disabilities DUSO (Developing Understanding of Self and Others) Learning to Get Along PALS: Problem-Solving and Affective Learning Strategies The SCORE Skills: Social Skills of Cooperative Groups Skillstreaming the Adolescent: A Structured Learning Approach to Teaching Prosocial Skills Skillstreaming the Elementary School Child: A Guide for Teaching Prosocial Skills Social Skills Instruction for Daily Living TAD (Toward Affective Development) Walker Social Skills Curriculum: The ACCEPTS Program examples of specific skills that may be taught. The actual training procedures may include different forms and combinations of the following: (a) direct instruction, (b) coaching, (c) modeling, (d) rehearsal, (e) shaping, (f) prompting, and (g) reinforcement (e.g., Cartledge & Millburn, 1986; Combs & Slaby, 1978; Gresham, 1981). In all cases, the goal is to help develop effective social response patterns. For example, McIntosh, Vaughn, and Bennerson (1995) developed a strategy to assist students with SLD in social problem solving based on the acronym FAST. In potentially hostile social situations, the following steps are applied: F – Freeze and think about the problem; A – Alternatives to resolve the problem; S – Solution (i.e., choose the alternative that will best resolves the problem); and T – Try it. In other programs, skills are taught individually using a direct instruction approach. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Social Skills Training Remediating academic deficits remains the primary focus for students with SLD, but the recognition of social skill deficits has led to the increased inclusion of social skills training as an adjunct intervention. As with any intervention, the effectiveness of social skills training must to be evaluated: Is it possible to teach students with SLD to cope effectively and adaptively with the larger social environment? A number of comprehensive reviews (e.g., McIntosh, Vaughn, & Zaragoza, 1991; Schneider & Byrne, 1985; Vaughn, 1991) have investigated the efficacy of social skills training, but the findings have been mixed and led to only tentative conclusions. Consequently, important questions remain unanswered: Is social skills training effective? If a student with SLD manifests social skill deficits, can the deficits be remediated? If there are positive effects associated with social skills training, what are their magnitudes? Are particular social skills deficits more amenable to treatment than others? How do different observers view the effectiveness of social skills training? Meta-Analysis of Social Skills Training Kavale and Forness (1995) (see also Forness & Kavale, 1996) used meta-analysis to gain greater insight into the efficacy of social skills training for students with SLD. Meta-analysis produces a quantitative research synthesis that offers the possibility of a more precise determination of intervention effectiveness (Lipsey & Wilson, 1993). The methods of meta-analysis are well known (e.g., Glass, McGaw, & Smith, 1981), and a number of advances have served to enhance the objectivity and verifiability of the technique (e.g., Cooper & Hedges, 1994; Hedges & Olkin, 1985; Mostert, 1996). The initial step in meta-analysis is to collect a representative and inclusive set of research studies investigating the efficacy of social skills training. A sampling framework was constructed that included (a) online databases using the descriptors SLD and social skills training, (b) reference lists from review articles, (c) bibVolume 27, Winter 2004 33 Table 2 Examples of Social Skills Starting a conversation Working cooperatively Asking a question Dealing with frustration Introducing yourself Controlling anger Asking for help Using self-control Learning how to listen Keeping out of fights Apologizing Feeling sad Expressing your feelings Responding to aggression Negotiation Responding to failure Goal setting Decision-making