The results challenge current understanding of socio-emotional functioning in children with SLI by pointing to the crucial role of social cognition and prosocial behaviour. Factors other than expressive and receptive language play a role in the socio-emotional functioning of children with SLI.

This article reports a series of interviews with education and health practitioners. The aims were to identify interventions used in practice with children with speech, language and communication needs, to explore explanations for the choice of intervention and to identify the ways that outcomes were measured. Participants (n = 61) included educational psychologists, speech and language therapists and education advisory staff. They talked about interventions in terms of published programmes, principles and activities, strategies, resources and training programmes. There was evidence of local adaptation of interventions and wide development of local programmes. The choice of intervention was governed by a desire to meet identified service gaps and with reference to the evidential and/or theoretical basis of the intervention and the practicalities of the intervention. Outcomes were typically measured at the level of the individual rather than a service level. The study provided insight into the range of interventions in current practice, how service managers justify intervention choices and measure outcomes. The data from this study informed a national survey to examine patterns of usage of interventions.

No abstract

There is an increasing emphasis on supporting the oral language needs of children in the classroom. A variety of different measures have been developed to assist this process but few have been derived systematically from the available research evidence. A Communication Supporting Classrooms Observation Tool (CsC Observation Tool) for children aged 4–7 years (that is, in Reception and Key Stage 1 classrooms) was devised following a review of the research literature. The evidence derived from 62 research papers was rated based on the studies’ research design following specific rating criteria. Based on the review of the literature and rating of the evidence, three main areas were identified and included as dimensions in the CsC Observation Tool: Language Learning Environment, Language Learning Opportunities and Language Learning Interactions. A feasibility study was carried out in 101 classrooms in 39 schools across 10 local authorities in England. The results suggested that the CsC Observation Tool discriminated well between different age groups within the sample and between different schools. In addition, significant differences were found across the three dimensions of the CsC Observation Tool. For all year groups, scores for the Language Learning Environment dimension were significantly higher than scores for Language Learning Interactions, and scores for the Language Learning Interactions dimension were significantly higher than those for the dimension of Language Learning Opportunities. The study provided evidence for using the CsC Observation Tool in schools to support training and development. The tool has the potential to be used as a key feature in universal intervention studies to promote oral language in the classroom.

Background and aims: Children with special educational needs (SEN) are generally less accepted by peers in school and have fewer friendships than those without SEN. However, little research has examined peer relations across multiple dimensions, relative to severity of need and in relation to classroom experiences and individual behavioural characteristics. This unique study aimed to extend understanding of the peer relations of pupils with differing levels of SEN support relative to children of differing attainment levels without a formally recognised SEN and in relation to levels of social contact in class and teacher ratings of behaviour.Sample: Three hundred and seventy-five 9-11-year-old children recruited from 13 classes in 4 mainstream primary schools in the south of England. Fifty-nine pupils had been identified as having a SEN, of which 17 had a statement of SEN.Method: Pupil sociometric questionnaires provided a range of peer relations measures and the extent of meaningful contact with peers. Pupil behaviour was rated by teachers using the Pupil Behaviour Rating scales. Analyses examined differences in peer relations measures, pupil behaviour and meaningful contact across different levels of educational need.Results: Compared to pupils without SEN, pupils with a statement of SEN had lower levels of peer acceptance, fewer reciprocated friendships, and were less integrated into peer groups. Whilst internalising behaviours, such as social anxiousness and anxiety, and externalising behaviours, such as aggression and hyperactivity, were related to peer relations measures, frequency of meaningful contact with peers was more predictive of peer relations measures than either SEN status or behaviour. Conclusion:Findings point to the crucial role of meaningful social contact in the classroom for children's relationships with peers. The study advances understanding by highlighting that greater opportunity for meaningful social contact may improve social involvement of, as well as enhance academic outcomes for, pupils with SEN educated in mainstream schools.