Special Classes and Group Therapy: An Evaluation of Their Effects on Achievement and Behavior in a Public School Setting

Abstract

This investigation was designed to test the relative effectiveness of four educational-treatment methods of providing adequate services for children with special learning problems in elementary school Special Learning Problems classes. The focus was on the relative effectiveness of these methods in bringing about positive achievement and behavior change. The subjects were 50 elementary school pupils enrolled in e ight existing Special Learning Problems (SLP) classes in Fairfax County, Virginia. The Ss represented a wide range of behavioral and/or educational disorders reflected in an equally wide range of inappropriate behavior and/or educational retardation of at least one, and generally two years. Each of the eight pre-established SLP classes was randomly assigned to one of four educational-treatment groups. Two SLP classes were assigned to each treatment group. The experimental methods consisted of special class placement and: (A) "Child Therapy Only" (CTO); (B) "Parent Therapy-Only" (PTO); (C) "Child and Parent Therapy" (CPT). In addition, a "Special Class-Only" (SEO) control group was included. Subjects in the CTO and CPT groups participated in 24, 90-minute group therapy sessions. The parents of the children in the CPT and PTO groups received 24, 90-minute parent group therapy sessions. The SEO (control) group did not receive group therapy nor did their parents. Group therapy sessions were conducted by trained and experienced group therapists from the Mental Health Center. The California Achievement Tests, The Wide Range Achievement Test, the Behavior Rating Scale, and the Human Figure Drawing Test were administered in mid-October, 1969 and repeated in mid-April, 1970. The difference between pre- and post-test scores were computed and the differences between treatment groups' mean gain scores were tested for significance by means of t-ratios. The null hypotheses tested were: Hypothesis 1. There will be no significant differences in mean gain scores on any of the achievement measures or on the behavior ratings between the control group (SEO) and any of the experimental groups (CTO, PTO, CPT). Hypothesis 2. No significant differences in mean gain scores on any of the achievement measures or on the behavior ratings will be found between the three experimental groups (CTO, PTO, CPT). Hypothesis 3. There will b e no significant differences in mean gain scores on any of the achievement measures or on the behavior ratings between those students designated as NEW (1st year SLP) and those FORMER students in SLP classes. The analyses of the results from the achievement and behavior measures provided, with only three exceptions, support for not rejecting the null hypotheses. With regard to Hypotheses 1 and 2, although only two comparisons reached statistical significance (i. e. , the CPT group obtained significantly higher CAT-Reading and WRAT-Arithmetic gains than the SEO group), it was found that the achievement mean gain scores were generally greater for the CPT group than for either the SEO group or for either of the other two experimental groups (CTO and PTO). In contrast, the SEO group obtained a greater behavior scale mean gain than any of the three experimental groups (CTO, PTO, CPT), although this difference did not reach significance. With only one exception (WRAT-Arithmetic), no significant differences were found between the NEW and FORMER groups. Subsequent to the experimental period, the NEW students demonstrated a significantly greater mean gain in Arithmetic than their FORMER group counterparts. Behaviorally, the FORMER group obtained a greater mean behavior rating gain than the NEW group, although not statistically significant. In general, the present findings provided no evidence for differential favorable effects from any of the educational-treatment methods utilized in terms of significantly greater achievement or behavioral gains. However, some noted trends were suggestive of the fact that perhaps each of the four educational-treatment methods is best suited for different situations, goals, and subjects. Further research was recommended.