Research to Practice Summit

Social Relationships of Preschool Children with Disabilities in Inclusive Settings ¹

by Sam Odom

• Investigator
• School of Education
• Indiana University, Bloomington

Method    Results    Implications    References

A primary developmental task for children is to establish positive social relationships with peers (Hartup, 1983). For young children with disabilities, inclusive preschool programs offer the opportunity to establish social relationships with children who are typically developing. Social interactions engendered through such positive social relationships are a medium through which children with disabilities may learn more advanced social competence skills (Odom & Brown, 1993). In fact, the opportunity for development of such skills is one rationale for the selection of inclusive settings as educational placements for preschool-aged children with disabilities (Guralnick, 1990).

Previous research has examined the nature of social integration of children with disabilities in inclusive programs. One of the most consistent findings over the past 20 years has been that children with disabilities engage in interactions with peers less often than do typically developing children (Guralnick, 1980; Odom, & Speltz, 1989). The methodological rigor of the work by Guralnick and others has contributed to the understanding of social interaction patterns in developmentally integrated and segregated settings. By closely controlling the characteristics of the participants, conducting play groups in laboratory settings, and using a standard length of time for the play session to occur, the internal validity of these findings has been enhanced. A next step in this program of research is to examine the social relationships occurring in naturalistic inclusive settings.

Such inclusive settings take many different forms (Odom et al., 1997) and enroll children with a range of characteristics. Such variables could well affect the nature of peer social relationships. The purpose of this study was to examine the peer relationships of young children with disabilities in naturalistic inclusive settings, particularly as they relate to social acceptance and rejection.

Method

Setting and Participants

This study took place in 16 inclusive preschool programs California, Maryland, Tennessee/Kentucky, and Washington. Investigators used a purposive sampling process to select programs that represented a national diversity in geography, population, socioeconomic status of families, culture, and language use. Participants from each classroom were five children with disabilities and two children who were typically developing (i.e. 80 children with disabilities and 32 typically developing children). Children with special needs met their states' criteria for receiving special education and had IEPs. Two of these five children had severe developmental delays or behavior disorders. The two typically developing children in each program were matched with a child participant with special needs on gender, age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and family status.

Procedure: Field-Study Approach

In this research, we followed a field-study approach employing quantitative and qualitative data collection strategies. The quantitative strategies included an ecobehavorial observational system called the CASPER-II (Brown, Favazza, & Odom, 1995) (which yielded information on the frequency of positive and negative social interactions), an observer impressions questionnaire completed after each observation (which yielded information on the nature of social interaction), a peer rating sociometric assessment, and a friendship questionnaire. The qualitative data included participant observations, semi-structured interviews with professionals, administrators, and family members, and document analysis.

Data analysis first occurred with aggregation of the quantitative data across sites. Investigators from each site examined the data and created an index for identifying children who were socially accepted and rejected. The marker variables for social rejection was a sociometric ranking in the lowest three students in the class and a mean sociometric rating less than 2.0 (out of 3.0). The marker variables for social acceptance was a sociometric ranking above the class median and a mean sociometric rating above 2.0. Once meeting these initial criteria, the other quantitative data had to confirm the acceptance and rejection of these children (i.e., frequency of social interaction, nature of interactions, identified friendships). After the accepted and rejected children were identified, investigators at each site created case summaries from the qualitative data.

These summaries were designed to highlight the nature of the social relationships with peers and identify reasons for the social acceptance and rejection. Content analyses were conducted to identify themes related to social rejection and social acceptance. After themes were identified, case summaries were recoded and themes were associated with individual children.

Results

Social Interactions

As a group, children with disabilities engaged in positive social interaction with peers significantly less often than typically developing children in inclusive classrooms. Similarly, peers directed social behavior to the children with disabilities significantly less often than to typically developing children. Negative behavior occurred infrequently and did not differ significantly across groups. The observer impression scale indicated that the most typical form of interaction for both groups was Play Companion; the typically developing children engaged in more Play Companion interactions, although this was not significant at the adjusted .05 level. Typically developing children had significantly higher peer ratings, overall, than children with disabilities. However, it should be noted that the average peer rating of the children with disabilities was only slightly 2.0, which suggests some general level of acceptance in the classroom. As might be expected from the mean ratings, the mean ranking was significantly higher for typically developing children (5.74 vs. 11.71). The average number of reciprocal friendships reported by teachers and parents for the two groups did not differ significantly.

Themes

Twenty-two children with disabilities were identified as being rejected in the classroom. These themes related to social rejection and the frequency of case summaries in which these themes appeared (indicated in parentheses) are: Speech/Language/Communication problems (14), Conflicts with peers (12), Lacks social and play skills (10), Disruptive in class (8), Aggressive toward peers (5), Lacks play skills (2), Prefers adult interactions (2), and Physical appearance (1).

Themes Related to Social Acceptance

Twenty-two children with disabilities met the criteria for social acceptance. The themes related to social acceptance and the frequency of case summaries in which these themes appeared (indicated in parentheses) are: Social skills (16), Speech/Language/communication problems (14), Close friendships (14), Displays positive affect (12), Communication skills (10), Pretend play skills (10), Interprets other children's behavior accurately (7), Perceived dependence (6), Expresses affection physically (6), Imitation (5), Follows class rules and routines (5), Play-social routines that maximize the opportunity for social interaction with peers (4), Tuned into social interaction (3), and Peer entry (3). The frequency of case summaries associated with each theme is now being analyzed. Definitions and examples from the case summaries will be presented.

Implications for Inclusion

This study extends the current knowledge-based by examining social relationships of preschool children with disabilities occurring in a nationally representative set of naturalistic inclusive settings. It also used a mixed methodological approach to identify social acceptance and rejection. The findings replicated previous research in indicating that as a group, children with disabilities appear to engage in fewer social interactions with peers and receive lower sociometric scores. These results suggest preschool children with disabilities may be a high risk for social rejection in the classroom, given that about 30% of the sample met the social rejection criteria. However, it also indicated that a substantial majority of children with disabilities were not socially rejected, and many were actively accepted. The specific themes related to social acceptance and rejection may inform our understanding of the nature of both constructs and how they operate with young children with disabilities.

References

• Brown, W. H., Favazza, P. C., & Odom, S. L. (1995). Code for Active Student Participation and Engagement-Revised (CASPER-II). Unpublished observer training manual. Nashville, TN: Early Childhood Research Institute on Inclusion, Vanderbilt University.
• Guralnick, M. J. (in press). The nature and meaning of social integration for young children with mild developmental delays in inclusive settings. Journal of Early Intervention.
• Guralnick, M.J. (1990). Social competence and early intervention. Journal of Early Intervention, 14, 3-14.
• Guralnick, M.J. (1980). Social interaction among preschool handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 46, 248-253.
• Gurnalick, M.J., Connor, R.T., Hammond, M.A., Gottman, J.M., & Kinnish, K. (1996). Immediate effects of mainstreamed settings on the social interactions and social integration of preschool children. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 100, 359-377.
• Hartup, W. (1983). Peer relations. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), P.H. Mussen (Series Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 103-196). New York: John Wiley.
• Jenkins, J.R., Odom, S.L. & Speltz, M.L. (1989). Effects of integration and structured play on the development of handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 55, 420-428.
• Odom, S.L., & Brown, W.H. (1992). Social interaction skill training for young children with disabilities in integrated settings. In C. Peck, S. Odom, & D. Bricker, (Eds.), Integrating young children with disabilities into community based programs: From research to implementation (pp. 39-64). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
• Odom, S. L., Horn, E. M., Marquart, J., Hanson, M.J., Wolfberg, P., Beckman, P., Lieber, J., Li, S., Schwartz, I., Janko, S., & Sandall, S. (1997). On the definition(s) of inclusion: Organizational context and service delivery models. [Manuscript submitted for publication]

¹  Presented at the Research to Practice Summit, July 30-31, 1998, Washington, D.C., sponsored by the National Early Childhood Technical Assistance System in collaboration with the Early Childhood Research Institute on Inclusion and the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Education Research and Improvement (OERI).