The Effects of Social Skills Interventions for Students With EBD and ASD: A Single-Case Meta-Analysis.

Hutchins et al. (2020) pooled 25 single-case studies. They looked at social-skills lessons for students with autism or emotional-behavioral disorders. All lessons happened at school. The team used a meta-analysis to find the average effect.

They checked two follow-up windows: right after the lessons ended and weeks later.

The lessons gave a solid medium boost overall. Kids kept the new skills better over time than they used them in new places. In plain numbers, maintenance beat generalization.

The authors say the result is reliable enough to keep social-skills goals on an IEP.

Wang et al. (2013) saw a larger effect in an earlier meta-analysis. The drop from large to medium makes sense: the 2013 paper looked only at autism, while S et al. added students with EBD. A wider pool often softens the numbers.

Reichow et al. (2010) already called social-skills groups an evidence-based practice. The new meta gives fresher numbers that back up the same label.

Hong et al. (2018) found mixed long-term gains when parents gave the lessons. S et al. show stronger maintenance when school staff run them. The difference points to the trainer, not the skill topic.

Koh (2024) and Chan et al. (2021) got similar medium effects, but they used sports and games instead of tabletop lessons. Same outcome, new route — useful for kids who learn better while moving.

You can keep social-skills goals on the IEP with confidence. Pick programs that include practice weeks after the main lessons end; the data show maintenance wins. If a child also has EBD, expect a medium rather than large jump, and plan for extra generalization cues in real classrooms. Try pairing seated lessons with movement-based practice — two meta-analyses now say both paths work.