Social skills in the context of learning disability definitions: a reply to Gresham and Elliott and directions for the future

Early identification: Language skills and social functioning in deaf and hard of hearing preschool children

OBJECTIVE

Permanent childhood hearing impairment often results in speech and language problems that are already apparent in early childhood. Past studies show a clear link between language skills and the child's social-emotional functioning. The aim of this study was to examine the level of language and communication skills after the introduction of early identification services and their relation with social functioning and behavioral problems in deaf and hard of hearing children.

STUDY DESIGN

Nationwide cross-sectional observation of a cohort of 85 early identified deaf and hard of hearing preschool children (aged 30-66 months).

METHODS

Parents reported on their child's communicative abilities (MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory III), social functioning and appearance of behavioral problems (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire). Receptive and expressive language skills were measured using the Reynell Developmental Language Scale and the Schlichting Expressive Language Test, derived from the child's medical records.

RESULTS

Language and communicative abilities of early identified deaf and hard of hearing children are not on a par with hearing peers. Compared to normative scores from hearing children, parents of deaf and hard of hearing children reported lower social functioning and more behavioral problems. Higher communicative abilities were related to better social functioning and less behavioral problems. No relation was found between the degree of hearing loss, age at amplification, uni- or bilateral amplification, mode of communication and social functioning and behavioral problems.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that improving the communicative abilities of deaf and hard of hearing children could improve their social-emotional functioning.

LD, interpersonal understanding, and social behavior in the classroom

This study used Baron and Kenny's (1986) criteria for mediation to investigate the extent to which interpersonal understanding mediates the relation between learning disabilities (LD) and social adaptation in the classroom. Twenty-two children with and 22 children without a diagnosis of LD completed a semistructured developmental clinical interview measure of interpersonal understanding. They were also rated by their fourth- and fifth-grade teachers on a measure of social adaptation in the classroom. Interpersonal understanding and social adaptation in the classroom were found to be positively correlated. Children with LD exhibited less interpersonal understanding and social adaptation. Although this group difference on social adaptation was greatly reduced when interpersonal understanding was statistically controlled, it remained statistically significant. These results suggest that reduced social adaptation in the classroom and lower interpersonal understanding are both associated with a diagnosis of LD. However, they do not conclusively support the claim that interpersonal understanding mediates the relation between LD and social adaptation. Thus, whether the social difficulties of people with LD stem from the same complex phenomena that produce these people's learning problems remains an open question.

A postmodern critique of Conte's, Andrews's, Gresham's, and Elliott's assumptions

In this article I suggest that the assumptions that Conte, Andrews, Gresham, and Elliott make regarding the characteristics that should be attributable to learning disabilities are limited by the "either/or" empirical view. I contend that (a) there is no such phenomenon as a pure primary disorder; all behavioral and learning problems are manifested by a discrete cluster of behaviors, so that one differentiates exceptionalities by looking at the quality of behaviors and possible antecedents rather than comparing them quantitatively; (b) that learning disabilities are earmarked by the inefficient manner in which tasks are approached in one's specific area(s) of deficient intellect rather than by universal characteristics; (c) that all aspects of learning are metaphorical and, therefore, have implicit dimensions; and learning disabilities are, in large part, a deficit in learning implicit information; (d) that in-school and out-of-school learning are of a piece and must be synthesized, just as theory, research, and practice must be synthesized; and (e) that the definition should not dictate our notion of what learning disabilities are, but rather should reflect our observations of persons with learning disabilities.