Teaching social skills to children and adolescents in schools

School Psychology: Behavioral Interventions

As children often learn the majority of their prosocial behaviors from school it is important that there is an awareness of the processes of teaching and assessing these skills. It is also important to recognize that antisocial behavior in school may be an indicator of a need for prosocial skill teaching and development (Elksnin & Elksnin, 1998).

Teaching Social Skills to Young Children and Adolescents

The initial stage in teaching social skills to any child or adolescent is to assess their learning needs. This is a basic assessment of the skills which are required weighed up against the skills which are already being learnt, and those which have been mastered. Hazel et al. (1995) suggest that once the skill has been identified, a five-step process may then be used to teach new skills which have been identified as learning needs. This involves definition of the skill, describing the skill, providing a rationale for the skill, describing situations in which to use the skill, and finally practicing the skill in role-play situations.

In addition to the formal teaching of social skills, there are also a number of other factors which should be considered. The first of these is that it is possible that preschool children may provide social reinforcers within their group, which may help to shape and maintain social behaviors. It has also been shown that by changing the behaviors of one child through intervention, this may also facilitate changes in other children not involved in the intervention (Kohler & Fowler, 1985). One possible explanation for this is that offering feedback and praise to one child for their actions may act as a cue to other children to exhibit those same behaviors (Kazdin, 1981, cited in Kohler & Fowler, 1985). In addition to their taking cues from other children, students are also likely to take cues from the teacher and other adults in the school. Therefore it is also essential that adults model the skills which they require the children to learn (Elksnin & Elksnin, 1998).

Question

Completion of a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) is mandated by federal law in any case of disciplinary action. This is used to collect information which may be used for developing or revising a behavior intervention plan for the student engaging in the disruptive or destructive behavior. It is important that all those involved in the collation of data for FBAs are aware of the underpinning theoretical concepts and rationale for doing so.

Rationale for Completion of FBA

Operant learning theory was the original basis of the introduction of FBAs. Operant learning theory is grounded in functionalism, which indicates that there is more to behavior than simply a description of the behavior which occurs. This gives rise to applied behavior analysis, which through the FBA, identifies antecedent and consequent events which are associated with the disruptive act. By identifying these associated events interventions may be designed and introduced which change the undesirable behavior (Gresham et al., 2001). The rationale for completion of an FBA in the case of this pupil is therefore that there would most likely have been important events surrounding the act of vandalism which would be controllable if identified (Gresham, 1999). The FBA offers a means of documenting and assessing these events, alongside those occurring afterwards. This documentation then provides the basis for a planned intervention which may prevent future events from culminating in a similar act of vandalism.

Process of FBA Completion

There are two main elements to the FBA which would be completed for this pupil. The first of these is the identification of positive/negative reinforcement contingencies and the specific antecedent events which culminated in the property destruction. The second element is the identification of consequent events, for example reinforcement and punishment contingencies, which may affect whether the behavior occurs or does not occur (Gresham et al., 2001).

There are a number of different methods which may be used to collect the information required on these two themes. Indirect methods may be used, including functional assessment interviews (FAIs), most likely taking information on the surrounding events from relevant third parties such as parents and teachers. Although the focus is on collection of information directly related to the incident of vandalism, other background information may also assist in achieving a thorough assessment (Witt et al., 2000). In support of the information taken from interviews, a systematic review of the student's school records (SARS) may provide additional relevant information. In particular, information may be garnered on consequent events from similar previous incidents, providing information on possible positive/negative reinforcing factors (Walker et al., 1991).

Behavior rating scales may offer a method of identifying possible target behaviors for intervention, although they do not offer information on either antecedent or consequential events (Gresham et al., 2001). In this instance the individual has already been highlighted as in need of behavioral intervention however, and so they are likely to provide little useful additional information. Direct assessment is likely to be the optimal means of verifying the information gained through indirect assessment methods such as interviews and SARS. The Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence analysis is suggested by Gresham et al. (2001) to be the most simple and effective means of collecting information through direct observation. Once all of the information on these three events has been collected, it should then be possible to design interventions to prevent future recurrences. This may be achieved by preventing the antecedent events or changing the consequent events to a more effective punishment, or removing positive/negative reinforcements.

Hypotheses and Interventions

One possible hypothesis is that in this instance there was an event which occurred directly prior to the vandalism which sparked the destructive event. If this were the case then intervention strategies should focus on prevention of the prior event. For example if the child had been moved due to other disruptive behavior and this were believed to have triggered the incident, other strategies for dealing with disruptive behavior could be developed. It could simply be that moving the child to a different area may make the potential effects of attempted property damage ineffective, for example moving them into a corridor away from objects which could be easily destroyed.

Another hypothesis is that there were numerous events which occurred not directly prior to the destructive incident. Interventions which may be required in this instance may be more long-term, dependent on the events identified in the FBA. In contrast, it may be that the consequences of the behavior also reinforced the destruction. For example attention from classmates may be the desired effect of the destruction. In this case, intervention should seek to change the consequences, possibly by moving the student away from classmates, or removing the damaged property. Identifying whether previous punishments have reinforced the behavior would also be important to design an appropriate punishment strategy.

Question

Fostering Positive Relationships with Students

Developing a close relationship with children is associated with improving the positive outcomes of that relationship (Birch & Ladd, 1997). This indicates that as a school psychologist every effort should be made to develop a close relationship with each and every student. While it is acknowledged that this may be impossible, particularly in large schools, the protective impact may be achieved through ensuring that each child has such a relationship with at least one member of staff. The school psychologist should therefore develop a close relationship with as many students as possible, but focus on those which are identified as not having positive relationships with other members of staff. There are certain characteristics which are likely to be associated with a positive relationship with students. For example positive relationships are likely to be those which are characterized by warmth, trust and low degrees of conflict (Baker et al., 2008). Therefore to develop a positive relationship with students the school psychologist should ensure that they maintain these characteristics.

Advocating for Other Staff part of advocating other staff within the school to foster positive relationships with students may be advising them in activities which may build those relationships. Bay-Hinitz et al. (1994) found that playing cooperative games fostered better relationships between peers than when engaging in competitive games. They also discussed the fact that increased teacher attention was given to students playing competitive games, and suggested this may be due to the increased conflicts which they created. By advising teachers on the use of cooperative games as opposed to competitive games this may encourage more positive relationships as they may be of a more supportive nature as opposed to the disciplinary nature they may take when supervising competitive games. This is only one example, and it is possible that by advising on other activities it may also be possible to increase positive interactions between teachers and students. In addition to advising other staff, the school psychologist may also advocate for positive relationships by offering workshops to offer guidance on the importance of positive relationships and methods for their development.

School-wide Mental Health Support

The school system plays an important role in ensuring that all children and adults receive mental health support, as many would otherwise not access appropriate services. One of the main reasons why the school mental health support system is so important is that it may offer a less formal means of accessing help, reducing the stigma with which it is associated (Stephan et al., 2008). The fostering of positive relationships with students is instrumental in this, as students are more likely to consult in an adult with which they have already fostered a positive relationship. One particularly crucial element of those relationships is likely to be trust, as children are more likely to seek advice, guidance and support from an adult with whom they have built a trusting relationship (Watson & Ecken, 2003). Once a child has sought support from that one particular adult with whom they have developed this positive relationship it is then important that there is a hierarchical system in place for that adult to seek further assistance. This ensures that the trust of the student is not endangered, while ensuring that mental health services have access to the student and are aware of their needs.

Question

Prompting a Threat Assessment student threat assessment may be completed by a school whenever there is a perceived risk of violence to any other member of the school community, whether that be students, teachers, parents or other members of staff. There are a number of warning signs which were included in a federal government guide which may indicate a student who could pose a potential threat. These signs included a history of discipline problems, use of drugs and alcohol and excessive feelings of rejection (Dwyer et al., 1998). In another booklet produced by the American Psychological Association (APA) signs such as increased risk-taking, increased alcohol or drug use, significant vandalism, and loss of temper on a daily basis were listed as immediate warning signs (Cornell et al., 2004). Therefore any of these behaviors may prompt a threat assessment to be conducted. At the present time there is little evidence as to whether there is any difference in the probability of transient or substantive threats being carried out. At the present time therefore, even threats which are communicated as jokes, sarcasm or angry rhetoric may prompt the completion of a threat assessment.

Performing a Threat Assessment

FBI guidelines suggested that a multidisciplinary team be constructed by a school to conduct threat assessments. They advised that these assessments take into account four factors: a) the personality and behavior of the student being assessed; b) the family situation of the student; c) the culture and climate of the school and d) the social dynamics of the community (Cornell et al., 2004). In particular, guidelines issued by the Secret Service indicate that there are five different elements of information which the threat assessment inquiry should collect (Fein et al., 2002). The first of these is the facts which identified the student as a threat initially. In this instance that would the facts surrounding the incident in which the threat of violence was made. Secondly, information about the student should be collected, including identifying information, background both in terms of school behavior and their past mental health, and also information on their current life situation. In particular the report highlights that information may be particularly valuable if taken from an adult with whom the student has developed a positive and trusting relationship.

The third element of information which should be collected is that relating specifically to violent or 'attack-related behaviors'. This would include information on specific incidents which have occurred previously in which any other person has been targeted, self-injury has been planned or implemented, or weapon-seeking behaviors. Information on motives for an attack should also be sought. For example in this case there should be an inquiry into whether there may be a reason for the student to wish to cause harm to the particular teacher in question. The final element of information is that of target selection, which has already been made clear in this instance.

The information which is collected is likely to come from numerous sources, including school records, interviews with staff and students or observers, interviews with the student's family and with the student themselves. If it is concluded in the threat assessment that there is insufficient information to reach a conclusion or that the student is an imminent risk of attack, then the matter must be forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency (Fein et al. 2002).