I’m not sure if you mean viable in terms of getting funded, or actually improving the social intelligence of the children enrolled in them.
They do exist if the lack of social intelligence is considered a diagnosis. I had lessons once or twice a week from a speech therapist as a child, partly for difficulty pronouncing letters, and partly for social skills, for that reason. During elementary school, some of this was with the school’s speech therapist. I think I also remember a few “how to make friends” lessons with a school guidance counselor, but I’m not completely sure of that. I went to a public school, but probably an unusually well-funded one—I’m not sure how usual it is for schools to provide this sort of help.
I think something must have worked for me, because my social skills don’t feel deficient in most situations I’ve encountered as an adult, and most of my friends who had similar problems as children do still have some problems like this. This sort of socialization could also be done through an institution, though—maybe make membership to after-school activities a requirement of the gifted program, or include more group work in advanced classes. There’s also the risk of causing anxiety problems, though—being in a room full of children is stressful if you can’t read them well enough to predict what they’re going to do next.
I’m also not sure if what I have counts as increased social intelligence—I might just have done the equivalent of memorizing multiplication tables. (Communicating with new people takes more mental energy than people who I’m used to, as though I need to re-learn some things for each specific person.) Practically, it seems to be enough to get up to the waterline, though.
This sort of socialization could also be done through an institution, though—maybe make membership to after-school activities a requirement of the gifted program, or include more group work in advanced classes.
I had a thought on this subject earlier, mostly in the context of gifted students who are bored as hell with standard classes: Have the students who master the material first help teach the rest. They learn a social skill and there are more teachers to go around. Keeping it in the classroom stops it devolving into either the smart kid doing everyone’s homework for them, or everyone else beating up on the smart kid for being uppity. Additionally, it would (I think) improve the social status associated with intelligence and academic success, which is a significant barrier in some places.
Making people perform a social task is not the same as teaching a social skill. If the skill involved isn’t taught, or is just too hard, then the solutions of “make them teach” or “make them do highly social extracurriculars” or “make them do group work” are straight-up punishment for success and make the “bored as hell” option look pretty attractive.
Yes—it’s more forcing someone to learn social skills, than actually teaching social skills. Practicing a whole lot works as a way to learn, but hopefully there is a more efficient, less unpleasant way.
I also know a girl in high school who had asperger’s syndrome and was an extreme extrovert (she felt bored if she didn’t have an outing or a visit from a friend almost every day if it wasn’t a school day), and she still seemed to have significant trouble with social skills. So I guess that might mean that either practice doesn’t work for everyone, or doesn’t work as well as I had thought.
Hrm. Good point. Now that I think of it, I would have hated my own suggestion at the age to which it applies, although I’m a fairly extreme introvert so I may not be a representative case.
I’m not sure if you mean viable in terms of getting funded, or actually improving the social intelligence of the children enrolled in them.
They do exist if the lack of social intelligence is considered a diagnosis. I had lessons once or twice a week from a speech therapist as a child, partly for difficulty pronouncing letters, and partly for social skills, for that reason. During elementary school, some of this was with the school’s speech therapist. I think I also remember a few “how to make friends” lessons with a school guidance counselor, but I’m not completely sure of that. I went to a public school, but probably an unusually well-funded one—I’m not sure how usual it is for schools to provide this sort of help.
I think something must have worked for me, because my social skills don’t feel deficient in most situations I’ve encountered as an adult, and most of my friends who had similar problems as children do still have some problems like this. This sort of socialization could also be done through an institution, though—maybe make membership to after-school activities a requirement of the gifted program, or include more group work in advanced classes. There’s also the risk of causing anxiety problems, though—being in a room full of children is stressful if you can’t read them well enough to predict what they’re going to do next.
I’m also not sure if what I have counts as increased social intelligence—I might just have done the equivalent of memorizing multiplication tables. (Communicating with new people takes more mental energy than people who I’m used to, as though I need to re-learn some things for each specific person.) Practically, it seems to be enough to get up to the waterline, though.
I had a thought on this subject earlier, mostly in the context of gifted students who are bored as hell with standard classes: Have the students who master the material first help teach the rest. They learn a social skill and there are more teachers to go around. Keeping it in the classroom stops it devolving into either the smart kid doing everyone’s homework for them, or everyone else beating up on the smart kid for being uppity. Additionally, it would (I think) improve the social status associated with intelligence and academic success, which is a significant barrier in some places.
Making people perform a social task is not the same as teaching a social skill. If the skill involved isn’t taught, or is just too hard, then the solutions of “make them teach” or “make them do highly social extracurriculars” or “make them do group work” are straight-up punishment for success and make the “bored as hell” option look pretty attractive.
Yes—it’s more forcing someone to learn social skills, than actually teaching social skills. Practicing a whole lot works as a way to learn, but hopefully there is a more efficient, less unpleasant way.
I also know a girl in high school who had asperger’s syndrome and was an extreme extrovert (she felt bored if she didn’t have an outing or a visit from a friend almost every day if it wasn’t a school day), and she still seemed to have significant trouble with social skills. So I guess that might mean that either practice doesn’t work for everyone, or doesn’t work as well as I had thought.
Hrm. Good point. Now that I think of it, I would have hated my own suggestion at the age to which it applies, although I’m a fairly extreme introvert so I may not be a representative case.