Content area
Full Text
This article uses a measure of psychosocial maturity for children in kindergarten (age 5) through third grade (age 8)-the relationship questionnaire (Rel-Q)-to illustrate the growth of social competence in young children. Social competence on the Rel-Q is defined according to maturity levels of three psychosocial competencies-understanding about, skills in, and personal meaning of social relationships, which depend on the degree to which the social perspectives of self and other are coordinated. Results on the Rel-Q from 4,076 kindergarten, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade children from urban public school systems in 2 different geographic areas show strong developmental trends and gender differences: there were significant differences in mean level between each grade from kindergarten through 3rd grade, and, beginning in 2nd grade, girls consistently scored higher than boys. The Rel-Q also showed theoretically predicted associations with a teacher rating scale of social skills. Confirmatory factor analyses suggest that the hypothesized structure of the measure fit the data.
Social competence is a complex construct, and its assessment in children, especially young children, is challenging. Yet the assessment of social competence is crucial for prevention and intervention efforts in children at risk for-or already displaying-negative life outcomes (e.g, Selman, Watts, & Schultz, 1997; Weissberg, Caplan, & Sivo, 1989), as well as for character education in general (Selman, 2003). Deficits in social functioning, particularly with peers, are predictive of academic failure, antisocial behavior, and psychopathology in adolescence and adulthood (e.g., Cowen, Pederson, Babigian, Isso, & Tost, 1973; Gesten, Flores de Apodaca, Rains, Weissberg, & Cowen, 1979; Roff, Sells, & Golden, 1973; Rubin & Ross, 1982; Spivack, Platt, & Shure, 1976). Promoting competent, caring, and respectful social interaction is fundamental to effective character education programs (Berkowitz, 2002).
A number of researchers distinguish between social competence defined as (a) an integrative, summary, and more abstract construct (e.g., "effectiveness") versus (b) specific skills or beliefs used to deal with social situations (e.g., Dodge, 1985; Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998; Weissberg, Caplan, & Sivo, 1989). Waters and Sroufe (1983) point out that the construct of social competence, with its intuitively abstract nature but discrete manifestations, presents problems for both conceptualization and assessment: if it is defined in terms of specific capacities or skills, the integrative potential of the concept is forfeited,...