1
Teachers’ opinions and parents’ ideas about the social behaviour, personality traits and play interaction of the children with multiple problems in peer relations
Kaarina Laine & Marita Neitola
Department of Education
University of Turku
Finland
;
Paper presented in European Conference on Educational Research of EERA in Crete 22-25 September 2004 (Network 5)
Abstract
Our paper is based on a research project Origins of Exclusion in Early Childhood: Development and interactive accumulation of risks of social
and academic exclusion from pre-school to primary education.The purpose of the longitudinal research is to investigate children’s early peer relations and the dropout from peer networks in kindergarten and first grade. The purpose of the longitudinal research is to investigate children’s early peer relations and the dropout from peer networks in kindergarten and first grade. Earlier results in this project and in the pilot-study pointed out that children’s peer relation problems are very common and easily accumulative. The children could be harassed, rejected, victimized or withdrawn or have all these problems. The children who had problems in their peer relations could be divided into four categories: children who had no problems, children whose problems varied during follow-up years, children whose problems decreased or they had only one problem, children whose problems increased or constantly had multiple problems in their peer relations. (Laine & Neitola 2002; Laine, Salonen, Lepola & Neitola 2004.) Children’s social behavior and personality traits were examined by the assessments of teachers’ and parents evaluated their interaction with peers in play situations. Teachers rated social behaviour of children with multiple problems in peer relations more negative than other children’s behaviour. Our results give support to earlier discoveries about the social behavior of at-risk children (see e.g. Ladd & Kocherderfer-Ladd 1998) and its connection to social status and acceptance in the peer group (see e.g. Bierman & Welsh 1997.) Behavioral troubles seem to extend with increasing peer relations problems and age and these problems come out as externalized and internalized behavior difficulties. Also parents are aware of their children’s troubles with peer interaction.
Introduction
Social competence with peers has been generally defined as behaviours and cognitions reflecting successful social interactions with peers (Howes & Matheson 1992). According to various researchers children’s social competence can be considered to consist of positive peer relations, adequate social skills and decent socio-cognitive abilities (see e.g. Bierman & Welsh 1997; Rubin, Bukowski & Parker 1998; Webster-Stratton & Lindsay 1999). Being excluded by peers means serious risk to children’s well being and to the development of their social competence (see Asher & Coie 1990; Bagwell, Newcomb & Bukowski 1998; Harrist & Bradley 2003; Ladd 2000). In previous investigations it has been found that unaccepted children’s social behavior can be one reason for exclusion (Bierman & Welsh 1997; Ladd & Kochenderfer-Ladd 1998).
Peer related social competence consists of the ability of young children to successfully and appropriately carry out their interpersonal goals (Guralnick 1990,4). According to Howes and James (2002), social competence can be defined as a behavior that reflects successful social functioning. Social skills and positive relationships are included in the definition. Children must be both effective in meeting their own social goals with others and be sensitive to social communications from others so that their partners also are effective in meeting their social goals. Peer-related social competence can be seen as a hierarchical model where higher levels depend upon lower ones, and that specific processes transform elements from lower level to achieve a different meaning in terms of peer related social competence. Children’s social exchanges are dynamic by nature, actual sequences of strategies that are used in a given context. (Guralnick 1992, 41.) Social and communicative skills are essential in child-child interaction. These skills emerge during the course of development and are dependent upon integration of skills and abilities of the more fundamental domains. The transformation of social/communicative skills are used to solve interpersonal problems in the context of social tasks that are of interest. The integration, organization and sequencing of social/communicative skills produce strategies within a social task. These strategies are associated with peer-related social competence. Differences that may exist among children in accordance with varying levels of peer-related social competence –as assessed by peer sociometrics- should be reflected in social interaction strategies employed during these social tasks. (Guralnick 1992, 42.)
Social incompetence is defined by relationships that are mistrustful and by behavior that disregards the reciprocal nature of social interaction and relationships. One maladaptive category of social behavior is aggression or bullying which may achieve the actor’s social goals but not the partner’s. Another type of maladaptive category of social behavior includes avoidance, withdrawal, or passive acquiescence, which does not achieve the child’s social goals and may (or may not) achieve the partner’s. (Howes & James 2002, 138.) We think that rejection, bullying, victimization, withdrawal and loneliness can be categorized dimensions of social incompetence. These problems in peer relations can lead to exclusion and leaving outside the social world of peers, which plays a part in the development of children’s social skills. Dropping out of the group prevents the social interaction, which could promote the skills of children at-risk and contribute to their well being.
Our earlier findings got from child interviews, self-evaluations and sociometric ratings- gave evidence that diverse peer problems, such as being rejected, withdrawn, bully, victimized and/or lonely, are very common and the problems are easily accumulative.
Methods and procedure
This study is part of a larger longitudinal research project concerning children’s social development and social relations (Origins of Exclusion in Early Childhood, funded by the Academy of Finland). The purpose of this three-year longitudinal survey research was to investigate children’s early peer relations and the dropout from peer networks in kindergarten, pre-school and school. The sample of the project consisted of 179 five-year-old children (99 boys and 80 girls) who were recruited from day care centres by parents’permission in one Southwestern city in Finland. Children’s mean age in the beginning of the research was 5 years. We followed these children for three years. Our presentation now deals with that part of the investigation was aimed at children’s social behaviour and peer interactive play between the ages of five and seven.
In addition we recruited also teachers and parents to our research, because besides children themselves also parents and teachers are valuable source of information as regards to social competence. In this presentation we describe parents’ and teachers’ opinions about children’s social behavior, interactive play behavior and peer relations. Every year teachers rated children’s social behaviour, social status and peer relations via questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 30 items dealing with social behaviour, peer relations, personality/mood and doing homework each rated on Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (never typical to this child) to 5 (always typical to this child). The items of social behaviour were calculated in six sum variables: aggression, withdrawal, prosocial behaviour, entry behaviour, shyness and isolation in the group. Teachers rated children’s social status and peer relations like peer acceptance and rejection, bullying, victimization, loneliness, withdrawal and such personality traits as sadness, balance and impulsiveness. We asked them also to evaluate children’s working with their exercises. We got teachers’ ratings of 166 children over three years.
Parents’ ideas of their children’s interaction with peers were asked when children were in the pre-school, at six year old. Parents of 156 children completed a questionnaire, which partly based on Fantuzzo’s and his colloquies’ parental assessment of peer play, the Penn interactive Peer Play scale PIPPS. Parents rated their child’s interaction with peers in play situations by filling a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The scale included items such as helping other children, starting fights and arguing, disrupting the play of other children, destroying others’ things, playing a lot with others, playing happily with others, having peers and friends. There were 24 arguments in the scale and the arguments could be answered between 1 to 5, 1= completely same opinion to 5= not at all same opinion.
Results
We’ll describe our findings generally and with the case of one boy called Eric. From the first measuring time Eric belonged to the group of multiple peer relation problems. His peers in kindergarten and preschool nominated him bully and rejected him. He begun his school in special education class and in that spring when interviewing his parents they told about the neurological examination to come. At school he felt himself as well to be victimized and lonely and withdrew outside the group.
Teachers’ opinions on children’s social behavior and personality traits from the five year olds to seven year olds
Children were divided into four categories on the grounds of the amount of peer problems: multiple or increasing problems, constant one problem or decreasing problems, varying problems and no problems in all measuring years. Eric belonged to the group of children with multiple problems.
Teachers’ ratings were analyzed by Kruskall-Wallis nonparametric test. At the age of five children with multiple or increasing problems were rated slightly more aggressive and lesser co-operative by teachers and their mood was less often well balanced. Differences were statistically quite significant. In teachers opinion these children were very significantly more often bullies when evaluating their peer relations than other children
In their assessments Eric’s teachers in kinder-garden, preschool and first class told about his social behavior like this: As five year old Eric seldom helped other children or noticed their needs. He was quite often incapable of working with others in the group. He was sometimes aggressive, but sometimes he could e.g. ask permission to play with others and took part to other children’s doings, but he wasn’t shy or afraid of others. His teacher felt him a very demanding child who was dependent of his teacher and whose behavior was hard to understand.
Table 1. Teachers’ opinions about five year old children’s social behavior in kindergarten
Table 1. Teachers’ opinions about five year old children’s social behaviour in kindergarten
Social behaviour at the age of five (N=166) / Multiple/ increasing problems (n=28)Mean Rank / Constantly one problem/decreasing problems (N=57)
Mean Rank / Varying problems (N=54)
Mean Rank / No problems (N=27)
Mean Rank / Kruskall-Wallis
p
Aggression / 103.11[a] / 73.80[b] / 86.63 / 77.39 / .047*
Entry behavior / 63.00 / 89.05 / 84.00 / 92.04 / .077
Prosocial behavior / 66.00 / 92.18 / 81.05 / 88.22 / .110
Shyness / 85.29 / 87.62 / 79.42 / 81.11 / .813
Co-operation / 60.91[a] / 91.79[b] / 80.39 / 95.65[b] / .018*
Isolation / 63.00 / 89.05 / 84.00 / 92.04 / .219
Note. Mean differences between the groups with letters a,b are significant at the level p <.05
Table 2. Teachers’ opinions about five year old children’s peer relations and personality traits in kindergarten
Peer relations and personality traits at the age of five (N=166) / Multiple/ increasing problems (n=28)Mean Rank / Constantly one problem/decreasing problems (N=57)
Mean Rank / Varying problems (N=54)
Mean Rank / No problems (N=27)
Mean Rank / Kruskall-Wallis
p
Accepted / 70.54 / 88.91 / 81.99 / 88.54 / .323
Rejected / 94.66 / 83.10 / 84.67 / 70.44 / .226
Bully / 108.57[a] / 73.68[b] / 82.66[b] / 79.93[b] / .008**
Victimized / 90.36 / 84.61 / 86.10 / 68.83 / .224
Sad / 91.46 / 82.91 / 88.05 / 67.39 / .182
Well-balanced / 67.66 / 91.25 / 75.99 / 98.59 / .026*
In pre-school Eric’s teacher noticed his unskilled social behaviour more distinctively. Eric was very suspicious towards his peers, very aggressive physically and verbally and still he had problems in working with others, but still he was quite often initiative in playing with others when they took him along or Eric himself wanted to take part. The teacher stated that social interaction and contacts with other children were very difficult to Eric. He had constantly conflicts with peers.
Like Eric, children with large problems in peer relations and in social interaction were rated still markedly lesser co-operative than other children at the pre-school stage. The difference between them and other groups became clearer and statistically more significant. Teachers regarded them being rejected bullies and victimized in the peer group and they noticed these children’s unstable feelings. Seems to be that these children’s peer relation problems are noticed better or become more complicated.
Table 3. Teachers’ opinions about six year old children’s social behaviour in pre-school
Social behavior at the age of six (N=166) / Multiple/ Increasing problems (N=28)Mean Rank / Constantly 1 problem/
Decreasing problems (N=57)
Mean Rank / Varying problems (N=54)
Mean Rank / No problems
(N=27)
Mean Rank / Kruskall-Wallis
p
Aggression / 102.02[a] / 79.49[b] / 84.85 / 70.06[b] / .065
Entry behavior / 86.39 / 83.12 / 87.17 / 73.96 / .671
Prosocial behavior / 69.93 / 89.66 / 80.57 / 90.43 / .263
Shyness / 79.79 / 85.32 / 88.79 / 72.93 / .501
Co-operation / 54.70[a] / 91.73[b] / 81.89[b] / 99.22[b] / .002**
Isolation / 89.75 / 81.20 / 91.36 / 66.15 / .127
Note. Mean differences between the groups with letters a,b are significant at the level p <.05
Table 4. Teachers’ opinions about six year old children’s peer relations and personality traits in pre-school
Social behavior at the age of six (N=166) / Multiple/ Increasing problems (N=28)Mean Rank / Constantly 1 problem/
Decreasing problems (N=57)
Mean Rank / Varying problems (N=54)
Mean Rank / No problems
(N=27)
Mean Rank / Kruskall-Wallis
p
Aggression / 102.02[a] / 79.49[b] / 84.85 / 70.06[b] / .065
Entry behavior / 86.39 / 83.12 / 87.17 / 73.96 / .671
Prosocial behavior / 69.93 / 89.66 / 80.57 / 90.43 / .263
Shyness / 79.79 / 85.32 / 88.79 / 72.93 / .501
Co-operation / 54.70[a] / 91.73[b] / 81.89[b] / 99.22[b] / .002**
Isolation / 89.75 / 81.20 / 91.36 / 66.15 / .127
Note. Mean differences between the groups with letters a,b are significant at the level p <.05
Eric began his school career in a small classroom, in special education. His teacher described his social behavior: Eric ignored other children and liked to be with himself, he was afraid of others, aggressive (had fights and threatened peers) and distressed with them. He was bad-tempered, impulsive and intrusive at school. So the teacher had to continually encourage Eric and he needed exceptionally much guidance. Eric’s behavior was hard to control and naturally teacher felt herself insufficient. Eric himself told us that he felt lonely and he didn’t like to be with other children because they harassed him. The amount of his peer relation problems increased during measuring years from two to all five: He was lonely, withdrawn, bully, victimized and rejected, but his teacher noticed only his non-acceptance with peers. A positive trait was that Eric did his homework properly.
If we look at our research groups we see that during the first school year social behavior, mood and working habits differ statistically significantly or very significantly. Children with multiple or increasing problems in their social life are more aggressive, they are inept in joining to the group and they help, comfort and notice other children weaker then other children. Children with multiple and increasing problems have difficulties in co-operation. They rarely are initiative or obey the rules or are able to work with other pupils. Children with problems don’t ask for permission to play or be with peers, are too intrusive and cannot get member of the group. Shyness is the only area where there isn’t a remarkable distinction. It seems to be that these children lack of advanced social skills needed in peer interaction. Maybe because of problems mentioned earlier these children often seem to isolate themselves from other children’s company.
According to teachers, other children didn’t accept children with multiple problems. On the contrary they are to some extent rejected within peers. Teachers thought these children harassed peers, but were also harassed by others, but what they didn’t notice was withdrawal in peer relations. Teachers didn’t consider children with multiple problems withdrawn although they thought they isolated themselves in the group. Bad mood and lack of socially satisfying interaction with peers was manifested in the feelings of loneliness and sadness, not well-balanced and impulsive behavior. Quite often these children were in a bad mood and neglect their work, as the their teachers said.
Table 5. Teachers’ opinions about seven year old children’s social behaviour in the first form
Social behavior at the age of seven (N=166) / Multiple/ Increasing problems (n=28)Mean Rank / Constantly 1 problem/ Decreasing problems (N=57)
Mean Rank / Varying problems (N=54)
Mean Rank / No problems (N=27)
Mean Rank / Kruskall-Wallis
p
Aggression / 112.80[a] / 76.64[b] / 87.36[b] / 59.87[b] / .000***
Entry
behavior / 105.21[a] / 78.52 / 90.75 / 57.00[b] / .001***
Prosocial behavior / 57.93[a] / 93.46[b] / 75.57 / 104.93[b] / .001***
Shyness / 89.75 / 82.54 / 88.81 / 68.41 / .243
Co-operation / 47.61[a] / 92.76[b] / 80.25[b ] / 107.67[b] / .000***
Isolation / 95.82[a] / 82.65 / 94.38 / 50.76[b] / .001***
Note. Mean differences between the groups with letters a,b are significant at the level p <.05
Table 6. Teachers’ opinions about seven year old children’s peer relations and personality traits in the first form
Peer relations and personality traits at the age of seven (N=166) / Multiple/ Increasing problems (n=28)Mean Rank / Constantly 1problem/ Decreasing problems (N=57)
Mean Rank / Varying problems (N=54)
Mean Rank / No problems (N=27)
Mean Rank / Kruskall-Wallis
p
Accepted / 59.38[a] / 84.61[b] / 81.90[b] / 109.30[b] / .001***
Rejected / 101.38[a] / 76.63 / 89.59 / 67.28[b] / .010*
Bully / 107.11[a] / 79.50 / 85.38 / 63.70[b] / .002**
Victimized (N=164) / 102.07[a] / 78.78 / 90.38 / 60.44[b] / .001***
Withdrawn in group
/ 93.50 / 82.11 / 85.81 / 71.43 / .286Feels him/herself lonely (N=163) / 97.75[a] / 74.59[b] / 91.65 / 62.44[b] / .003**
Sad (N=163)
/ 98.57[a] / 81.49 / 86.16 / 57.85[b] / .004**Well-balanced / 57.04[a] / 89.45[b] / 77.01 / 111.37[b] / .000***
Impulsiveness / 109.29[a] / 79.45[b] / 82.27[b] / 67.78[b] / .003**
Often in bad mood (N=164) / 100.77[a] / 78.37 / 87.26 / 62.78[b] / .005**
Negligence in exercises (N=165) / 100.16[a] / 75.15[b] / 88.92 / 70.15[b] / .004**
Note. Mean differences between the groups with letters a,b are significant at the level p <.05