1. Do They Say Thank You? Evaluation of a Social Skills Curriculum in a Youth Development Program

2. Research Objective  To evaluate the effectiveness of a brief social skills curriculum taught to youth participating in the Youth Impact program.

3. Research Questions Does participation in the social skills curriculum affect the social skills of the youth?  Specifically, do the scores of the youth taking the social skills classes significantly change after having taken the classes?  Do the scores of the youth taking the social skills classes significantly differ from the scores of the youth who did not take the classes?

4. General Principles of Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory People learn by observing the behavior of others Learning occurs without a change in behavior Cognition plays a role in learning Social Learning theory can be considered a bridge between behaviorist and cognitive learning theories

5. How the Environment Reinforces Modeling The participant is reinforced by the model. The participant is reinforced by a third person. The imitated behavior leads to reinforcing consequences. The model’s behavior affects the participant’s behavior vicariously.

6. Skillstreaming Process In Class:  Define the Skill  Model the skill  Show examples/experiences  Set up the role-play  Conduct the role-play  Provide feedback Real World:  Apply skill at home, school, Youth Impact with peers and surrounding adults  Complete homework and continue to apply skill each week

7. Five Skills Taught Listening Giving a compliment Saying thank you Following instructions Apologizing

8. Social Skills Classes Taught once a week for five consecutive weeks. Each class consisted of approximately 6 youth. Classes were age specific and an age appropriate curriculum was taught in each class. Average class length was 30 to 45 minutes.

9. Methods – Subjects in Sample Two groups of YI participants  Experimental group – youth who participated in the social skills classes (n = 42)  Control group – youth who did not participate in the social skills classes (n = 24) Selection of Experimental Group  Relied on youth who were the first to return consent forms and attended class. Selection of Control Group  Chosen by default. Youth who returned consent forms but did not attend the classes.

10. Demographics- Youth Experimental (n=36) Average age: 12.43 Age Range: 9 to 16 Gender: 50% male 50% female Race: 26.5% Caucasian 52.9% Hispanic 20.5% other Control Group (n=10) Average age: 11.6 Age Range: 9 to 17 Gender: 40% male 60% female Race: 30.0% Caucasian 40.0% Hispanic 30.0% other

11. Demographics- Parents Experimental (n=36) Average age: 36.7 Gender: 91.7% female Race: 27.8% Caucasian 55.6% Hispanic 16.7% Other Control Group (n=10) Average age: 35.7 Gender: 100% female Race: 30.0% Caucasian 50.0% Hispanic 20.0% Other

12. Demographics- Parents cont. Experimental (n=36) Education Level: 22.2% less than H.S. 27.8% HS Diploma/GED 27.8% Some college 13.9% Associates 5.6% Bachelors Employment Status: 69.4% full-time 5.6% part-time 16.7% unemployed Household Income: 33.3% less than $20,000 Control Group (n=10) Education Level: 22.2% less than H.S. 22.2% H.S. Diploma/GED 44.4% some college 0% Associates 0% Bachelors Employment Status: 50.0% full-time 40.0% part-time 10.0% unemployed Household Income: 60.0% less than $20,000

13. Demographics- Parents cont. Experimental (n=36) Marital Status: single 22.2% married 41.7% separated 5.6% divorced 25.0% cohabiting 5.6% Relationship to Child: biological/adopted 77.8% legal guardian 22.2% Control Group (n=10) Marital Status: single 10.0% married 30.0% separated 20.0% divorced 40.0% cohabiting 0% Relationship to Child: biological/adopted 80.0% legal guardian 20.0%

14. Data Collection Methods  Longitudinal Study  Using two points in time  Pre-test and Post-test technique

15. Data Collection from Youth and Parents Methods Pre-test and post-test surveys from child, parent, and staff Surveys were collected from both participants and a control group. Group Interview of staff members at Youth Impact Incentive Parent: Having their child/children participate in the social skills program. Youth:  Learning and practicing social skills in a non- threatening environment.  Candy!!!  Overnight trip in a Hotel during the summer.

16. Data Collection from Program Staff Methods Pre-test Surveys Post-test Surveys Group Interview Incentive Volunteer Help Social Skills research project to help the participants of their program. Learning more about their participants through our longitudinal study.

17. Measurement of Social Skills  Do I listen to someone who is talking to me?  Do I say thank you when someone does something for me?  Do I tell other people when I like how they are or something they have done?  Do I carry out instructions from other people quickly and correctly?  Do I apologize to others when I have done something wrong?

18. Measured by: Likert Scale on a scale of 1-5  1 being almost never  2 being seldom  3 being sometimes  4 being often  5 being almost always

19. Results: Social Skills Overall before Classes Social SkillsYouth Mean Score Parent Mean Score Staff Mean Score Listening4.32 (n=59) 3.72 (n=50) 3.48 (n=47) Saying Thank You4.27 (n=59) 3.81 (n=50) 3.76 (n=47) Giving a Compliment3.47 (n=59) 3.36 (n=50) 2.92 (n=47) Following Instructions3.66 (n=58) 3.51 (n=49) 3.47 (n=45) Apologizing4.14 (n=59) 3.74 (n=50) 3.46 (n=46)

20. Results: Mean Social Skills Scores for Experimental Group of Youth (Youth Ratings) Youth Rating (n=27) Before Classes After Classes Mean Difference Listening4.35 0.00 Saying Thank You4.354.540.19 Giving a Compliment3.693.920.23 Following Instructions3.724.080.36 Apologizing4.194.460.27

21. Results: Mean Social Skills Scores for Experimental Group of Youth (Staff Ratings) Staff Rating (n=34) Before Classes After Classes Mean Difference Listening3.624.470.851** Saying Thank You3.884.620.738** Giving a Compliment2.914.091.178** Following Instructions3.794.350.563** Apologizing3.534.350.823**

22. Results: Mean Social Skills Scores for Experimental Group of Youth (Parent Ratings) Parent Rating (n=17) Before Classes After Classes Mean Difference Listening3.884.240.355 Saying Thank You4.184.820.644** Giving a Compliment3.654.180.526* Following Instructions3.884.120.238 Apologizing3.944.530.589**

23. Summary of Changes in Scores for the Youth in the Experimental Group As reported by the staff, the social skills of the youth were significantly better after attending the classes in each of the five skill areas. As reported by the parents, after attending the classes the youth significantly improved upon three of the five social skills. As reported by the youth, after attending the classes there were improvements in four of the five social skills, however these improvements failed to achieve statistical significance.

24. Results: Listening Skills – Youth Rating

25. Results: Listening Skills – Parent Rating

26. Results: Listening Skills – Staff Rating *

27. Summary of Listening Skills Results Although both the youth and parents rated listening skills as increasing after the classes, there was no significant difference between the youth who attend classes and those who did not. Staff rated those youth who were participating in the classes as doing significantly better with listening than those who didn’t attend the class.

28. Results: Saying Thank You – Youth Rating

29. Results: Saying Thank You – Parent Rating **

30. Results: Saying Thank You – Staff Rating **

31. Summary of Saying Thank You Results The parents and staff observed an increase in saying thank you for the youth who attended classes. Overall, there was a significant difference between the youth who participated and those who did not.

32. Results: Giving A Compliment – Youth Rating

33. Results: Giving A Compliment – Parent Rating

34. Results: Giving A Compliment – Staff Rating **

35. Summary of Giving a Compliment Results As reported by the youth, after attending the classes there were improvements in four of the five social skills, however these improvements failed to achieve statistical significance. Both the youth who took the classes and those who didn't increased in their ability to give a compliment but there was no significant difference between the two groups at the end of the classes. According to the staff, the youth who took the social skills classes were significantly higher in their giving a compliment score after the classes than the youth who did not take the class.

36. Results: Following Instructions – Youth Rating

37. Results: Following Instructions – Parent Rating

38. Results: Following Instructions – Staff Rating *

39. Summary of Following Instructions Results According to the youth, the experimental group improved and the control group decreased. Although the parents saw an improvement in their kids after the classes, it was not significant. The youth who took the class are better at following instructions at time two according to staff as they noticed a significant change.

40. Results: Apologizing – Youth Rating

41. Results: Apologizing – Parent Rating *

42. Results: Apologizing – Staff Rating **

43. Summary of Apologizing Results Student participants and non-participants both perceived an increase in their apologizing skills between time one and time two tested. Parents and Staff perceived a statistically significant increase in apologizing for students that attended this Skillstreaming class.

44. Conclusions There was a significant change in the social skills of the youth who participated in the classes. After the classes, the social skills of the youth who participated were higher than those of the youth who did not participate. Overall, the skillstreaming curriculum was effective.