Group Proposal

Promoting Social and Emotional Learning:

A Study of Grade 1 Students and the Effectiveness of
Strong Start Curriculum
Preetpal Pannu
Christina Majcher
Alison Lessard

Outline
Purpose of the study
Literature review
Overview of Strong Start
Research Question and Hypothesis
Participants/Sampling
Evaluation and Design
Instruments
Procedures
Data Analysis
Ethical Considerations
Limitations
Significance
Conclusion

Purpose of the Study

Developmental research indicates early experiences and relationships at home and school set
the stage for how a child learns to self-regulate, manages emotions, takes perspective of
others, and develops close relationships.

Social and emotional competence is closely linked to cognitive and academic success.

Development of these skills is not automatic, particularly for children exposed to risk factors
such as harsh or neglectful parenting, poverty, and marital/family dysfunction

As children enter school, interactions with peers increase, as do demands for social and
emotional skills.

Often a mismatch between the demands of the school environment and the social-emotional
readiness of children

Purpose of the Study

Estimated 12-22% of American children have emotional and behavioral problems

25-30% of American children experience some form of school adjustment problem

7.5 million children in the U.S. alone struggle with one or more diagnoses of ADHD, anxiety, and
depression

Purpose of the Study

Many social-emotional problems are less amenable to intervention after age 8

Schools are faced with increasing need to support the social-emotional needs of students

Many social and emotional learning programs or curriculums have been developed but there is
a need for programs that are:
evidence-based
cost effective
universal and relatively easy to implement by classroom teachers
able to be embedded into daily classroom and school routines

SEL Core Competencies

Retreived from http://www.casel.org/social-and-emotional-learning/core-competencies

Literature Review
What are Social Emotional Curricula?
Comprehensive programs often in a manualized format that focus on fostering protective factors and
reducing risk factors associated with academic and social problems.
friendship skills
emotional recognition
problem-solving skills training
violence and substance abuse prevention
social and anger coping skills training
Several individual studies and reviews suggest social emotional learning (SEL) programs are
associated with positive results such as:
improved attitudes about self and others
increased prosocial behavior
lower levels of problem behaviors and emotional distress
improved academic performance

Literature Review
Multiple research studies and meta-analysis studies resulted in the following recommendations for
SEL programs:

Sequenced step-by-step training approach

Active forms of learning
Focus sufficient time on skill development
Explicit learning goals

Literature Review

Results of meta-analysis demonstrated classroom teachers and other school staff can
effectively conduct SEL programs - students did better when instructed by teachers

Interventions can be incorporated into regular routines and outside personnel are not required
for effective delivery

High quality implementation with fidelity is critically important and significantly increases impact
of the program

Use of evidence-based and practical programs is crucial

Very positive results possible across multiple settings with low-cost intervention

What is Strong Start?

Low cost, preventative intervention

Brief - 10 lessons
Specifically designed cognitive-behavioral strategies
Lessons aim to explicitly teach children to recognize body, facial and
situational cues
Incorporates childrens literature
Uses visual cues such as posters and a puppet or stuffed animal (Henry)
Includes parent newsletters that can be sent home
Involves role play and additional lessons which focus on practice of skills
Developed by Dr. Kenneth Merrell from the University of Oregons
Resiliency Project

Research Question and Hypothesis

Research Question: Does social-emotional education positively
influence grade one students prosocial behaviour and social emotional
competence?
Hypothesis: Grade one students who receive
the Strong Start intervention will demonstrate
increased prosocial behaviour and social
emotional competence compared to grade one
children who do not receive the intervention.

Operational Definitions
Social-Emotional Education- Strong Start Curriculum
Prosocial Behaviour- Communication, Cooperation, Assertion, Responsibility,
Empathy, Engagement, and Self-Control
Social-Emotional Competence: Goal-Directed Behavior, Relationship Skills,
Personal Responsibility, and Decision-Making

Participants/Sampling Method
Who?
10 teachers
220 grade one children, aged 6 or 7 (75% Caucasian, 20% Asian, 5%
other ethnic groups
220 parents/caregivers
Where?
10 suburban schools, Western Canada
Each school had student population 642-754
Average class size 20-24 (wide range of abilities)

Participants/Sampling Method
How?
Cluster sampling- Principals responded to emails requesting participation
Each school, one Grade One classroom to receive the intervention and one
classroom to be studied that did not receive the intervention
Five participating teachers delivering Strong Start- full day training session
(program delivery, lesson content, suggestions to embed content)
Teachers and parents- two behaviour rating scales (prior to intervention, after the
intervention and as a 6 week follow-up)
Out of 235 students enrolled in the participating classes, no parental consent from
12, and 3 were dropped due to extended absences

Evaluation Design
Pre-Post Nonequivalent Control Group design
Classroom A- Strong Start intervention
Classroom B- No intervention (control group)
Intervention 14 weeks, January- April
Data collection included pre and post data collection periods
social skills rating scales prior to intervention, immediately
following intervention and the six-weeks post intervention

Instruments
Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS): Social Skills
Seven domains of social skills functioning: Communication, Cooperation,
Assertion, Responsibility, Empathy, Engagement, and Self-Control.
Reliability
Internal Reliability- good
Test-Rest Reliability- good
Validity
Criterion Validity- The manual demonstrates evidence of adequate criterion validity
Convergent Validity- The SSIS manual reports adequate support for the convergent and discriminant
validity of the SSIS rating subscales
Correlations between SSIS and other rating scales demonstrated low or mod. correlations

Instruments
Devereux Student Strengths Assessment (DESSA):
Assesses the social-emotional competencies that serve as protective factors
for children in kindergarten through eighth grade including: Goal-Directed
Behavior, Relationship Skills, Personal Responsibility, and Decision-Making
Reliability
Internal Reliability- good
Test-Rest Reliability- good
Validity
Criterion Validity- strong
Convergent Validity- strong

Procedures
Independent Variable- Strong Start

Implementation data- grad students

Implementation checklists
Was the intervention being implemented with fidelity?
50% of lessons observed with 80-90% of core lesson components
Duration of lessons, responses on topic, teacher feedback
Overall engagement and types of feedback provided
Level of integration outside of SS lessons- email

Data Analysis
With-in Group
Analysis

Social Skills Composite Score

SSIS
M (SD)

Social Emotional Competence

Score
DESSA
M (SD)

Pre-Test

Total Score

Total Score

Post Test 1

Total Score

Total Score

Post Test 2

Total Score

Total Score

Intergroup
Analysis

Social Skills Composite Score

SSIS
M (SD)

Social Emotional Competence Score

DESSA
M (SD)

Pre-Test

Intervention Group

Control Group

Intervention Group

Control Group

Post Test 1

Intervention Group

Control Group

Intervention Group

Control Group

Post Test 2

Intervention Group

Control Group

Intervention Group

Control Group

Table 3
Intervention
Group

Pre-Test
M (SD)

M (SD)

M (SD)

Social Skills
Composite
Score
SSIS

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Social
Emotional
Competence
Score
DESSA

Post Test 1

Post Test 2

Table 4
Control
Group

Pre-Test
M (SD)

M (SD)

M (SD)

Social Skills
Composite
Score
SSIS

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Student
Teacher
Parent

Social
Emotional
Competence
Score
DESSA

Post Test 1

Post Test 2

Ethical Considerations
1) Participant Risk
- no possibility of serious risk

2) Rights of Participants
- letters of consent and assent
-

parents, teachers and students

- right to decline or withdraw

3) Confidentiality

Limitations
1) Sampling Error

recruitment
The types of schools that were interested in
participating

school size

Schools chosen had a large school population,

therefore must be careful to generalize to small
school settings

class composition
Though randomly chosen, the needs of one class
could affect the results as well

Limitations
2) Maturation
January to April
Maturation effects could result from students
naturally developing skills over time, however the
use of control group can help

Routines
Students take time to adjust to classroom routines and systems
which could affect affect responsibility and decision making scores

3) Curriculum Delivery
student engagement
classroom management

Limitations
4) History
school systems
classroom systems

5) Testing effects
6) Teacher Bias
data collection
Teachers involved in collection and implementation of program

perceptions
perceptions of behavior may change after training and with time

Significance
Since the social-emotional competence of children is important to future
academic and social success it is vital to understand how these intervention
programs can be effectively incorporated into the school curriculum

Results of this Study

This study of the impact of Strong Start on Grade 1 students who receive
intervention as opposed to those that do not, has resulted in meaningful
information that is promising and worth future research

Significance
1) The study displays some findings that provide the possibility of a
systematic SEL program within schools
-

unique with a large sample size

use of a control group deals with co-founding variables and maturation effects
parent and student data assessment included

2) The study displays that Strong Start is a program that can provide teachers
with the skills, tool and ability to strengthen students social skills and social
emotional competence.
3) Strong Start seems to stand apart from other programs because it is
- cost effective
- universal, easy to implement and highly acceptable
- feasible

Conclusion
Future Research
1) Follow up long term preventative impact
2) Differences between school and home
3) Gender differences
4) Study of students at risk
5) Indirect and direct observation study of behavior from third party
- direct observation using coding system
- specific pro-social behaviors, student disruptive behavior, teacher social skills prompts

6) Larger variety of school size and different demographics (variety of

populations)

Conclusion
Policies
Based on the results of this study, it should be suggested that Strong Start be
implemented into school curriculum
practice skills taught and are prompted and reinforced over course of day
in a variety of settings
training and consultation for teachers and parents
o consistent language
o similar strategies

References
Caldarella, P., Chistensen, L., Kramer, T.J., & Kronmiller, K. (2009). Promoting social and emotional learning in second grade
students: A study of the Strong Start curriculum. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 51-56. doi:10.1007/s10643-0090321-4
Crosby, J. W. (2011). Test Review: FM Gresham & SN Elliott" Social Skills Improvement System Rating Scales." Minneapolis,
Minnesota--NCS Pearson, 2008. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(3), 292-296.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). http://www.casel.org/
Denham, S. A.,& Brown, C. (2010) Plays nice with others: Socialemotional learning and academic success. Early Education and
Development, 21:5, pages 652-680.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students
social and emotional learning: A MetaAnalysis of SchoolBased universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405432. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
Harlacher, J.E., & Merrell, K.E. (2010). Social and emotional learning as a universal level of student support: Evaluating the
follow-up effect of strong kids on social and emotional outcomes. (2010). Journal of Applied School Psychology, 26(3),
212-229. doi:10.1080/15377903.2010.495903

References
Haggerty, K., Elgin, J., & Woolley, A. (2011). Social-Emotional Learning Assessment Measures for Middle School Youth. Seattle:
Social Development Research Group, University of Washington Commissioned by the Raikes Foundation.
Joseph, G. E., & Strain, P. S. (2003). Comprehensive evidence-based social-emotional curricula for young children: An analysis of
efficacious adoption potential. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23(2), 62-73.
doi:10.1177/02711214030230020201
Kramer, T.J., Caldarella, P., Christensen, L., & Shatzer, R.H. (2009). Social and emotional learning in the kindergarten classroom:
Evaluation of the Strong Start curriculum. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 303-309. doi: 10.1007/s10643-0090354-8
Whitcomb, S.A. & Merrell, K.W. (2012). Understanding implementation and effectiveness of Strong Start K-2 on social emotional
behaviour. Early Childhood Education Journal, 40, 63-71. doi:10.1007/210643-011-0490-9