University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Evaluation of a therapeutic preschool program's goals of behavioral and social skill development

(USC Thesis Other)

Evaluation of a therapeutic preschool program's goals of behavioral and social skill development

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content EVALUATION OF A THERAPEUTIC PRESCHOOL PROGRAM'S GOALS OF BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SKILL DEVELOPMENT by Douglas Eli Harrington A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE IN EDUCATION February 1977 Copyright Douglas Eli Harrington 1977 This thesis, written under the direction of the Chairman of the candidtr.te' s Guidan ce Committee and approved by all members of the Committee, has been presented to a;zd accepted by the F acuity of the School of Education of The University of Southern Califo1·nia in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Education. Dean Guidance Committee . . C. ... ········· ·············· ··· ········ Chairman ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to thank the Foundation of Education and Behavioral Therapy, Huntington Beach, California, for allowing me to undertake this evaluation of their program. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............ . V Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ...... . 1 II. III. IV. Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . 3 The Purpose of the Study. . ....... 3 Summary of the Procedures . . . . .... 4 Definition of Terms ........... 5 Hypo the s es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Outline of the Remainder of the Study .. · 6 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . 8 Description of Need ............. 10 Important Considerations ........... 11 Therapeutic Ideologies ............ 13 Review of Other Programs . . ..... 18 Summary . . . . . . . . .... 21 THE STUDY The Pro gr am . . . . . . Staffing. . . . . . . .. Daily Schedule ..... . Implementation of Schedule ..... The Children ...... . Assessment Scales ........ . Burks' Behavior Rating Scale (Preschool and Kindergarten) California Preschool Social Competency Scale ..... . Preschool Attainment Record .. . Method of Data Collection .. . RESULTS . . . 22 . . . . . 2 2 . . . . 24 . . . . . 2 6 . . . . . 2 8 . . . 2 9 . . . . . 3 2 . . . . . 32 . . . . . 3 5 . . . . . 37 . . . . . 39 . . . . 42 Statements of the Expected Results ...... 42 Description of Major Findings ........ 43 Analysis of Contributing Variables ...... 45 Overall Implications ....... . ..... 50 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .... 51 iiij Chapter Conclusions ... Recommendations . LIST OF REFERENCES APPENDICES . . . . . 53 53 54 59 APPENDIX A, Preschool Attainment Record ....... 60 APPENDIX B, Burks' Behavior Rating Scales . . .. 67 APPENDIX C, California Preschool Social Competency Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 iv L 1. 2. 3. 4. LIST OF TABLES Community Referral Sources of Children in Pro gr am . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change in Performance on the Measurement Scales Between Pre and Post Treatment ... . Sample Differences for Each Variable .. . Influence of Variables Upon Improvement ... . 31 44 46 47 V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION You know also that the beginning is the most important 1 part of any work, especially in the case of a young and tender thing; for that is the time at which the character is being formed and the desired impression is more readily taken. (Plato, p. 72) The current trend in education is a focus of importance on preschool experiences and their effect upon a child's future (Frost, 1968; Gordon, 1972). These expe riences provide a foundation for a child to increase his learning potential and his growth and development as a mature, independent, self-actualizing individual. During the child's earliest years he will experience the most rapid physical and mental growth. His early experiences are the most susceptible and responsive to environmental !influences which may positively or negatively influence his development. The negative influences of an impoverished home environment significantly affect the child's developmental process and can lead to certain learning difficulties, emotional disorders, and behavioral problems. For example, I with the absence of a primary wage earner the relaxed and I !secure atmosphere necessary for diminished greatly. The family l healthy development is itself has so many ___ l unfulfilled needs of its own, the child is often overlooked. It then becomes necessary for intervention on the child's and the family's behalf. There is an obvious need for early child care pro- lgrams which allow socially disadvantaged families to break the existing negative social cycle, and prevent this cycle from repeating itself. This need could be accomplished by allowing the children of these families an opportunity for a successful educational experience. In addition, the family as a whole could benefit from being involved in the program through parent education to increase their skills in child management. Also, while their children are being provided for during the day in an enriched environment, the parents will have an opportunity to take steps toward meet ing their own needs through employment or further education. A sense of independence and self-worth can be created in an otherwise s tagnant and negative family environment. There is also a need to provide such programs for !children and their families . who, for a variety of reasons, have emotional and behavioral problems. In this way a primary early prevention program of mental illness is developed. By providing such an early prevention program, one may be lowering the rate of new cases of mental dis- 1 order in a population over a certain period by counteracting !harmful forces before they have a chance to firmly establish I !themselves. A school program can provide early prevention 2 because of the connection between school adjustment and subsequent emotional problems (Wagenfeld, 1972; Becker et. al., 1974). Statement of the Problem The need ex~sts in the educational and psychologi cal fields to provide early childhood developmental pro grams for children from impoverished backgrounds who have behavioral/emotional disorders. This type of program serves as an enrichment opportunity for children who would be having certain intellectual and emotional needs neglected within their own environments and as an early intervention device to thwart possible deleterious psycho logical problems. The problem is that the design of such a program has to be all inclusive with a multi-discipline approach. The educational and psychological fields have to combine their efforts so that the overall needs of the children involved can be met. To assess the needs of the children and to determine whether these needs are being met by the program, an ongoing comprehensive evaluation has to be incorporated into the program. The Purpose of the Study I The purpose of this study was to evaluate a pre school therapeutic developmental program for behaviorally disturbed and economically disadvantaged children in its goals of promoting improvement in specific social and l 3 behavioral deficit areas. Measurement scales tapping these developmental areas were administered at pre enrollment to the program. To assess growth of develop ment, these measurement devices were later re-administered. In addition to generally evaluating the program, this study also analyzed certain variables within the sample to deter mine which were most significant in promoting improvement in the deficit areas. Summary of the Procedures Several steps were involved in the procedure of the study. First, measurement devices were selected for the purpose of evaluation. A description of the three measurement devices selected can be found in Chapter III along with the rationale for their selection. In addition, a copy of eaGh device is located in the Appendix section. Secondly, all children were administered a pre-treatment battery soon after admittance into the therapeutic pre school program. After the program had been in operation approximately nine months, a post-treatment battery was administered for the purpose of evaluation. Next, a detailed analysis of the change in performance made by each of the children as measured by the difference in pre and posttest administrations was completed. Finally, a further analysis of the data was attempted to see if any identified variables had significant influence upon the 4 children's change in performance. Statistical analysis was used to help interpret the findings. Definition of Terms Academic Readiness-to have the necessary academic skills for entrance into public school kindergarten. Affective Development-the development of feelings, values, and perceptions of the child. Behavior Modification-an operational system based upon rewards that increase certain behaviors and punish ments which decrease other behaviors. Cognitive Development-the intellectual development of the child. Ecological Perspective-views one's behavior as an antecedent to circumstances within one's environment. Economically Disadvantaged-children who come from families at or near the poverty level. Educational Therapist-an instructor within a pro gram utilizing educational therapy. Educational Therapy-using the educational process as a therapeutic device in helping handicapped children. Emotionally Disturbed-children exhibiting problems by being overly withdrawn or overly active within their environment. Neurophysiological Readiness-to have the fine motor and gross motor skills developed for entrance into L 7 !public school kindergarten. Primary Prevention-where mental illness is combated within the community at the point of origin. Psychoanalytic Orientation-the traditional theory regarding psychological development based upon Freudian concepts. Social Readiness-to be prepared within the social skill realm for public school kindergarten. Hypotheses Two hypotheses are presented as part of the evalua tion. They are presented as follows: I . Hypothesis 1 There arc substantial gains made in behavioral and social development by the children involved in the program as measured by the differences between the pre-admission evaluation and the re-administration of the measurement devices. !Hypothesis 2 By analyzing important sample variables, certain identified variables are significant contributors towards improvement on the measurement devices. ~ Outline of the Remainder of the Study In Chapter II is presented the relevant literature on the topic of therapeutic preschool intervention. A 6 description of the need, varying ideologies of interven tion, and sample programs are reviewed. The experimental design is presented in Chapter 1 III. There is a complete description of the therapeutic preschool program and a description of the experimental population. In addition, the measurement devices used and , the method of collecting data are discussed. In Chapter IV of the study is the presentation of the data and the results. Included is a description of the findings relating to the hypotheses and overall implications. Finally, in Chapter V are found the summary, conclusions, and recommendations of the study. 7 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE More and more emphasis and interest within the fields of education and psychology are being placed upon the idea of preschool programs providing diagnostic and therapeutic services to children with educational and emotional deficits. It is becoming increasingly more apparent that early identification and remediation of learning and emotional problems helps to decrease the incidence and degree of such problems in the future. Wagenfeld (1972) talks about the concept of "primary pre vention" from a sociological perspective. He stresses the need for an emphasis within connnunity mental health pro grams to be placed upon early prevention counteracting harmful forces before they have had a chance to produce mental illness. This early prevention can lower the rate of new cases of mental disorder in a population over a certain time period. Becker, Wylan, and Mccourt (1974) advance the concept of "primary prevention" one step further. They describe how a school can provide early 1 intervention because of ·the connection between school adjustment and subsequent emotional problems. "Early l 8 failures (within school] can lower a child's self-esteem, foster a negative and sometimes defiant attitude, and build a deep sense of hopelessness." (Becker et. al., p. 27) They suggest that the school, through early childhood education programs, might be able to prevent both school failure and emotional disorder if early identification of troubled children could be established and remedial, therapeutic experiences could be offered. Bentovim (1973) and Fenichel, Coopchik, and Walker (1974) also stress the need for some type of resource to become available for disturbed young children. "There is very little provision for the preschool disturbed child. He usually has to make do with a play group or nursery group that is prepared to try and contain him. Such an approach is felt to be inadequate." (Bentovim, p. 31) "There is a great need to explore and evaluate the feasi bility of training new types of community personnel to help meet the critical problem of emotionally disturbed young children." (Fenichel et. al., p. 549) This need for therapeutic early childhood education programs was most recently stated in the July/August, 1976, issue of the newsletter for the California Association for Neurologically Handicapped Children. In the newsletter there is a description of how HEW's Bureau of Education for the Handicapped is providing 13.3 million dollars for the early education of handicapped children in order to: L 9 (1) facilitate intellectual, emotional, physical, mental, social, and language development; (2) encourage participa tion of parents in the development and operation of any such program; and (3) acquaint the connnunity to be served by the program with the problems and potentialities of such children. Edwin W. Martin, Acting Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, states: Recent court decisions and resulting laws show an awareness among the states of the fact that a handicapped child has a 'right' to education, and states are beginning to realize the importance of finding and working with handicapped children as early as possible. (CANHC Gram, p. 1) Description of Need Wohlford (1974) describes exactly how large this need for attention directed towards disturbed young children really is. He indicates that the Joint Connnission on the Mental Health of Children estimates that 10 percent of all children have some discernable emotional problem requiring attention, including 3 percent who are psychotic or severely disturbed. An additional 3 to 6 percent of all children are seriously retarded. The total number of children who have primarily behavioral or behavior-related handicaps include an even higher percentage. This last category would include children with speech problems, perceptual-sensory impairments, and behavioral problems. Even though it is difficult to determine possible overlap of diagnostic categories, it appears that 10 to 20 percent L 10 of children in the general population require attention for emotional disturbance, retardation, speech disorders, or !other behavioral disorders. Stein et. al (1975) report that in Westchester County, New York, of an estimated 64,000 children between the ages of two and five, only forty-six were receiving any kind of psychological treatment. Stein estimated the degree of children in need of mental health services within the population to be from 2 to 12 percent. AU. S. Senate Committee on Education (Wohlford, 1974) estimates that when working with poverty-related factors such as malnutrition, poor medical care, poor housing, disrupted family life, there is an even higher incidence of disorders among children. The Senate Committee estimates that the prevalence of handicaps in children among the general population to be 10 percent as compared with 15 percent or higher for disadvantaged popu lations of children. Important Considerations Efforts are being increased to make available therapeutic programs, but still only a very limited amount of treatment is available. Educational therapy can be particularly useful for children who are emotionally and maternally deprived, who come from disadvantaged families, 1 and children who have behavioral adjustment problems. A l -~ __ _ 11 concentration must be made on meeting the emotional needs of these children to provide them some type of success in their young lives and help develop more positive feelings of self-esteem and self-worth. If therapeutic preschool programs need to become available, the problem exists that there are very few institutions providing systematic training in educational therapy for preschool personnel. Stein and Ronald (1974) describe one such program, a two year intensive training program at the Center for Preventive Psychiatry in White Plains, New York. Here educational therapists are specially trained under psychological supervision to work effectively with disturbed and handicapped children by making appropriate, specific, goal-oriented demands upon the children commensurate with the child's developmental abilities. The therapists also serve as communicators, !listeners, and encouragers of catharsis by word or play for the children. Weber (1973) emphasizes that the function of early childhood education is not only to promote cognitive development of the child, but promotion of affective development as well. By promoting cognitive and affective growth, early childhood educators can embrace the totality of human potentialities. Reineke et. al. (1973) talk about the important aspects of a day care program wanting to relate to the mental needs of the children involved. l 12 I I Such a program should promote development, foster explora tion, and provide enrichment for all areas of a child's functioning. In addition, it is essential to interrelate the family and day care services with extensive communica- tion channels. Emphasis within such a program should be placed upon meeting the child's needs, not on being a profitable financial venture. There are important considerations to be made by the teacher or therapist wanting to work with problem ctildren. Perry (1970), in her essay on helping children with emotional problems, writes about the special qualities needed in such a person. No one can address the problem of working with children with emotional problems without also addressing one's own feelings of frustration and defeat. The special child needs a firm adult who is not threatened by the child's anger, who finds a way of being firm without abandoning, rejecting, or shaming the child. Such a person must not be shocked, frightened, or over whelmed by sudden emotional reactions. One must be able to provide the gift of unconditional sharing and caring. Therapeutic Ideologies When talking about therapeutic programs for children, the question arises as to what kind of therapy is most effective in helping problem children. After review- ing the literature there are four basic types of ideologica] 13 approaches in dealing with preschool children with emotional problems. The four types are the psychoanalytic model, behavior modification, the humanistic approach, and the ecological perspective. Wolffheim (1972) describes how to work with emotionally disturbed nursery school children with a psychoanalytic orientation. The emphasis of the program is on play and peer interaction. Play is seen as a natural medium for self-expression for the child, and through their play children are able to work through such problems as accumulated feelings of tension, frustration, insecurity, and aggression. The function of the teacher or therapist is to facilitate this working through process and to interpret behavior and understand the children from a psychoanalytic orientation. The experience seems to be a !larger manifestation of an individual play therapy session, except that it is done in the confines of a nursery school with groups of children. Behavior modification and operant conditioning techniques are probably the most widely used form of treatment with problem preschoolers (Gaete, 1976; Ogburn, 1974; Hodges, 1972). Behavior modification is an opera tional system based upon rewards that increase certain behaviors and punishments which decrease other behaviors. When done professionally, behavior modification is a systematic, consistent, and precise technique with the L 14 J emphasis placed upon rewards to increase appropriate behaviors rather than punishment. The Edna A. Hill Child Development Laboratory at the University of Kansas is one such early childhood program based upon behavior modifica tion techniques (Goetz, 1976). Hodges (1972) explains how external reinforcement aids the development of pre-learning skills, the emergence of creativity, child analysis, and complex learning. It also helps improve the affective climate and guides teacher behavior to be consistent and regular. Moskovitz (1973), however, criticizes behavior modification programs because they promote failure for children in programs designed to foster success. She sees four basic problems: (1) behavior modification restricts the interest range of the child by reinforcing only certain behavior patterns; (2) the essence of reinforcement is that there is a built-in margin of failure; (3) emphasis is placed upon content, rote memorization rather than tapping higher integrative processes of the child; and (4) the programs are authority centered, not allowing the child to find his own answers. The humanistic program is designed to provide self-seeking, explorative, success orienteq tasks for the child in order to help build the child's self-concept. Survant (1972) explains how the teacher can build a child's self-concept most effectively. Provide the child tasks that are interesting and challenging but still within his l ~~- 1s ability level. Verbal praise and encouragement by the teacher are very important. The teacher must positively accept what the child does and solicit and use suggestions from the child. The emphasis is on helping the child feel important. In addition, one must allow the child to make choices and make decisions on his own. Most importantly, listen attentively to the child and be patient. All of these humanistic ways of approaching children helps build self-image and feelings of significance. One author explains: The resultant behavior of successful image building shows up in the child's ever increasing awareness of his own autonomy. He shows more self-direction in his behavior. He has a clearer notion of his goals and how to achieve them. (Hawkes, 1968, p. 335) The ecological perspective is an alternative to the three previously mentioned approaches. It attempts to view the troubled child as a reactive individual to a given set of circumstances within his environment. By understanding and problem solving difficulties within the child's environment, it is anticipated that the resultant behaviors can be remediated. The disturbance the child exhibits is seen as a "dynamic functioning whole, a system of activities occurring between people and environments which are component parts of a system, rather than an attribute of an individual." (Lewis and Jacobson, 1973) The importance of such a perspective is placed upon what is motivating the child to behave in the manner that he L 16 I does. By influencing the child's motivational system, one can affect his behavioral repertoire. Lewis (1974) describes a highly successful project working with ele mentary age children who had serious learning and behavior problems using ecological analysis. The children involved in the project made significant improvement in behavioral deficit areas. Lewis and Jacobson (1973) give a warning about the ideological conflicts which may arise while treating and conducting research with special children. They explain how conflicting theoretical viewpoints create "islandism" which results in fighting between professionals that is unwarranted. This "islandism" leads to unproductive efforts for children. The needs of the child have to be of utmost importance rather than the needs of a program or of promoting one particular theoretical frame of refer ence. Killian Katz (1975), Director of the ERIC Clearing house on Early Childhood Education, also addresses himself , to the issue of ideological differences within professional literature. He says each camp avoids examination of counterevidence by rejecting the other's "data" as inadmissable. This creates the problem of accountability. What is needed is objective research diligently applied towards realistic evaluation of early childhood programs for qualified coilIDlunication of ideas between professionals with differing ideologies. L_ 17 Review of Other Programs Lehrman (1969) attempted to provide a specialized guidance class for eight-year-old children with severe emotional problems. The children had disorders ranging from childhood schizophrenia to character disorders. The program was a small individualized program oriented towards the success of the child. Although somewhat effective in helping the children, the author describes many problems, frustrations, and pitfalls within the program involving both the staff and children. A kindergarten-nursery school program for severely disturbed children (Bloch, 1970), including psychotic, autistic, and the neurologically impaired, was staffed by a psychiatric social worker and seven teachers. The pro gram attempted to utilize community volunteers to help supplement the program and involved the parents of the children in parent groups once a month. Individual treat ment plans designed to develop self-care of each child were utilized. The program was highly successful. A cooperative venture between a connnunity child guidance clinic and the public school was initiated in 1 Hartford, Connecticut, to help serve emotionally disturbed young children from the innercity (Leve, 1971). The pro gram was successful for many of the children who were referred primarily for acting-out behavior problems. The 18 program approaches the children from three directions: (1) individual therapy; (2) remedial special education techniques; and (3) environmental intervention to help improve home life. Most of the children had, in addition to inner-psychological problems, disadvantaged environ mental conditions at home. Another program for socially disadvantaged pre schoolers (Silverman and Wolfson, 1971) combined the efforts of psychotherapeutic intervention with a community day care center. The therapeutic team of a psychiatrist, psychiatric social worker, and an educati0nal consultant worked closely with the day care staff to provide indi vidual psychotherapeutic techniques in order to help the children overcome deleterious environmental influences that threatened and stunted their emotional and educa- 1 tional development. The authors' conviction is that there is a definite place for psychotherapeutic intervention in programs dealing with the poor. Katz et.al. (1973) reported that a pediatric-child psychiatry team consulting in a community early childhood center was able to provide beneficial assistance in nurturing healthy personality development of the children and early detection of childhood problems. The consulta tion team helped the staff with providing a meaningful preschool education program and with dealing more l effectively with problem children. 19 1 An experimental therapeutic program for preschool language-delayed children relied upon direct parental assistance and involvement within the program for its success (MacDonald et al., 1974). The program consisted of two phases. The first phase was involving the parents in the program to work directly with the children while they were receiving training and supervision from the pro fessional staff on how to therapeutically intervene with their children. The second phase involved the parents working successfully with their children at home away from the treatment facility. This experimental group was com pared with a control group of children who received more traditional treatment without direct parental involvement. The children in the experimental group made significant advances over the control group. This study indicates the importance and significance of involving parents directly with a therapeutic preschool program. Another experimental program where parent involve ment was significant was conducted at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Woodside, 1976). It is a community based therapeutic preschool program for emotion ally disturbed children where weekly conjoint therapy sessions for parents are mandatory. The pr0gram also involves a detailed psychological and educational evalua- tion. It has achieved a great deal of early success with the children in the program. l 20 Summary After reviewing the literature on therapeutic pre school education, several salient points need to be reit erated: 1. there is an obvious need and growing interest in therapeutic preschool programs for special children; 2. it is postulated that the concept of "primary prevention'' can serve as a possible antidote to future psychological, educational, and sociological problems; 3. therapeutic preschool programs need to have specially trained indulgent personnel, where the emphasis is on the promotion of cognitive and affective development in the children; 4. there are a wide variety of therapeutic ideologies; 5. the importance of evaluation and research needs to be on qualified communication of ideas and not on developing ideological rivalries; I 6. generally speaking, most programs reviewed 1 have multi-disciplinary input from the medical, psychologi cal, educational, and social service professions; 7. involving both the community and the parents of the children with the program seems to increase the likelihood of successful intervention. 21 L CHAPTER III THE STUDY This chapter presents a description of the thera peutic preschool program and the children involved in the program, a description of the measurement devices used in the evaluation, and the method of data collection. The Program The therapeutic preschool program evaluated in this study combines the aspects of an educational learning experience and an emotional growth experience for children with a variety of educational and emotional needs. Other similar programs described in recent literature are mentioned and have been reviewed in the previous chapter. The program presented in this study was an innova tive one developed by the Foundation of Educational and Behavioral Therapy in Huntington Beach, California, to meet the needs of the surrounding Orange County community. The 1972 survey done by the Orange County Department of Mental Health established a need for mental health services to be directed towards primary prevention care. The program was approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors in September of 1975 and funded through Revenue Sharing funds from the federal government. 22 1 The goals of the program are to provide an enriched and balanced educational, therapeutic, and developmental program for twenty-four children from economically dis- 1advantaged families near or below the poverty standards established by the Office of Economic Opportunity or in some way under severe financial burden. The program stresses the development of social, academic, and neuro physiological readiness in the children so that they will be prepared to function successfully within a public school kindergarten program when of age. In addition, the program is designed to strengthen the stability and security of disadvantaged families by offering the parents the opportun ity to better themselves through their own employment or education while their child is being provided for during the day and by encouraging the parents' participation in the child's education. To achieve these goals, the following objectives were established: 1. To provide an opportunity for each child to have positive success experiences to foster increases in self-esteem and personal worth. 2. To provide an opportunity for improved social skills and self-control through contact with peers and planned activities. 3. To establish meaningful positive relationships with adult authority figures in order to promote increased L security and respect within their environment, 4. To insure high quality services through diagnostic psychological, educational, speech, and language evaluation, to encourage early detection and pre vention of learning handicaps and emotional problems. 5. To encourage physical development and coordination through precise neurophysiological exercises, 1 specialized indoor/outdoor recreation equipment, and games. 6. To provide nutritionally balanced meals and snacks for the children in the program. 7. To provide parent groups to help educate parents towards more effective child management skills and to promote support and guidance between parents with similar family problems. 8. To elicit community support and input through the establishment of a Connnunity Advisory Board made up of professionals and laymen of the surrounding communities. 9. To research, develop, and constantly upgrade the program through the coordinated efforts of the staff in order to share knowledge, techniques, and program design with the professional community. Staffing The staffing of an early childhood program is very significant to the overall effectiveness of the program. The staffing role may be more crucial in determining what happens in the program than are the models or techniques 24 I being used. When treating young children, particularly 7 children with behavioral/emotional problems, the more the I adult attention, instruction, and professional interven tion the more successful the program. In the Therapeutic Preschool Program the ratio of staff to children providing direct services is six to one, with two full-time teachers and two full-time teacher-aids for twenty-four children. In addition, the director of the program provides direct teaching services during the day thus decreasing the staff/child ratio even more, and also is responsible for the overall functioning and effec tiveness of the program including lesson planning, con ferencing with parents, conducting parent education meet ings, and community liaison duties. A part-time consulting psychologist provides four hours of clinical service per week, offering inservice training to the staff, in vivo observation and supervision of the program, individual play therapy for certain children having particularly difficult times in the program, and initial screening and evaluation of children for the program. Also, for those children with speech and language handicaps, individual speech and language therapy by a qualified speech therapist is avail able to a maximum of six hours per week. The program is also a training ground for pro fessionals and paraprofessionals within the community. The teacher-aid positions are for individuals working towards L 25 a degree in early childhood development and who are interested in receiving training and work experience in early childhood development while in school. In addition, a maximum of four volunteers from community junior colleges and universities within the area are utilized. The vol unteers add to the efficiency of a program with a small adult tr child ratio and in return receive specific train ing and experience in working with handicapped children. Daily Schedule 7:00-9:00 School opens--extended morning hours for work ing parents. When children arrive ·· hey are to be directed towards learning activities and growth centers. 9:00 9:10 9:40 10:00 Program begins--children begin the day in large group circle with staff where greetings are shared. Motor activities begin--structured neuro physiological developmental exercises used to develop gross motor skills (e.g. balance beam, maze walking, stretching, etc.). Table activities begin--perception games, drawing, fine-motor control (e.g. weaving, string beads, Frostig Sheets). Free play--children are directed towards learning activities and growth centers. ..J rl0:15 10:30 10:45 11:15 11:30 11:40 12:00 2:00 2:10 2:20 2:45 3:00 3:20 3:50 Toileting, clean-up, short rest period and massage for children at the tables. Nutritional Snack. Story and language time--children are worked in small groups for language development. Free play Toileting and clean-up for lunch Nutritional lunches Nap time Getting children up from nap--toileting Nutritional snack Musical activities--records, instruments, songs. Free play Story and language--language kits, puppets, finger plays. Trampoline--outside recreation activities. End of the day group--review of the day, soliciting what children liked and disliked. 3:55 Farewells for the day 4:00 Program ends 4:00-6:00 Extended afternoon hours available for working 1 parents. Children are directed towards learn ing activities and growth centers. 27 Implementation of Schedule The schedule is designed for the children to move back and forth from structured activity times to free-flow play periods. This movement allows the children to experience both structure and guidance with an opportunity for experimentation and exploration. The structured activity times provide learning experiences to help promote improvement in all develop mental areas for the children. Specifically, these activi ties will be aimed towards promoting: a. physical and health development b. development of language skills c. number and mathematical concepts d. enrichment of their experiences e. increased fine-motor/perceptual skills f. development of social skills g. healthy peer interactions h. development of auditory perception i. improved verbal expression The free-flow play period permits the child to gravitate toward various interest centers situated around the room and/or play yard. Basic material and equipment is rotated to meet the needs of the child's attention and interest span. The purpose of this time is to help the child: L 28 l a. experience success without adult interference b. to have the freedom to explore and choose c. to manipulate and familiarize himself with new materials which will nurture his own interest d. to increase likelihood of spontaneous peer interaction, cooperation, and sharing Extended day hours in the morning and afternoon are available for those parents who may be working or may want to seek work while their child is being provided for during the day. Also, some parents may want to go back to school or participate in a vocational training program during the day. It is postulated that the extended hours will pro vide an opportunity for parents to better themselves and allow their family to become a more autonomous unit within the community. The Children The Therapeutic Preschool Program was originally designed and funded for twelve children. Because of the immediate acceptance by the community and the large amount of referrals, enrollment in the program was expanded to twenty-four children. The children were referred to the program from various resources. An extensive advertising and exposure program was developed to educate the community to the availability of the program. Telephone calls to phy sicians, educators, and social service agencies were made. 29 A mailing list to all professionals dealing with young 7 children within the community was developed and information fliers were mailed. Local public newspapers and professiona newsletters were asked to distribute the information. A list of the referral sources can be found in table 1. The largest number of referrals came from physicians and psy chologists within the community. Social Service agencies accounted for 20 percent of the referrals. The miscel laneous category is composed of individuals who became aware of the program from indirect sources such as the newspaper, friends, or bulletin boards. The children were referred to the program for a variety of reasons. Most of the children could be classified at one extreme end of the behavior spectrum or the other. At one end is the acting-out behavior problem child. This child is generally hyperactive, difficult to manage, prone to tantruming, and highly manipulative of his environment. In addition, these children were some times very aggressive and had a difficult time interacting with peers in a cooperative manner. The other children could be classified as with drawn and isolated from their environment. These children were characterized as loners, developmentally immature, having speech and language handicaps, and preferring little interaction with peers. 30 TABLE 1 COMMUNITY REFERRAL SOURCES OF CHILDREN IN PROGRAM Referral Source Number of Referrals Psychologist/Physician Social Service Agency School Miscellaneous 10 5 3 6 Some of the children were not able to function adequately within another more traditional preschool pro gram. Others were completely beyond the control of the parents at home. The program is designed to promote healthier, more successful interaction with the child's environment whether it is by calming down the hyperactive, asocial child or bringing out the severely withdrawn child. Seventy-five percent of the children involved in !the program were boys. Half of the children came from single parent households. An additional five children came from relatively unstable family environments because of marital discord, drugs and alcoholism, or temporary I foster homes. Only seven children came from relatively jstable home environments with both parents living in the home. 31 I Assessment Scales The most frequently used tests for the assessment of disadvantaged children in preschool programs are the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, The Goodenough Draw-A-Man Test, The Lee-Clark Reading Readiness Test, and The Metropolitan Readiness Test (Baker, 1971). Most of these tests yield intelligence or mental age scores that are assumed to be strongly culture bound and not appropriate in evaluating the cul turally disadvantaged child (Weikart, 1967). Because of the cultural influence, results or assessment of outcomes based upon conventional intelligence tests should be approached with caution. In this particular study, assessment was primarily interested in looking not at intelligence, but at behavior/ emotional factors and how they related to the overall growth and development of the child. Three assessment scales were used: Burks' Behavior Rating Scale (Preschool and Kindergarten Form), California Preschool Social Competency Scale, and the Preschool Attainment Record. Burks' Behavior Ratin Scale Preschool and Kindergarten The Burks' Behavior Rating Scale is specifically designed to identify patterns of pathological behavior shown by children between tle ages of three and five. The scale is primarily a device used to gauge the severity of negative conduct symptoms which can be observed and rated by significant others. It is not meant to be a measurement of the child's inner psychic world but merely how his behavioral expressions may relate to his inner world. The scale itself consists of eighteen patterns or categories of behavior. The categories are: 1. Excessive Self-Blame 2. Excessive Anxiety 3. Excessive Withdrawal 4. Excessive Dependency 5. Poor Ego Strength 6. Poor Physical Strength 7. Poor Coordination 8. Poor Intellectuality 9. Poor Attention 10. Poor Impulse Control 11. Poor Reality Contact 12. Poor Sense of Identity 13. Excessive Suffering 14. Poor Anger Control 15. Excessive Sense of Persecution 16. Excessive Aggressiveness 17. Excessive Resistance 18. Poor Social Conformity 33 I Each category consists of five to seven descriptive behav ior traits which are rated on a continuum from one to five as they relate to the child. The categories can then be plotted on a profile sheet and listed as "not significant," "significant," and "very significant," thus indicating problem areas for the particular child. A copy of the rating scale and profile sheet is in the Appendix section. The items on the scale were selected by its author after many years of clinical observation of children and from evidence in psychological and educational research. There has long been a relationship between personality difficulties and the outward expression of these conflicts through one's behaviors. Face validity of the items has been established through extensive use of the scales by teachers and parents that have shown pro files congruent with their observations of the rated children. Statistical research including extensive corre lation and factor analyses have strengthened the content and construct validity of the instrument. Validity and standardization of the scale was constructed over a four year period after evaluation of over 2,000 children. The preschool and kindergarten form was modified to fit the needs of persons observing very young children. A jury of twenty-six kindergarten teachers assisted in the modifica tion for young children. L I 34 j I The scale was selected for this study because it I could identify patterns of disturbed behavior of young children and show changes in behavior patterns over a period of time. In addition it can indicate areas of a child's personality where further evaluation might advantageously take place. California Preschool Social Competency Scale The California Preschool Social Competency Scale (CPSCS) was designed to measure the adequacy of preschool children's interpersonal behavior and the degree to which they assume social responsibility. The behaviors selected in the CPSCS were chosen in terms of common cultural expectations to represent basic competencies to be developed in the process of socialization. This selection required an adequate sampling of behaviors expected of the 1 preschool child which are common and important to all socioeconomic groups. Thus the broad coverage in the content of the social competency items leaves this scale lless vulnerable to "cultural bias" criticism that has been frequently leveled against conventional intelligence tests. The California Preschool Social Competency Scale is designed for use in evaluating the social competence of children aged two years and six months through five years and six months. The norms are based on teacher L ____ _ ___ 35 ratings of children within this age range who are attend ing preschool or nursery school programs. The scale consists of thirty items which are representative samples of the critical behaviors in the preschool child's social functioning as is seen in Appendix C. The items cover a wide range of behaviors such as following instructions, helping others, initiating activities, reaction to frustration, and accepting limits. The items were devised to be observable within the context of a preschool, but the behaviors can be general ized beyond this specific environment. Each item contains four descriptive statements which represent varying degrees of competence relative to the behavior measured by that item. The items require observations of actual performance rather than inferences about presumed abilities or capacities. The performance to be rated is stated in behavioral terms, thereby minimizing subjectivity in the evaluation process and increasing the reliability of judgment. The raw scores are related to the normative sample based upon age group, sex, and socio-economic status. From this a percentile rating of the child's social competence is established. The CPSCS was selected for this study for several reasons. It was explicitly designed to be used by teachers I within the context of a preschool setting as an objective rating device with minimal interference from subjectivity of judgment. It provides a relative index of a child's social competence with comparisons to age, sex, and I socioeconomic status. It also is very useful as a cri terion measure of the effectiveness of direct therapeutic intervention upon a child's social development over time at the preschool level. Preschool Attainment Record There are several useful scales for the measure ment of intelligence and the overall development of young children which include the Gesell, Dunn, Kuhlman, Psyche Cattel, Merrill-Palmer, and Ruth Griffiths (Doll, 1966). These scales are principally directed toward intellectual processes without overt evaluation of physical or social functions. The Vineland Social Maturity Scale used the technique of interview and reporting of behaviors to assess the development of a child's social development but is only moderately developed for the preschool years. The Preschool Attainment Record (PAR) was developed to supplement the virtues of the Vineland Social Maturity Scale but with more intensive and extensive inventory of specific developmental attainments. The PAR combines an assessment of physical, social, and intellectual functions of young children as is seen in Appendix A. It does so for children with or 1 without various types of handicaps, including the L 37 culturally disadvantaged. Eight categories of develop mental behavior morphology are measured which include: ambulation, manipulation, rapport, communication, responsi bility, information, ideation, and creativity. A profile sheet is provided for quick review of assessment. For each category there is one item for each age period. The purpose of the scale is to provide an assessment of not only what a child can do but also what he actually does in a natural situation. In this way, an "attainment age" lis established for the child's overall development and for his specific development within physical, social, and intellectual areas. The assessment is conducted by means of an inter view by a trained examiner and can be supplemented with observational data. The interview data are obtained from a significant other involved with the child in how they see the child's usual behavior. The PAR was selected because it can be used to provide a baseline of performance for educational planning, treatment, and/or management. It can be related to behaviors seen in the home and at school. It 1also establishes a progressive record over time denoting progress of development. It permits appraisal of a child's abilities with his other skills, a child's progress of development over time, and a child's abilities with his I peers. 38 Method of Data Collection Of the original twenty-four children in the pro gram, complete data were only able to be accumulated on twenty-one children. Three children had to be dropped from the study because their parent(s) took them from the program or moved from the area before all the data could be collected. The Burks' Behavior Rating Scale was completed by one or both parents of the children within a week of admission into the program. The parents were asked to complete the scale keeping in mind their child's behavioral performance within the past several months. The parent(s) was then asked to again complete the scale for the post evaluation. The average time between pre-and post measures was 5.5 months with the range being 2 months to 8 months. This was approximately the same time span between pre-and post measures on the two other measurement scales. The California Preschool Social Competency Scale was completed by the teacher who had the most direct contact with the child during the day. After approximately two weeks of general observation in the program, the pre CPSCS was completed by the teacher. The same teacher completed the post evaluation CPSCS. The teacher was asked to be as objective as possible with each evaluation. As mentioned earlier, one of the unique characteristics of 39 f the CPSCS is that because of its delineated objective cri teria it avoids the conflicting variable of rater subjec tivity and bias. The Preschool Attainment Record was completed in interview format between the Staff Psychologist and the parent(s). The pre-PAR was completed soon after admission and the post PAR was completed at approximately the same time interval as mentioned for the BBRA. There were eight variables which were examined that were suspected as possible factors which could influence a child's progress within the program. The eight variables were: (1) time in program (in months); (2) age at admission; (3) sex; (4) number of parents in the home; (5) degree of parent involvement in the pro gram; (6) whether the child received speech therapy; (7) whether the child received individual play therapy; and (8) pathological classification ("aggressive/asocial" or "other"). All the variables are self explanatory except for numbers (5) and (8). The degree of parent involvement (5) was deter m .ined by asking the teachers, teacher aids, and program director to rate the parent(s) on a continuum from 1 to 5 with 1 being "no involvement" and 5 being "always !involved." "Involvement" was defined as the amount of time the parent(s) spent volunteering, participating in parent education, interacting with the teachers (asking L 40 questions, etc.), observing the program, and soliciting l help and advice. The ratings were then · veraged together and an overall rating of parent involvement for each !child's parent(s) was determined. The pathological classification was determined by the Staff Psychologist at the time of admission. The children were classified as either "aggressive/asocial" or "other." The "aggressive/asocial" child was character ized as acting-out within his environment. He did not I interact cooperatively with peers or siblings, was a continual behavior problem either at home or at the school he may have previously attended, defiant to rules, prone to temper tantrums, having poor impulse control, and possibly being destructive to other persons or property. The "other" child was described as a child who was severely withdrawn from his environment. This child was characterized as being a loner with very little peer interaction, passive, reverting to his own fantasy world, and/or having serious neurological or developmental deficits restricting him from interqcting successfully within his environment. There were fourteen children classified as "aggressive/asocial" and seven classified as "other." 41 1 CHAPTER IV RESULTS This chapter presents and discusses the results of the study. It includes (1) statements of the expected results; (2) a description of the major findings; (3) an analysis of the variables which may have contributed to the major findings; and (4) a discussion of the overall implications. Statements of the Expected Results It was proposed and expected that there would be substantial improvement in behavioral and social develop ment in the twenty-one children who participated in the program as measured by the pre-admission administration and subsequent re-administration of the three measurement devices. It was also expected that upon analysis of the significant contributing variables to the program that certain variables could account for the improvement in behavioral and social development. The possible significant variables that were anal yzed included (1) amount of time the child participated in the program; (2) age of the child at admission; (3) sex; 42 (4) number of parents in the hon1e; (5) degree of parent I involvement in the program; (6) whether or not a child was being seen in speech therapy; (7) whether or not a child was being seen in individual play therapy; and (8) patho logical classification of the child as either "aggressive/ asocial" or "other." The collected data on each child was keypunched on IBM cards and an analysis of covariance was conducted. A critical ratio for each contributing variable was computed as outlined in Statistical Inferences (Walker and Lev, 1953). In addition, F ratios were computed to see if there was any significant difference within the sample for each individual variable. The confidence level of significance of p <.05 was selected. The data are represented in tables 2, 3, and 4. Description of Major Findings As was expected, the major findings indicated that on the average there was substantial improvement made in behavioral and social areas by the children (table 2). On the PAR, all the children made improvement as indicated by an increase in "attainment age" (Doll, 1966). The range was from 0.5 years increase to 1.9 years increase with the average increase being 1.2 years. This average increase in "attainment age" is best understood when compared with the average time spent in the program which was 0.5 years. TABLE 2 CHANGE IN PERFORMANCE ON THE MEASUREMENT SCALES BETWEEN PRE AND POST TREATMENT 1subjects Changes in Changes in Changes in PAR BBRS CPSCS (years) (rating points) (percent) 1 1.7 11 16 2 1.4 98 27 3 0.8 -15 32 4 1.1 24 52 5 1.6 118 15 6 1.7 82 37 7 0.9 10 4 8 1.6 -17 27 9 0.8 -48 17 10 1.2 181 0 11 1.0 46 4 12 1.0 53 2 13 0.6 32 32 14 1.1 1 9 15 1.9 29 43 16 0.5 23 -42 17 0.6 37 14 18 1.1 14 -28 19 0.7 -59 22 20 1.0 46 15 21 1.9 97 80 Average change 1.2 36.3 18.5 1 In other words, the children developed at a pace of more than twice as fast as their expected development should have been in the same time period. On the BBRS, behavioral improvement is indicated by a reduction in total rating points (Burks, 1975). Seventeen (81 percent) of the children had a reduction in their total rating scale while only four (19 percent) had 44 ' an increase. The average reduction in behavioral rating 7 was by thirty-six points. On the CPSCS, again there was substantial improve ment. Eighteen (86 percent) of the children showed improvement in social skills while only three (14 percent) showed no improvement or a decrease in social skills. The average improvement was 18 percentile points (Levine et. al., 1969). Analysis of Contributing Variables Table 3 indicates that there was no significant difference for each of the eight variables within the sample. A variable would have been significant if the F ratio of equal slopes had approached zero while the F ratio for the slope was substantially greater than zero and the F ratio of the sample had been significant (p( .05). Thus, when corrected to initial differences, there were no significant differences between the various grouping comparisons. When the same data were applied to a critical ratio including the pre-test data (Walker and Lev, 1953), the same conclusion of no significant differences was determined. Table 4 indicates that there was no variable which significantly contributed (p < .05) to the major findings of the study. However, upon close analysis of the comparative differences between the variables, interest trends can be interpolated. 45 1 I ../ TABLE 3 SAMPLE DIFFERENCES FOR EACH VARIABLE PAR BBRS CPSCS Com. Slope Reg. Com. Slope Reg. Com. Slope Reg. Slope =O Line Slope =O Line Slope =O Line Variable Category "F" "F" "F" "F" "F" "F" "F" "F" "F" Months in S 5 months 0.83 45.55 0.10 0.82 10.74 3.05 0.56 13.19 0.24 program 16 months Age at ~ 3. 9 years 1.41 45.93 1.90 0.00 7.86 0.68 1.89 13.14 0.75 admission 2: 4. 0 years Sex Male 0.01 45.20 0.02 2.00 6.63 0.02 0.05 12.38 0.97 Female No. of parents 1 0.68 42.90 0.05 in home 2 3.65 8.99 1.48 0.07 11.09 0.00 Parent ~ 2. 6 1.06 53.59 2.44 involvement ~2. 8 0.70 5.80 3.03 6.00 16.35 2.86 Speech therapy yes 0.49 36.66 0.07 3.66 6.93 0.01 0.16 9.14 1.34 no Play therapy yes 5.75 55.11 3.52 7.56 9.05 3.57 0.68 15.26 1.47 no Pathology Aggressive 0.60 42.14 1.37 4.01 9.71 2.96 0.87 12.60 0.39 Other p ( .05, F=4.45, 4.45, 4.41 +' Source (Walker and Lev, 1953, pp. 391-395) °' TABLE 4 INFLUENCE OF VARIABLES UPON IMPROVEMENT PAR Mean of Mean of Mean of Variable Category N Pre Post Change Months in ~5 months 9 40.67 52.00 11.33 Program ~6 months 12 41.25 52.92 11.67 Age at S. 3. 9 yrs. 9 39.56 50.33 10.77 Admission ?4. 0 yrs. 12 42.08 54.17 12.09 Sex Male 16 40.69 52.25 11.56 Female 5 42.00 53.40 11.40 No. of 1 12 42.92 53.67 10.75 Parents 2 9 38.44 51.00 12.56 Parent i 2. 6 13 43.00 53.00 11.00 Involvement ?2.8 8 37.75 51.75 14.0 Speech Yes 9 35.67 49.11 13.44 Therapy No 12 45.00 55.08 10.08 Play Yes 8 40.75 54.13 13.38 Therapy No 13 41.15 51.54 10.39 Pathology Aggressive 14 42.36 54.07 11.71 Other 7 38.29 49.43 11.14 BBRS Months in .! 5 months 9 252.78 186.11 66.67 Program .?6 months 12 211.58 198.92 12.66 Age at ~ 3. 9 yrs. 9 100.22 190.67 9.55 Admission ~ 4. 0 yrs. 12 251.00 195.50 55.50 Sex Male 16 235.50 196.31 39.19 Female 5 209.20 184.20 25.00 No. of 1 12 246.58 191.08 55.50 Parents 2 9 206.11 196.56 9.55 Parent ~ 2. 6 13 218.62 178.62 40.00 Involvement ?2.8 8 246.50 217.50 29.00 Crit. Ratio .08 .30 -.03 .42 .92 -.90 -.66 -.13 1.64 -1.42 .36 1.39 .33 47 J TABLE 4 (Continued) Mean of Mean of Mean of Crit. Variable Category N Pre Post Change Ratio Speech Yes 9 220.33 191.22 29.11 -.34 Therapy No 12 235.92 195.08 40.84 Play Yes 8 234.50 175.75 58.75 1.08 Therapy No 13 226.00 204.31 21.69 Pathology Aggressive 14 237.29 186.43 50.86 1.28 Other 7 213.14 207.43 5.71 CPSCS Months in ~ 5 months 9 27.22 41.67 14.45 .40 Program ? 6 months 12 21.33 42.83 21.50 Age at i 3. 9 yrs. 9 9.11 36.44 27.33 -.93 Admission ?:.4.0 yrs. 12 34.92 46.75 11.83 Sex Male 16 22.06 33.13 11.07 .50 Female 5 29.60 55.80 26.20 No. of 1 12 32.25 48.33 16.08 .33 Parents 2 9 12.67 34.33 21.67 Parent ~ 2. 6 13 26.62 37.62 11.00 1.10 Involvement .? 2. 8 8 19.38 50.00 30.63 Speech Yes 9 12.78 27.78 15.00 .37 Therapy No 12 32.17 53.25 21.08 Play Yes 8 10.38 40.13 29.75 -1.04 1 Therapy No 13 32.15 43.69 11.54 Pathology Aggressive 14 25.36 45.79 20.43 -.32 Other 7 20.86 35.43 14.57 p ( . 05, CR=2.03, df = 38 48 _J On the PAR, those children receiving speech j therapy and those children receiving play therapy appeared I to improve more substantially than those children who did not receive speech therapy nor play therapy. Also, it appears that the children whose parents were more involved with the program improved more substantially. Months in the program, age, sex, number of parents in the home, and pathology did not have any substantial relationship with improvement on the PAR. On the BBRS, amount of time in the program, age, number of parents, play therapy, and pathology all seemed to have more substantial influence over the other variables. It appears that the shorter the amount of time in the program, the older the child, the fewer number of parents in the home, whether the child participated in play therapy, and whether the child was aggressive all contrib ute to greater behavioral improvement as measured by the BBRS. The CPSCS also showed some interesting trends on improvement in social skills. The age of the child, amount of parent involvement, and play therapy seem to have the most substantial influences. This is to say that 1the younger child, the more parent involvement, and whether the child was being seen in play therapy all appear to influence improvement in social skills more than the other variables in question. Overall Implications The most important implication is that the described Therapeutic Preschool Program was successful in its original goals of promoting improvement in behavioral and social areas as measured by the Preschool Attainment Record, the Burks' Behavior Rating Scale, and the California Preschool Social Competency Scale. In addition, although no significant results occurred, some interesting trends seem to be apparent when analyzing possible contrib uting variables which may have facilitated the improve ments. Degree of parental involvement and whether a child participated in play therapy both seemed to have more of an influence on a majority of the scales in improved per formance over other variables. Also, age seemed to be significant with the younger children improving more in social skill development while the older children seemed to improve their behavioral patterns more. 50 CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary It is apparent that the current focus on preschool education is a valid one. It is also becoming increasingly more apparent that early childhood education can be used as a means of providing early identification and remediation of learning difficulties, emotional disorders, and behav ioral problems. The relationship between school adjustment and success with subsequent emotional difficulties provides a possible link in the effort of combating mental illness. In addition to remediating individual difficulties of the child, therapeutic intervention can help whole families, and thus whole communities, to overcome a negative social cycle and prevent it from repeating itself. One such therapeutic preschool program is presented and evaluated in this study. The program is a humanistic goal-oriented one specifically designed for economically disadvantaged and emotionally disturbed children. Its goals are to provide an enriched and balanced educational, therapeutic, and developmental atmosphere in order to remediate individual child handicaps in the areas of 51 behavior and social adjustment. It is postulated that the children will be able to graduate from the program and function successfully within a regular public school environment. In addition, the program attempts to strengthen family stability and security by offering the parents of the children an opportunity to help themselves and their families. The major findings indicate that the program was successful in its goals of improving behavior and social adjustment. All children made advancements in development, with the average child developing 1.2 years while partici pating in the program only 0.5 years. Eighty-one percent of the children made advancements in their behavioral patterns and 86 percent of the children made advancements in social skills. An analysis of eight possible variables which may have contributed to the improved performances of the children indicated that there was no one variable which significantly affected the performance of the children. However, when the variables are compared on a relative basis to each other some interesting trends are apparent. The amount of parent involvement and whether or not a child ! was seen for individual play therapy in addition to the regular program seemed to have more consistent influence on performance than the other variables. The more the parents were involved in the program and if the child was seen in play therapy, the higher the likelihood of improvement. Age also appeared to be consistently more influential than other variables with the younger children improving more in social areas and the older children improving in behavioral areas. Conclusions The results of this study support the findings in the literature. Therapeutic preschool programs can serve as early intervention programs in helping to remediate childhood handicaps. In addition, direct parent involve ment in the program leads to a higher likelihood of success. There is also a place for direct psychological therapy in such an early childhood educational program. Recommendations It is strongly recommended that further evaluations of similar programs be made available so the professional community can share its ideas and findings. Only through joint cooperation and interest can valuable programming be developed for the community. It is also hoped that similar programs can be maintained and developed to fill in obvious needs within the community. Finally, more longitudinal studies will hopefully be able to be conducted so that the complete impact of such programs upon a child's success and development within his environment can be assessed over \longer periods of time _. -- 53 LIST OF REFERENCES 54 LIST OF REFERENCES Baker, W. H. "Effects of Preschool Enrollment and Parent Participation on Academic Growth." Doctoral disserta tion, University of Southern California, 1971. Becker, A.; Wylan, L.; and Mccourt, W. Prevention--Whose Responsibility?'' Psychology Digest 3 (1974) :24-29. ''Primary The School Bentovim, A. "Disturbed and Under Five." Special Education 62 (1973):31-35. Bergen, R. "Mental Health: You Can Help Too." Day Care and Early Education 2 (1975):12-15. Bloch, J. "A Preschool Workshop for Emotionally Disturbed Children." Children 17 (1970) :10-14. Bronfenbrenner, U. "Is Early Intervention Effective?" Day Care and Early Education 2 (1974):14-18. Brown, B. S. "Family Life Makes the Difference." Day Care and Early Education 1 (1973):23-25. Bullock, L. M. and Brown, R. K. "Behavioral Dimensions of Emotionally Disturbed Children." Exceptional Children 38 (1972):740-741. Burks, H.F. Burks Behavior Rating Scale. Manual. Huntington Beach, California: Arden Press, 1975. Chazan, M. "Disadvantaged and Nursery Schooling." Special Ed~cation 62 (1973):19-23. Doll, E. A. Preschool Attainment Record. Manual. Circle Pines, Minnesota: American Guidance Service, Inc., 1966. Fenichel, C.; Coopchik, H.; and Walker, T. "New Resources for Severely Disturbed Young Children and their Parents." Phi Delta Kappan 55 (1974) :548-549. "First Chance Consortium--for Infants and Prescho"'lers." CANHC Gram Newsletter 10 (1976) :1. 55 Frost, J. L., ed. Early Childhood Education Rediscovered. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1968. Goetz, E. "A Guide to Behavior Modification." Day Care and Early Education 3 (1976):21-24. Gordon, E.W. "Programs of Compensatory Education." In Social Class, Race, and Psychological Development. Edited by M. Deutsch. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1968. Hawkes, G. R. "Building Self-image in Preschoolers." In Early Childhood Education Rediscovered. Edited by J. L. Frost. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1968. Reineke, C.; Friedman, D.; Prescott, E.; Puncel, C.; and Sale, J. "The Organization of Day Care: Considerations Relating to the Mental Health of Child and Family." American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 43 (1973) :8-22. Hodges, W. L. "The Role of Rewards and Reinforcements in Early Education Programs: External Reinforcement in Early Education." Journal of School Psychology 10 (1972):233-241. Katz, H. F.; Sorrentino, J.; and Rodriguez, A. "Pediatric-child Psychiatry Team Consultation Community Early Childhood Education Center." Children 28 (1973):237-243. in a Young Katz, K. G. "Early Childhood Programs." The Educational Forum 39 (1975):266-271. Lehrman, W. "A School Guidance Class for Emotionally Disturbed Children." Children 16 (1969):187-191. Leve, R. M. "An Attempt to Combine Clinical and Educational Resources: A Report on the First Year's Experience of a Therapeutic School." Journal of American Academy of Child Psychiatry 10 (1971):108-123. Levine, S.; ~reeman, F. E.; and Lewis, M. California Preschool Social Competency Scale. Manual. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., 1969. Lewis, C. D. and Jacobson, B. R. "Toward a View of l Education and the Disturbed/Disturbing Child." Journal of School Health 43 (1973) :387-390. 56 Lewis, W.W. "Ecological Planning for the Disturbed Child." Childhood Education 46 (1970) :306-310 . . "From Project Re-ED to Ecological Planning." ---- Phi Delta Kappan 55 (1974):538-540. MacDonald, J. D.; Blott, J. P.; Gordon, K. Spiegel,B.; and Hartmann, M. "An Experimental Parent Assisted Treatment Program for Preschool Language Delayed Children." Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 39 (1974):395-415. Martorella, P.H. "Selected Early Childhood Affective Learning Programs: An Analysis of Theories, Structure, and Consistency." Young Children 30 (1975):289-301. Morse, W. C. "If Schools are to Meet their Responsibili ties to All Children." Childhood Education 46 (1970): 299-303. Moskovitz, A. Children." "Behavioral Objectives: New Ways to Fail Young Children 28 (1973) :232-235. Ogburn, K. "Interaction with Appropriate Consequences." Journal of Learning Disabilities 7 (1974):204-206. Perry, M. "Helping Children with Emotional Problems at School." Childhood Education 46 (1970):290-292. Plato. The Republic. Translated by B. Jowett. New York: Random House, n.d. Rogers, M. "The Emotionally Disturbed Child in the Classroom." Slow Learning Child 20 (1973) :84-90. Schultz, E.W.; Hirshoren, A.; Manton, A. B.; and Henderson, R. A. "Special Education for the Emotionally Disturbed." Exceptional Children 38 (1971):313-319. Silverman, M. and Wolfson, E. "Early Intervention and Social Class: Diagnosis and Treatment of Preschool Children in a Day Care Center." Journal of American Academy of Child Psychiatry 10 (1971) :603-618. Stein, M. L.; Beyer, E.; and Ronald, D. "Beyond Benevolence--The Mental Health Role of the Preschool Teacher." Young Children 30 (1975):358-373. Stein, M. L. and Ronald, D. "Educational Psychotherapy of L Preschoolers." Journal of American Academy of Child Psychiatry 13 (1974):618-634. 57 l Survant, A. "Building Positive Self-concepts." Instructor 81 (1972) :94-95. - ... 3.genfeld, M. 0. "The Primary Prevention of Mental Illness: A Sociological Perspective." Journal of Health and Social Behavior 13 (1972):194-203. Walker, H. M. and Lev, J. Statistical Inference. New York: Holt and Company, Inc., 1953. Weber, E. "The Function of Early Childhood Education." Young Children 28 (1973):265-274. Weikart, D. P. "Preschool Programs: Preliminary Findings." 181. Journal of Special Education 1 (1967) :163- Wilborn, B. and Smith, D. "Early Identification of Children with Learning Problems." Academic Therapy 9 (1974):363-371. Wohlford, P. "Potentials and Problems in Achieving Quality Psychological Services in Head Start and Day Care Programs." In 12th Annual Distin uished Lecture Series in Special Education an Re a i itation. Edited by E. Neumann and E. Williams. Los Angeles: School of Education, University of Southern California, 1974. Wolffheim, V. Ps cholo in the Nurser School. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 53; reprint ed., 1972. Woodside, R. V. The Therapeutic Preschool: A Service, Research, and Demonstration Pro·ect. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED O O 11, 1976. / 58 APPENDICES 59 APPENDIX A PRESCHOOL ATTAINMENT RECORD 60 RESEARCH EDITION BY EDGAR A. DOLL, Ph.D. Name ............ ... ................................................................................ .. ............ Sex ................ ........... . Exam iner ........................................................................... . Lo,t First Residence ............................•.................................•.................. Phone ................... Descent ... ............ . Guardian ................................... ............................................... Relationship ..................................... . Fam ily Physician ............................................................................................................................... . Inform ants .................................................................. ........................... ···-········ .................... Role(s) ENVIRONMENT AL NOTES Social•Economic ............................................ .................................................................................... . Cultural•Lingu istic ...........................................................•...............•.•.......•.......................•....•........... FAMILY DATA Date Born Life Age Mental Age Intelligence Quotient PAR Raw Score • Year Year Years PAR Attainment Aget tt PAR Attainment Quotient* Mo. Day Mo. Doy Mo,. Days Te,: FATHER Name ........•........................... ......................................................... Age ................. Occupation .....................................•......... , ... Education····-············· MOTHER SIBLINGS (in order of oirth) Remarks ................................................................................. ....•......................•...........•... ................•.......•....•.................................•..........••.. .......... Name ........•.................................................................................... Age ................. Occupation .................................•......•.......... Education .•............ . .. Remarks ...........................................................................................................................•........................•.•...............................••.......................•....• 1. Name ...................................................................................... ... Age ................. Occupation ............ ....................................... Education .•.........•....... Rema"rks .................................. ................................................................................................................................................................................. . 2. Name ...................................................................................... .... Age ................. O ccup3tion ................................................... Education ..............•.... Remarks ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... . 3. Name ................................ ........................................................ Age ............•.... Qccupation .................................... ........ ....... Edu~ati on .................. . Remarks ........ ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... . OTHERS Name ............ ................................................................................ Age ................. Occupation ................................................... Ed~calion .............. .... . (in home wi h Remarks .......... .........................•...............•.........................•........................................................................•........................•........•........................... relationship Name .....................................................................• ...................•... Age ........ ......... Occupat1on ............................•...................... Education .................. . Remarks ..........................................................•....................................•.......................................................... .................... • ······· ····························· REFERRAL NOTES Vision ................................................................................................... ................................ ........................................................................................................... . Hearing ............ .............................................. ...................................................................... ............................................ -. ................................ ... ........................ . Spe~ch ............................................................................................................................ , .......... ........... .......... .........•.............. ....... ................................................. Orthopedic ........................................................ : .......... ............... ................... ........ , ........................................................................................................................ . Health ........................ .......................................................................................................................................... • ............................................................................ . 86havior ............................................................................................................. ................................................................... ............................................................ . Emotional .. ................................................ ..................................................................................................................................................................................... . Other ... ..................... ......................................... ............................. ............. .................................................................................................................................. . ' " Ra w Score" is tile total number o f ,terns suc::essfully passed allowing h· Ii credit f r = sc.ores. t"Att31nment Age" in years is determined by dh11d1 ng ra w score by 16 , 16 ,terns. pe r y,1,irl . 'T"Atta1nment Ag ~·• in m an hs 1s determined by m ul t i plying R.i w Score b; .75 C S •terns r,er 6 months interval) • " Atta, rime'1t Quo ient " is determ,ned by <J1•11ding Li f e, Age irita Attainrnen t Age .•nd mul tiplying by 100. AMERICAN GUIDANCE SERVICE, INC. • Publishers' Bu:lding. C1rcl~ Pines, Iv :nn. 550 14 Copyri hri:., 1966 Edgar A . D(ll/ 61 L Score Basis; Score Basis; Item Score" Item Score 0 ltam Number ard Item ~ 1 Sits un uppor .:?ti abou fre ly AMBULATION ·• Ba lane s standin~ ........................ ............................................... ..... ... . Life Ag Mean 1.0 1.5 2.5 11 C iimb · about ................................................................................. ........... ........ .. .. ...... ............. .. ..... 3.0 1 ~ Jumps ( I . random .................................... .. .. .... .................................... ... .... .... .......... .......... ... .... 3. ··H p around ............... .................................... ..................................... .... ........ .... . ... .......... ........ ...... 11 .0 , .. Circks formally ................... .............. ................................. .................... ..... ... . ..... ............... ....... .... .. .. 4 . .:- :iskip . al ter n- t f et ... . ............. ... ........ ................ ............ ...................... ...... ............................... ........ .5 .0 " J ump~ (2), p:1ttern ...................... ......................... .. ...................... ......... ...... . .... .... ....... ... ............... .. 5 .5 ~~Follows eader .. ................. .................................. ...................................... ........................................ ...... 6.0 ~ :Dances in pattern ... ..................... .............................................. ................. . ...................... .... ............. 6 .5 1 ''~R idc · play vehicl ;; .. ....................... ........................... .. .......................... ...... ......... ........... ................. 7 .0 Item Number and Item • ~ Reache , arm MANIPULATION Life Age Mean .5 F•Gra p , fingers ......... ......... . .................................................................. .... .............. ..... .............. ......... 1.0 1 -rvra ks , random ·············--········----·------···--------· ----·----·--··-- ·····--······•· -- ·--·•··--· ........ ...... ............................. 1.5 ~r, nwrap covering 2.0 :~ D is a semblc . tak s apart . . .. . . .... .......... .................... .... ..... .......... ... .. . .... .... . .. ....................... ... 2 .5 4 =. s cmb 1 e , puts together .. ... .. .............. ... ... ... .. .......... ...... ... .... .......... .... . ............ .. ............. ..... 3.0 "~Throws objects ~·catches o jects 3. 4.0 r,,·copiec squ re ......... ······· --···· .......... .. ........ ........... .......................... ...... .. .. ... . .. ......... .. ................. 4. " Blows no e . ... ............................................. .............. .. .................... ......... ........ ...... ..... ..... . ... .. ... ...... 5. 5. •,· Faste n 5 ...... ......... .................................................................. .................. ········-- ...... •.• ······•··· 6.0 " Colors dra, -ings 1 ' ··Paste· cut- uts 6.5 .. 0 •Us'! R for inter,iew data ,epo,:· use O rcr obse~.e,:. o!:·'orm n~e: u~e T for tes' '!d perform3r,ce Use .... for full success; u;,e = for h;,lf s •, CCl!SS i;s e for no succe s note :,o fo, no opportunity. • Suoer cnpt Nu'Tibers are the 1 t.,m numbers · the e m;,y be .ro,, , eter~nced .v1 1h bc:h of 1he fv' an • 1al Score Basi * Score 8as1st Item Score Item Score 0 Item~• mter and item RAPPORT l.;; rd _: r .. por1\l:> ...................................................................................................... . L'fe ge Me~n .5 · .-\tt •nJ, ( I l : bncl : ....................................................................................... .. ..... .................. ............. 1.0 '''lnitiat "s acti n'i ........................................................................................... ...... ...... ............................. l .5 "Di ·criminates; ho ~c · . .. .. .................. ............................................. .............. .................................... : .o :·c·om Ires: operate ··········"·•"•"·•·············· .... ······································ ....... ·•···•·················· ... ... : .5 4 •Pla . . (a),b ide . ................................................................................................................................. 3.0 ~ 'Play (b), with .......... ........................................................................................... ............................... 3.5 . Play J. coop ' rJ ,,..dy . ... .. .............................. . 4.0 • 17 ttcnd· (2); .::on cntrates . ........................ ............. ........ ..................... ... .. . ......................... .. ....... 4. - harmoniou ) ... .......................... .................................................. . .... .......... .................. ..... ...... 5 .0 ' He1p impl ta ks ........................................................................................... ...... ........ .. .................... .. 5. - !•: Play · (d), pretend ............................ ................. ............................................. ... ........ ......................... 6. "''Play. ( e competitively ....... .. ..... ......... ...................................................... . ................ ... ................ 6. 1 ·~ Play (f) rule games ................................................ .................................. ......... ........................... .... 7.0 Item Number and Item COMMUNICATION inanicu. tely .......................................................................... ... .... ..................................... . Life Age Mu .5 " ocalizcs non-verbally ..................... .............................................................. ........ ................ ... ......... 1.0 · Imitat s; echoes ·~ rnvites re pon t! ·········· ·· ····················· ········-············· •··················· ····• ···· ··········· .......................... -·- ······ ················ ····························· .. ··············-················· ......... ········ ········· .............. . ·' Speaks familiar words .. ................................ .... ................................ ................. ············· ...... ············ 1.5 1.0 1.5 ~ 'T alk. in phru s ... ............................ .......................................................... ................ .......... .. .. ....... 3 .0 ;~convers in sentenc · Rel.::tes in paragrnph •·•Describe and . hare ............... ..... ......... ...................... ..... ......... ...................................... ......... ················ ························· .. ······ ················· .. ·················-·-····· ................... .. .. ........... ............. . ····························· .. ·················· ................................................. ......................... . ···Recit · repr duce ······•·····•····· ··· .. ·············· .. ········-·······-·········-·····-··-······· ········· ......................... .. ..... ...... . 3.5 4.0 4 .5 5.0 <iPrints fi rst name ........................ .. ................................................................ ... ................................. ... 5.5 :c pie familiar w rd 1 ' R ad h rt sentences ········· .. ··········-·-···················································· ·•···· ... · ............ .... ................. ...... . ······ ·············•············ ............. .................................... . 6.0 6. 1 • 'Add t 10 ................................... ............................................... ........................................................... 7.0 !Use R fo r inter,,ew d t report, use O for observed perform nee; use T for tested i:;erformance Use - for full ucces ; use :::t for half success; use - for no succe s: ote N O for no oppo unity • Sui:;ersc •1pt Numb s 3re th ,:em nun-b '5 . : ~s r.-1ay !:.4 c •os refereric d ,tr. bott, " S .. mmary .. nd Profile" •nd · Spec.fie I em 0ef,n, 10 s" , p::,i ;:4 of the Manual. • 63 l Scllre Basis, Score Basist lem Seer ~ Item Scor~• Item umber and it.m Che\ . ..!rni-·0 1 d, .... . Lntb : RESPO SISILIT Y -··· ····· ... ·•··· ·•··· .. ··························· .... ········· . ............ ··•··· .................. . ········· ·· . ··············-······-·····-···························· ........... ·········· ·- ... ··-·- Life Age Mean 1.0 l. :.o :c n~ n~ m:Hl.!ri ! . ... .................................................... ......... .............. .... ... . .. . ... .. .............. ... :?.5 ··············· ········································· .. ·····························-······ ·•···· ....................... , ............ . Get drink ...................................................................................... . .......................... ............ . . · Dr <;<; s . If ... ·······• ········•··············· .... ··•······•········ .............. ········ ·············· ... ...... ·····•· ·············· ... . 'Toikt~ elf ...................... ····•··· .......... ················· -- ·······••······ ············· ............... ··•····················· ··c,I! n.· up . ·············· ···························· .. ···················-··•··························· ······ . .. ········ ··················-· ..... . .0 .5 4.0 4.5 5.0 ·· R,, pt:ch property .. ..... ........................................................................... ....... .................. ... ... ............ 5. - C.:>nform · t cu ·t• m .. ... ................... ....... ................................................... ..... ......... ......... .............. 6. ······•·········•··• ··············· .. ································· •··•· .... ····················· ......... . bs~n.e. routines .................. ······· ·········-····· ................................ .................. ····· .. Item umber and Item IN FORMATION • ··Re o nizes a) f \V ...........................•.. .......... ...•...................... ................... ..... •. .. .•... ......•.. .............• 14 R cognizl! ~"Recognize ( b) man:, ........... ·- ............... ······· ......................................... ··········· ················ ....... . (c) use ...... ······· ···································· ·································· ......... ······················ .. Re ogniz c; (d) hi ·-· ····•······ ............. ······························· .... ... .. ········· ··············· ·· ······· ......... . ' Fond le to hO\v recard ..... . ..................... ............. ··········· ········· ...... ······· .................. ········· ' Know, sex . ······•··············· ··············-·············· ..... ·•· .. ........ ....... ··········· .......... ··········- ........... . .... ....... ········ ............ ······· .... ··················· ···•·• ..... ·········. ······· ... ··············· ·······•········- .. -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... -. . . . . ..... -....... -. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . ........... --.... -. -.... . · Kno day-nig . .............. ········· ..... .. . ···························· ················ 6.5 7.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 30 3 . 4.0 4 . :•:\'"an1e c; coins . .......................... .................................. ..... ..................................... .. ............................. 5.0 Kn ow. ~ge · 'Knov A .. f.-P .. · 1. ················· ................................ ·······•······-········•····· ·····•· .................................. . ......... ......... ······················· ... ········ .......... ·•-····· ................ ····················-· .5 6.0 Kn \\'~ Right-L ft .. .... ........ ... . ...... .................. .. .. ..... .......... .. ..... ...... ... ... . .. . .. .... ............. 6 . Knows ud re· .......... ··············•··················· ··················· ··················· ... ········· ······························ . 0 ; Use R or ,nte'V1e.-, .. ., a ·epr.r use O to obsf>rved p ·forman-:e: use T ' or tested pt>rform.1nce. Use - for ful l success: ase fr:,r h~ lf success; u:;e for no success. note NO for no ooportun ,ty. • Su , er•r• o ',ur,•t:e s arp :n~ r ,n nu,.,t:c•s; Mt'~e rnl'.J be cross r1>ferenced v,:h bo n 'Sum-nar1 and P•of,1e·• 3,a ··soec,1 c I em 01>f1 ,tio~s". page 24 cf he 'Aanuci 64 Score Basis+ Score Basist Item Score ' Item Score" Item Numbu and Item '· lckntitic - fr:mili:ir IDEATION life Age Mean .5 l .0 --G1,; turc f r co:nmunicntion ..... ................................................................................ .................... ..... 1.5 : 1 \fatche fami liar th i g . .. ... .................................................................... .... .............. ...................... :.o " C Unt ,., ize ..... ... ......... ........................... ...................................... .................... .... .... ... . ..... 3.0 3. '·c ompare_ ( _) t Xtllfe ........................ ..... .... ..... ................... .. ..................... ........ .................... .... ......... 4.0 • 1 count ➔ ..... ··············· ·······--··········· ······ ······································----····--······ ... ... •. .... ......... ................ 4. :"Compares (3) wei:;ht 5.0 ··Nan1e~ cuh r ............ ................... ... .... .... . ....... ................................... .. ............ ................... ........ ..... 5.5 ···Beats rhytl~n1 ................ .. ............ ......... .. ......... ... .. .. .. ..... ... .. .............. .. ........................................ .. .. ... 6.0 unts 13 ..... ............ ............... ....... ... ..................................... ........ ... ............ ....................... ............... f. .5 i:;Tell hour ............................................................................................. ...... ........ ........ ................... 7.0 Item Number and Item *-Demands att ntion CREATIVITY Life Age Mean .5 1 c T es;ts for curio~it . ...... ... . ..... ... . .... ......... .... ....... ...... ... .......... .... .. . . ........ .. ......................... ! 0 -•Tran sf r : r arranges ·:Explores; surroundings 1.5 2.0 '"Tear, apart . ....... .......................... ........... ............. .. ............................ ... ... .. ... ..... .. ... ...................... 2.5 1 · Dr;:imatizcs ( l ) stories " Dra ws ponta eously · ::,.rcv1lds with pla tics 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 " Dramatize (_) :nusic ............................... .................................................................................... 5.0 -P:iint. imagin:niv ly .- Inven t. tnrie'i . • 4 S lo. : goc al n • 1 -Exp riment. : m dific. 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 : U•e R o• 1r.terv1ew d~:a rRides Ve hicles - - - Item s P assed by C.atego A rnbuli tJon I06Cuts and I Mampulalton P a st es 1 01 p1ays (f) R1r,i,ort 92 C op1es 1 00 R cads 1 0 8 Adds Commun1<~tic,n R espon sibility ~ Nurs es 13C hews I R ests 2~M111ds 3 1 C on serves 4 s Takes Care 5 J G cts D rink 61 oresses S elf 69foilets Sel! , ' Cle ans Up ~ R c~p ects q 3 Con P ;operty forms ID 1 Coop erates io•;Ob serv es R . Rupou,.!>iln Information Ideation C reativity 6Re cog Fcw (a) 1 4 R P cog Many (D) 22R e cog Use (c) o R ecog His (d) Jsfc,ndlcs 46Knows Sex s4Tells Name G 1 Nanies Objects 1 R esists 1 5 ldentitie~ 23 Gcsturcs 31 Matches 39 C ()unts 2 4 7 C omp. 5 ~ Counts 3 63 Comp. Size (1) Te~ tun• (7) 8 Oemands 1 6 T ests 2 4 T ,ansfers 3 ? E xplores 40 'fears 48 Oiama- 5 c.!Juilds b4Ornws liL CS S. (l) 101foows O -N 1 ~ Narncs 11 b Knows C oins Age irounts 4 79 C omp. 87 ffam es W eight (3) Colors n Moulus 80 Drama- 8 8 P aints llzes M. (2) 4 Know5 A .M .-P .M. 9 :;Be ats R h ythm 101 Knows R-L 10.;Counls u %111Vt:ll1S 1 04 Solos Stories 1 ,o t<.nows Addre ss 1 11Tc!ls H our 112 fxperi- 111enl5 tnfofffl.tlurn fd 1,_alton c~~ Items P assed by A g e P e riods DD DD□ DDDDDDDDD Ra.v Scort • " Raw Score" is the toldl number of ilt·m s e.uccessfully p.1ssca a llowing half c1 ed 1 I l or ..! scores . f"All a inm,nt Ace" ;,. 1ea, ~ is dctL rm,n ed hy divid ing raw scor .. by 16 (16 ,1e m ~ pe r ye .ir). I t " Attain m en t Age" in months •~ d,:tu min::d by m ultiplying fB "' s ~orc by .75 (3 1 tc,n s poar 6 mon lhs onterv~•). * "Att.i,nmen t Quotien t" ,s ddermine cJ by d ividing L,f., A E;t into Att a,nm.,nl AE;e a nd m ult1plyini; b y 1 00 ~opyn i:ht '', 1966 J .",li;,ir /)u /1 APPENDIX B BURKS' BEHAVIOR RATING SCALES 67 J BURKS' BEHAVIOR RATING SCALES O~SEO SY HAROLO F . BURKS, PH.0. (Pre•School and Kind•rgartef'I) Name __________________________ Oate ______________ _ School Age _____ G,ade ______ _ Roted by ______________________________________ _ Please rate each and every item by put,ing the number or the most oppropriote descriptive statement in the box opposite eoch item. The 5 descriptive statements are given below: Number 1. You hav• not noticed this behavior at all. Number 2. You have noticed the behavior to o slight degree. Number 3. You have noticed the behavior to a considerable degree. Number 4. You have noticed the behavior to a large degree. Number 5. You have noticed the behavior to a very large degree. 1. ls overobedient .................................................................................................................................... □ 2. Withdraws quickly from group :Jctivities; prefers to play by self. ·-··············································· □ 3. Questions indicate a worry about the futvre . .................................................... □ 4. Flushes easily. . .......................................................................................................... □ 5. Is difficult to get to kno..,, ........................................................... _. ••..••••..•.......•..••..••.•.••••••••....•••. □ 6. Is easily led ........................................................................................................................................ □ 7. Disinterested in ploy activity of others ........................................................... ·-························· ·□ 8. Upset if malces a mistake. ·· ······•·•••··············•··•·•·•·•·•••·••••·•···••·•··•·••·••·•·•··•·•·••••·•□ 9. Wanh others to do things fer him .•.••.••...••.....••.••••••...•........•.••......•.....•.•..•..•.••.• ••·••····••··•• •·••·•••·••·•······ ·□ 10. Shows many fears. ····································································································O 11. Shows little feeling wl-en others are upset . ............•..•••....•••••..••.••••.•..•...•.••••.•.•.• ·•••••••••·••·•·••••••••••□ 12. 13. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. L Shows excessive guilt for wrong doing. ······ ·······•••••••••··•···•·······•··········••··••••••·• ·□ Worries too much •...•....•........ ·····································~············································• ·□ Does not show feelings. • ...•.......•.•..•..••..•..•.......••..••...............•..•...........•.•..•...•. ········•·····•·•·•••····•□ Is upset if things do not turn out perfect ......................................................... □ Clings ~o adults .............................................................................................. _ .................................. □ Appears tense. ··•·•···••····•••••••········••·•·•·•··········•••••·•·•··•••••·••••·•··•••••···••·····•··•··••••·•··••··□ Is shy ......................................................................................................................................... □ Blames himself if things go wrong ................................................................... □ Seeks constant praise . ...................................................................................... ··········•························□ Appears nervous ........................................................................................................ □ I, depend eat on others to lead him around .........•......•....••.••...........•.•.••.•.•......•. ··· ······· ·· ···· ·••••···•··•·•·····□ COPYRIGHT 1968 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED c PUBLISHEO BY ARDEN PRESS 8331 ALVARADO DRIVE , HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA. 92646 BURKS' BEHAVIOR RATING SCALES DEVISED IIY HAROLD Jr. BURKS. ~H.0 . !Pre-School and Kind•rgortenl Nam _____________________ Oot•------------ Schoo,._ ____________________ Age , _____ Q,ad,._ ____ _ Rated by, _________________________________ _ TOTAL SCOR£$ s NOT SIGNIFICANT 1 I I ___ ... 2 .. I __ ..... , __ 1 .___ .... 1 _____ ,_~ 5 i 7 I I 10 ___ .. 3 !, ___ ___.. ,_~-~-~-~ 6 7 I I 10 11 12 ---""'' I. ________ , _ __.._ _ _._ ___ , _ _._ 6 7 I 9 10 11 12 5 I I 1 I !I lo 11 12 lJ 14 6 5 ' 7 I I Io 1 I I ---...:.s ..---,--... ,.---... ,.-----,---ro __ __;;.a .... ! -..-------------.-.--- ' ____,_I + I 9 lo 11 12 13 tc 9 I I I ----=s ... --,----,----... ,.-----,---T'a10 • 10 s ' 1 I !I 10 --~111 111 1 1 ,,,..-..,.--.... 10-----1 ... 1 ....... u-""'u---....,14..---.... 1s--n 12 5 6 1 I Io __ __.:,:13 I I I .. , ---,----,-----1 ... 0 -1 .... 1-...,12---.... 1 ... 3 .........,14 14 5 6 I 9 10 ___ ..;.;15 ~t-----....--------..,;,.._--.:. S 6 1 I 9 lo ___ .;;:_;ISi ,._ __ I __ : ..___ 1 __ 1 _ ____,; 1 _ __._ 6 7 I I 10 11 12 17 5 Ii 7 I 9 10 ----18 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 SIGNIFICANT EXCESSIVE SELF IL.AME I I 12 13 14 15 lli EXCESSIVE ANXIETY 17 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 EXCESSIVE WITHDRAWAL I I I I 13 14 15 16 17 11 19 20 21 EXCESSIVE DEl'ENDENCY I I I 13 14 15 16 17 11 19 20 21 POOR EGO STRENGTH I I I I I ! I I I I 15 16 17 11 19 20 21 22 23 24 POOR PHYSICAL STlENGTH I I I I I I I I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 POOR COORDI.NATION I I I I I I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 POOR INTELLECTUALITY I I I I I I : I I I 15717178 I9 20 Z17nTT4 POOR ATTENTION I I I I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 POOR IMPULSE CONTROL I ! I I I I 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 POOR REALITY CONT ACT 1 1 1 1 1 a 1~ 2~- 2 1 s 2 1 & 2 1 , -J, POOR SENSE OF IDENTITY I I I ! ! I I 111r- 13 1, 15 16 17 EXCESSIVE SUFFERING I I I I I : I I 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 POOR ANGER CONTROL I I I I 1'1---~12--....... u-__,.. 1,~~ 15~-1;,.., -----11 EXCESSIVE SENSE OF PERSECUTION I I I I ! I I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 EXCESSIVE AGGRESSIVENESS I I 13 14 15 16 17 11 19 20 21 EXCESSIVE RESISTANCE ' I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 POOR SOCIAL CONFORMITY ' I I I ' ' I I L 17 11 19 20 21 Z2 23 24 25 26 27 21 VERY SIGNIFICANT 11 11 20 21 z2 23 I I I I I 11 19 20 21 Z2 2l 24 2S I I I I I I 22 2l 24 25 Z& 27 28 29 30 I I Z2 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ~ I ! I I I 2 26 27 28 29 303132D 34 3~ I I I I 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Z5 18 19 20 I I 21 22 23 24 25 I I I I I I I l I 2'5"76Z""'7,_,.Zl.....,~...--r.30.-...31,....,.3•z......,33.--.3"4--..35 I I I I 11 19 20 21 22 23 24 2~ I I I I I 1r"1 .,... ,-...;20.----2..,.1 ---22.---n:,,...... ... 2.:-r,-z ... s I I 11 19 20 I I I 21 2Z 23 24 25 18 19 zo 21 Z2 23 24 I I I I I 22 23 24 25 26 Z7 ZI 29 30 I I I I 11 19 20 21 22 Z3 24 25 ' I ' I I I I I I I 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 S6 37 31 39 40 INSTIIJCTIONS: Cote;ory scores should be colculoted occ:,rding to d irections in manua l. 1-'ave on X at point a long eoch category continuum where score end number coincide. ConneCT X's to moke profile. Copyright 1968 All R ights Res•"'•d O Published by Aroen Press O 8331 Atvaredo Drive, Huntington Beach , Ca. 92646 69, 2 3. Follows dir~ctions poorly. . ......... ·························-··········································· ··························D 2.4 . Cannot finish what he is doing; jumps to some thing ehe. ··· ·· ················ ·· ·· · · ··· ························· ·-··········□ 25. Avoids physical contod in play ..................................................... ·························· □ 26. Thinks little of his own abilities. ·············•········· ·· ················· ······························□ 27. Has trouble holding on to things ..... ···· · ·············· ·· ····· · ······ ······· ··· ··························•·· ········ · ··□ 28. Attention ~pan is short .........................................••..•.................................... ...........•.......................... □ 29. Has trouble remembering things . .. .................................................................... ························· ·□ 30. Is easily satisfied with poor performance. ············ ································· ···········□ 31. Is easily distracted, locks continuity of effo~t and persev~ronce. · · · ···· ···· ··············· ·· ··· ·· ··················· ·····□ 32. Shows poor coordination in large musc,c: octivties ........ ............. .. ............. ......... ............... □ 33. Gets hurt in physical play ........................................................ ..... ··························□ 3.4 . Does not show imagination .......... .... ............................................................... ········ ·· ·· · ·············□ 35. Attention span not increased by punishment or reward ..................................... .. ................................ □ 36 . Is ecsily frustrated and g ives up passively. · ··················•······· ··············· ····· ·· ·· ·□ 37. Spills milk and drops food. ····················-························ · ·· ······ ············· ······ ······················□ 38. Ads silly. ····· ···· ··· · ·· ·············· ···•·····························•·•··••···•···•················ ····· · ·····□ 39. 1ves ,nappropriote responses . .................................................................................................. . G. . . □ 40. Appears physically lethargk . ..................................................................................... □ 4 1. Cannot shift responses to meet problem situations .............................. ·············· ···· ················ · ······□ 42. Avoids competition. · · ········· ········· ········· ················· ·········•···········••·······•·•···••····□ 43. Orawir1gs and paintings ore messy. ··················:······· · · · ·· · · ··············· ···· ·······························□ 44. Will not rough ond tumble with others. ······························· ············· ·· ··············· · ·······□ 45. Does not ask questions. ·········· ··· ··········· ············· · ··········•··•····· ············ ···•········•···· ············ ··········□ 46. Ploys the clown of the class. ·· ························ ··········· ··· ····················•····· · ····•····□ J. 7 . Accidently runs into people ond ob jects ....... ····· ·· ·········· ·· ··········· ··· ··· · ·· ········ · ····················· ·□ .48 . Shows limited vocabulary. ··· ·· ·············· ··· ····· · ··· ············ ·······················································•······· ·□ 49 . Shows little self.confidence ....... ............................. ······· ······· ······ ············· ·······□ SO . Gets tired quickly . ....... ............................................................... .•..••••............ ..... .. ... □ 51. Shows erratic, fl ,g hty or scattered beh01o1 ior . .. ......................... ................................ ............................ □ L __ 70 1 _ ··· J I L 52. Tells unbelievable stories ...........................•.......•.•.......••.........••.......................•........••.•.... □ 53. Appears didressed. ·· · ······························ · ·························· ···············••·······•··················•·······•· ············□ .S4 . Rejects clossmatu in hostile manner. ···············································•············•··•··•······················• □ 55. Cannot control self (will speak out or jump out of, seat). ··········•··········•·••·········□ 56. Feelings easily hurt. ·······················································································-··························· ······· □ 57. Is unaware of w!,at is going on around him . .... ............................................ : ...................• □ 58 . Emotional reactions wrong (laugh when should be sod, etc.). ·· ················ ··· ····· · ··· ···············□ 59. 1ves picture o poor me. . ................................................................................... : ........................ .. . G . . f .. .. □ 60. Is impulsive. ··· ·············· · ···· ····················· · · ··········•······ ··············· ········ · ····••········□ 61. Assaciotes with loners ................................................... ............................ ····· ······· ··•···················□ 62. Sulks. ··· · ···· · ·········· ···· · ··· ······················· ············ ·············· ·· ······· ························-············· ·····················□ • 63 . Shows explosive and unpredictable behavior. ····· ····· ·· · ··· ·········· ··· · ··········· ·· ······:□ 64. Rotates or rocks his body ...................................................... ·· ···· ········ ···················•········· ·□ 65. Wears un.Jsual clothing styles ......................................................... · ········ · ·· ········· ················· ·····□ 66. Seems to welcome punishment. ··········· ··· ·· · ······· ····················· ···· ··· ···•····································· ········ ·· ·· · ··□ 67. Secretly laughs or talks to himself . ......... .... .. .. ................................. · ···· · ·· ············· · ··········· ··□ 68 . Acts as non.conformist ............................ .. ....................................................... · ··········· · ······ ··· ····□ 69. Becomes overexcited easily ............................................................................. □ 70. Oeliberoteiy puts himself in position of being reprimanded ...... ....... ................ ······· · ···················· ·· ·····□ 71. Shows tics and grimaces without apparent reason . .................. ............. .... ··························□ 72. Is hyperactive and restless .................... ....................... .... ................................ □ 73 . Shows daydreaming. .... . .......... ........ ............................ ...... ••·· ·· ···································□ 74. Does not try to make friends by acting like other children . ....... · · ····· ··············· · ·············· ·············□ 75. Uses unintelligible language . . ... ................................. ............. .............. . · ························ ·□ 76 . Appears unhappy . .................. ..... .............. ................ .. ....... .................. ............ ............... ........... .. .. □ 71 . ., ~------ ---' 77. Is truant. ···················--··························-··-·-·---.. --............... - ..... _ ......... ____ •.• -._-··-··O 78. Maintains other children pick on him. ·······························-· ....................................... □ 79. Teases others. ···········································································-·························-··········· □ 80. Will not toke suggestions from others ........................................................................................... 0 81. Becomes a"gry quickly. ···········-··························-···········································□ 82. Complains he never gets his fair share of things .................................................. ·-··□ 83. Is involved in undesirable escapades. ·········································-·-·········· .. ·································--····□ 84. laughs when others ore in trouble ...................................................................... ••·············□ 85. Becomes angry if asked to do something ....................... - .. ~ ............................. □ 86. Will not forgive others (holds grudge) ............................................... ••····················· ·□ 87. Does things his own way. ··················••··•······························•···········•··················•···········•·•·······□ 88. Hits or pushes others .......................................................................................... ••·············□ 8 9. Shows little respect for authority. . ................................................................................ ••······················□ 90. Denies responsibility for own od:ons ........................................................................................... □ 91. flares up ot children if teased or pushed. •·······················································□ 92. Takes things which do not belong to him. ······················································· ··•····· ········••·······•···•········□ 93. Accuses others of things they actually did not do ....................................................... □ 94. Displays a don't care attitude; does what he wants ............................................................................... □ 95. /tl,akes fun of others ........................... ···················································-··························□ 96. Is stubbom and uncooperative. . ...................................................... ·-··-······-·················· .. •·•···•□ 97. Does not follow through on responsibiliti~s ......................................................................................... □ 98. uplodes under stress ....................................................................................... □ 99. Wants to boss others. ·•························ ····••······•······•··•··•····················•·······························□ 100. Tells falsehoods. . ........................................ ................................................................ ••······················□ 101. Is quickly frustrated and lo,es emotional control. .............................................. □ 102. Is rebellious if disciplined . ............................................................................. ·-··-······················□ 103. Complains others do not lilce him. ·····················································-··············· ........ □ 104'. Plays tricks on other children ..................................................................... ••······················□ 105. Is tardy •............••...............................•.............. ·····················································--·························□ 72 J APPENDIX C CALIFORNIA PRESCHOOL SOCIAL COMPETENCY SCALE 73 _J ... • CALIFORNIA PRESCHOOL SOCIAL COMPETENCY SCALE Samuel Levine Freeman F. Elzey Mary Lewis San Francisco State College CHILD'S NAMc;_ ______________ _ RATED BY ______________ _ PARENT'S NAME ______________ _ TEACHER _______________ _ ADDRESS ___________________________________ _ OTHER INFORMATION ________________________________ _ Chronological Age: Date Birthdate Age DIRECTIONS Year Month Day For each item, circle the number of the option that is most characteristic of 1h6 child being rated. Be sure to rate all 30 items. Add the circled numbers and enter the total at the lower right corner of page 3. Then transfer the total to the appro priate line on the profile sheet on the back page. Refer to the appropriate table in the manual to obtain the percentile. If examiner wishes, the individual items may be profiled on the back page to facilitate interpretation. A. Sex: Boy ________ Girl _______ _ B. Age Norm 2-6 thru 2-11 3--0 thru 3-11 4-0 thru 4-11 5-0 thru 5-6 C. Occupational Level of Major Wage Earner □ Low OL Unemployed, welfare recipient, unskilled or semiskilled (building helper, janitor, farm laborer, untrained aide, clerk). □ High Ol Skilled worker, semiprofessional (craftsman, technician, salesman, accountant, office manager), professional and executive (iawyer, physician, engineer, mir.ister, business executive). The three items checked above should be carefully observed in finding the appropriate column in the correct norm table . CONSULTING PSYCHOLOGISTS PRESS, INC. 577 College Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94306 • I \ i'.:"ll•~ed 1969. Portion, of th•• scale ar" reproduced by perm,ssion from the Caln-Levine Soc ,11 Cnmpetency Scale. cooyrlght 1963 by Consy r:·"'i P1yeho10g1 sts Press, Inc:. Any reproduction of this sca!e wltnout wrlnen permission of tl'le copyright holder is a ¥iol1tion of the 18 1#. I • 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Can state first name only 2. Can state lull name 3. Can s ate full name and age as ot last birthday. 4. Cans ate name, age, and aadress. 2. USING NAMES OF OTH ERS 1. Uses no proper names in ,nt~racting with those around him 2. Uses the names of no more than five children or adults. 3. Uses the names of from five to ten children . 4. Uses the names of virtually all ch ildr"ln and adults. 3. GREETING NEW CHILD When a new child ioins the grou~ 1. He inadve1tently physically overpowers child in greeting nim (1.e., hugs, bumps, pulls). 2. He makes a limited and brief physical contact (i e., pats. pokes, rubs) v. 1th child and scrie verbal cont ct. 3. He usually makes verba l contact and some ,mes touches child 4. He nearly always makes verbal contact with child without physical contact. 4. SAFE USE OF EQU IPMENT 1. He proceeds with ctivity, 1 nor1 ng hazard s 1nvolv1ng he,gtit. weight. and clusion of additional children- 1. He seldom initiates getting involved in the activity 2. He sometimes initiates getting invo lved in the activity. 3. He frcq..iently initiates getting involved in the actIvIty. 4. He nearly ai,vays initiates ge:11ng involved i the activity. 19. INITIATING GROUP ACTIVITIES 1. He nearly always initiates activities which are solely for his his own play. 2. He in,tiates his own activities and allows one child to join him. 3. He sometimes initiate'> activities which Include two or rnore chi,dren. 4. He frequently initiates ac ,vi ties which are or a group nature. 20. GIVING DIRECTION TO PLAY When playing with others- 1. He ty p!cally follows the lead or others. 2. He sometimes ma~es suggestions for the direction ot the play. 3. He fre~ue n ly makes suggestions for the direction of the play. J . He nearly always makes suggestions fo r the direction of the play. 21 . TAKING TURNS 1. He frequently interrupts or pushes others to get ahead of them in an activi:y taking urns. 2. He attempts to t2ite turn ahead of time but does not push or quarrel in order to do so. 3. He waits for turn, but teases or pushes those ahead of him. 4. He wails fo r turn or waits to be called on. 22. REACTION TO FRUSTRATION When he does not get what he wants or things are not going well- 1. He has a tantrum (screams , kicks, throws, etc.). ?.. He finds a substitute activity without seeking h.ilp in solving thti problem. 3. He seeks help from others i, so l•, lng problem without mak ing an a tempt to solve it 'limselL 4. He seeks help from others in solving the problem after making an effort to solve it himself. 23. DEPENDENCE UPON ADULTS He will continue In an activity on his own w 1thou having an ad ult participate with him or encourage h1m- 1. H.Hdly e er. 2 Sometimes 3. Frequently. 4 Nearly always. 24. ACCEPTING LIMITS When an adul sets l1mIts on 1hr child's act1 v;ty (play space use of maten3I, type or activity) M e accepts the 1tmI s- 1. Hardly e er 2. Sometimes. 3 Frequently. 4 Nearly always 25. EFFECTING TRANSITION S In changing from one ;ictI Ity to another- 1. He requ ires person3I contact by adult (, e . t-olding ands. leading). 2. He will not mo , e I0...vard new act, I1y until the physical arrangements r.:ive t:een r.ompleted 3. He moves toward new actIvIty wh nth~ teacher announcps the activity. 4. He moves towar new actIv1ty without physical or ve r!>al cues. 26. CHANGES IN ROUTINE The ct-,ld accepts changes in routine daily schedule. roo.n arrangements, adults) v,,thout res istance o r becoming up:;et- 1. Hardly e11er. 2. Somet imes. 3 Frequently. 4 . Nearly always. 27. REASSURANCE IN PUBLIC PLACES When taken to public places ho mus: be 11er. physical or verbal reassurance- 1. Nearly always. 2. Frequently. 3. Sometimes. 4. Hardly ever. 28. RESPONSE TO UNFAMILIAR ADULTS 1. H~ avoids or withdraws from any contact with unfam,l•ar adults. 2. He, when ini ially approach 3d t:y unfamiliar adults, avoids contact, but If approached again, Is responsive. 3. He responds to overtures by unfam1IIar adults b1,t does not initiate contact. 4. He readily rr.oves toward unfamiliar adults. 29. UNFAMILIAR SITUATIONS 1. He restricts himself to a..:tivIties in which he has previously engaged. 2. He joins In an actIvIty which is new for him only 1r other children are engaged 111 It. 3. He joins with other children ·n an activity which is new to everyone. 4. He engages in an activity wh;ch is new for him e en though other children are not involved. 30. SEEKING HELP When he is involved in an activity ,n wh icr. he needs help- 1 He leaves tt-e activity Y :ithout seeking help. 2. He con!inues in the act,~1ty bcit only 1 f l'lelp Is off red. 3. He persists in the acliv,ty and fina lly seeks nelp 4. He seeks help from others af er making a brier attempt. TOTAL SCORE ___ _ _ _ 76 CALIFORNIA PRESCHOOL SOCIAL COMPETENCY SCALE PROFILE SHEET Child's Name Norm Table Used Sex: _____ Age _ Total Score: Percentile: Item 1 2 3 4 1. Identification • • • • 2. Using Names of Others • • • . 3. Greeting New Child • • • • 4. Safe Use of Equipment • • • • 5. Reporting Accidents • • • • 6. Continuing in Activities • • • • 7. Performing Tasks • • • • 8. Following Verbal Instructions • . • • 9. Following New Instructions • • • • 10. Remembering Instructions • • • • 11. Making Explanation to Other Children • • • • 12. Communicating Wants • • • • 13. Borrowing • • • • 14. Returning Property • • • • 15. Sharing • • • • ~ 16. Helping Others • • • • 17. Playing with Others • • • • 18. Initiating Involvement • • • • 19. Initiating Group Activities • • • • 20. Giving Direction to Play • • • • 21. Taking Turns • • • • 22. Reaction to Frustration • • • • 23. Dependence upon Adults • • • • 24. Accepting Limits • • • • 25. Effecting Transitions • • • • 26. Changes in Routine • • • • 27. Reassurance in Public Places . • • • 28. Response to Unfamiliar Adults • • • • 29. Unfamiliar Situations • • • • 30. Seeking Help • • • • Comments and Recommendations: Signed _________________ _ 77

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The Rorschach technique applied to the evaluation of educable mentally retarded secondary school age students

PDF

Effects of imposed background noise on listening comprehension of primary children

PDF

An analysis of the needs and problems of individuals at mid-career for career development

PDF

Family therapy with Black families : social workers' and clients' perception

PDF

The minorities in higher education: undergraduate characteristics of law students

PDF

The social ecology of delinquency in Los Angeles county: a structural analysis

PDF

Teacher involvement in participatory management

PDF

Application of finite field transforms to image processing and x-ray reconstruction

PDF

An examination of a concept of image in presidential campaigning: the Humphrey-Nixon compaign of 1968

PDF

Women and the city, 1870-1920

PDF

Administrative reform in Sudan: A human resource perspective

PDF

Student perceptions of the Los Angeles Community College District instructional television college credit program: an appraisal

PDF

The employment of California women line administrators in K-12 districts in the years 1968, 1972, and 1976.

PDF

An investigation of oxygen-pulse time course as a measure of cardiorespiratory adaptation to exercise

PDF

Development of a quantitative assay of guanadrel in biological fluids

PDF

The role of the campus instructor in student achievement in community college television instruction

PDF

Attitudes toward work and success of women employed in male versus female-dominated jobs

PDF

An investigation of the chronic physiological changes due to relaxation training and practice

PDF

Anatomy of the aftermath of cover-ups: the lessons taught by the dynamics and processes of coverage of President Nixon's post-Watergate hospitalizations.

PDF

Pastoralism in the novels of Mary Shelley

Asset Metadata

Creator Harrington, Douglas Eli (author)

Core Title Evaluation of a therapeutic preschool program's goals of behavioral and social skill development

School School of Education

Degree Master of Science

Degree Program Education

Degree Conferral Date 1977

Publication Date 02/01/1977

Defense Date 01/15/1977

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Children with social disabilities -- Education (Preschool),OAI-PMH Harvest,socialization

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Garlock, Jerry C. (committee chair)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC25314

Unique identifier UC25314

Identifier Ed '77 H299 (call number),etd-Harrington-1977.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-Harrington-1977

Document Type Thesis

Format theses (aat)

Rights Harrington, Douglas Eli

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230120-usctheses-microfilm-box5 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu