Summary of doctor of psychology dissertation: Social Intelligence of preschool graduates

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HANOI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

­­­­­­­­­­­­­o0o­­­­­­­­­­­­­
  

NGUYEN THI HONG

SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE
OF PRESCHOOL STUDENTS
Major: Psychology
Code: 9.31.04.01

SUMMARY 
OF DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY DISSERTATION


Hanoi ­ 2018


THE DISSERTATION IS COMPLETED AT:
HANOI NATIONAL  UNIVERSITY  OF  EDUCATION
  
Scientific supervisors:  
        1.  Prof.  PhD.  Nguyen Quang Uan  
        2. Assoc. Prof. PhD. Tran Thi My Luong

Reviewer 1: Prof.   PhD. Tran Thi Minh Duc, University of Social 
Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Hanoi.  
Reviewer   2:   Assoc.   Prof.   PhD.   Nguyen   Van   Bac,   University   of 
Education, Hue University.

Reviewer   3:   Assoc.   Prof.   PhD.   Phan   Thi   Mai   Huong,   Institute   of 
Psychology.

The   dissertation   will   be   defended   in   front   of   the   University 
Dissertation     Examiner   Council   at   Hanoi   National   University   of 
Education at …, on … 2018. 
It is possible to learn about the dissertation at:


National Library, Library of Hanoi National University of Education.  


LIST OF PUBLISHED WORKS
1.

Nguyen Thi Hong (2017),  Social awareness in social intelligence of  

2.

preschool students, Journal of Education and Society, (11), p.118 ­ 120.
Nguyen Thi Hong (2017), Social intelligence and structural model of  
social intelligence of preschool students, TUCST Journal of Science, 

3.

(1), p. 03­ 09. 
Nguyen Thi Hong (2018),  Status of social intelligence of preschool  

4.

students, Journal  of  Social  Psychology, (1), p.65 ­ 74.
Nguyen Thi Hong (2018), Developing social intelligence of Art 
students, The papers collection in the international conference “Training 
Culture­Arts, Sports and Tourism in the integration context”, Thế giới 
publisher, p.101 ­ 107. 

5.

Nguyen   Thi   Hong  (2018),  Status   of   factors   influencing   social  
intelligence of preschool students, Journal  of  Social  Psychology,  (6), 
p.70 ­78.


1

INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
Simply,   social   intelligence   is   the   ability   to   accomplish   tasks   in   a 
context that interacts with others. It relates to the social awareness and the 
ability   to   solve   problems   intelligently   in   communicative   behaviors   or 
interaction among different people. The study of social intelligence (SI­
Social   Intelligence)   and   its   relationship   to   the   success   of   a   person   is 
considered to be a new research direction concerned by many scientists in 
the   world.   Nowadays   in   Vietnam,   Social   Intelligence   is   a   new   issue 
deployed by many applications.  However, there is a few of researchers on 
this field, especially the preschool education. 
  In   order   to   become   teachers   who   meet   the   needs   of   social 
intelligence   for   children,   preschool   graduates   themselves   have   to   study 
social intelligence and get knowledge of social intelligence at universities. 
Moreover, in order to get high efficiency in training and developing social 

intelligence for preschoolers, preschool graduates must have good social 
intelligence.   However,  there   has  been  no  research   on  this  issue  so  far. 
Therefore,   we   decided   to   the   tiltle:   "Social   Intelligence   of   preschool  
graduates".
2. Aims of the study
               Based on the theoretical study and the assessment of the social 
intelligence   of   preschool   graduates,   the   Dissertation   proposed 
psychoactive   psychological   measures   to   develop   social   intelligence   for 
preschool graduates. 
3. Objects and subjects of the study
3.1. Object of the study
         Expression and levels of social intelligence of preschool graduates
3.2. Subject of the study
 Preschool graduates, lecturers and experts on social intelligence. 
4. Scientific hypothesis
­   The   social   intelligence   of   preschool   graduates   was   unevenly 
expressed. Among that, social awareness is performed  the best and the 
ablitiy   to   effectively   solve   social   situations   in   specific   interactions   is 
demonstrated   the   worst.   The   level   of   social   intelligence   of   preschool 


2

graduates was not high. There were significant differences on levels and 
expressions   of   social   intelligence   among   the   study   parameters   such   as 
academic year and the performance.
­   Social   intelligence   of   preschool   graduates   is   influenced   by   many 
subjective and objective factors, in which activeness and loving children are 
the two most influential factors. 
­ It is possible to improve the level of social intelligence of preschool 

graduates  through  psycho­pedagogical   measures   by  enhancing  students’ 
activeness and organizing experiential activities for students.
5. Research tasks
5.1. Setting up the theoretical research on social intelligence of preschool 
graduates:   clarifying   the   research   directions   on   intelligence   and   social 
intelligence; Pointing out the components of social intelligence of preschool 
graduates;   expressions   and   levels   of   social   intelligence   of   preschool 
graduates; factors affecting the social intelligence of preschool graduates.
5.2.  Surveying,  analyzing   and evaluating  the  current   situation  of  social 
intelligence   of   preschool   graduates   as   well   as   objective   and   subjective 
factors affecting the current situation of social intelligence of preschool 
graduates.
5.3. Proposing and experimenting the impact of psychological­pedagogical 
measures   to   contribute   to   the   training   and   the   development   of   social 
intelligence for preschool graduates. 
6. Scope of the study
­ Research subjects: 511 preschool graduates, 40 lecturers majored in 
preschool education, experts on social intelligence. 
­ Research objects: Expression and levels of social intelligence of 
preschool graduates.
­   Research   contents:   Research   on   social   intelligence   through 
communicative activities of preschool graduates’s studying process. 
­   Research   site:   The   Dissertation   is   conducted   at   Hong   Duc 
University and Hanoi National University of Education. 
  Time: Three years (2015­2018)
7. Approach and research methods
7.1. Approach methods
­ Operational principles.

3

­ Systematic principles.
­ Development principles.
7.2. Research methods
­ Survey on documents.
­ Questionnaire survey.
­ Observation method.
­ In­depth interview.
­ Situational exercises.
­ Typical psychological portrait analysis.
­ Pedagogical impact experiment.
­ Data processing by mathematical statistics.
8. New contributions
8.1. In term of psychological theory
  The Dissertation developed the concepts: social intelligence, social 
intelligence   of   preschool   students;   establishing   the   model   of   social 
intelligence   structure   of   preschool   students;   the   social   intelligence 
expresions of preschool students contribute to clarify the nature of social 
intelligence; Developing appropriate scales to measure the level and social 
status   of   preschool   students;   Identifying   the   subjective   and   objective 
factors that affect the Social Intelligence of preschool students.
8.2. In terms of practical significance 
The   Dissertation   pointed   out   the   status   of   social   intelligence   of 
preschool students; factors affecting the social intelligence of preschool 
students. Also, the Dissertation proposedand experimentalized the impact 
measures on the improvement of social intelligence of preschool students.
9. Structure  of  the  dissertation
The dissertation includes the foreword, 3 chapters, conclusion and 
recommendation, list of  published works, reference and appendix.

4

CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL BASIS OF SOCIAL 
INTELLIGENCE  OF PRESCHOOL STUDENTS
1.1. A research overview of social intelligence
Researches on social intelligence are much concerned by foreign and 
Vietnamese psychologists. This is the new research direction in psychology 
which provides the practical life with many applications. However, there 
has been no study on the social intelligence of preschool students so far. 
Thus, this study explored the level and the expression of social intelligence 
of preschool students from the perspectives of psychology. 
1.2. Some issues on psychological theory of social intelligence
1.2.1. Intelligence
Intelligence is a complex of cognitive abilities, the creativity and the 
ability to understand the emotions of people in society. It is formed and 
developed   in   activities   due   to   cultural   and   historical   conditions   in   the 
purpose of ensuring the interaction consistent with the real life of people.
1.2.2. Social intelligence
Social   intelligence   is   a   combination   of   social   awareness,   self­
awareness,  and  awareness  about  others.   The awareness  helps  people  to 
establish   and   maintain   social   relationships,   integrate   them,   adapt   to 
changing   social   environments,   and   be   able   to   effectively   deal   with   the 
situations in social interaction with other people / groups. 
1.3. Preschool students and their psychological characteristics
* Preschool students
Preschool   students   are   the   learners   at   Preschool   department   in 
universities and colleges. In addition to receiving basic and specialized 
knowledge systems, preschool students also learn professional knowledge 

about preschool education in the future.
* Preschool students’ psychological characteristics
Preschool   students   have   some   of   the   following   psychological 
characteristics: self­awareness, self­assessment and valuable orientations. 
1.4. Social intelligence of preschool students
1.4.1. Definition 
Social intelligence of preschool students is a combination of social 
awareness, self­awareness, and awareness about preschool children. This 


5

awareness is capable of establishing and maintaining social relationships, 
integrating   and   adapting   to   the   changing   environment   of   preschool 
education   and   appropriate   abilities   to   solve   social   situations   for   the 
purpose of achieving certain goals. 
1.4.2. Structure of social intelligence of preschool students
        There consist five components: 
­ Ability to Social awareness.
­ Ability to establish and maintain social relationships.
­ Ability to get on well with preschool environment.
­ Ability to adapt to preschool environment.
­ Ability to solve social situations in specific interactions. 
1.4.3. Expression of social intelligence of preschool students
­ The first, social awareness: 
(1) Social awareness is the ability of preschool students to understand 
the meaning and explain the inner mood as well as the external expression 
of   communicative   partners   (friends,   teachers,   preschoolers,     children’s 
parents ...) in social interaction.
(2)  Social knowledge  is to understand deeply social environment in 

which preschool students are living. 
­   The   second,  ability   to   establish   and   maintain   social  
relationships:
+ Creating new relationships with parents, Governing Board of the 
preschool, colleagues, preschoolers, friends and the social community…
+ Establishing a positive and active relationship to become a good 
actor.
­  The   third,   ability   to   adapt   to   preschool   environment:   Actively 
learning and preparing for the future careers; adjusting yourself; fulfilling 
the new requirements; actively training professional skills.
­ The fourth,  ability to get on well with preschool environment: 
actively getting acquainted with different people in the new environment; 
being able work in teams.
­ The fifth, ability to solve social situations in specific interactions: 
Quickly identifying the problem and timely supply appropriate measures 
to solve the situation; having flexibly and skillfull behaviours. 
1.4.4. Factors affecting the social intelligence of preschool students


6

The   social   intelligence   of   preschool   students   is   influenced   by   the 
objective   factors   (content,   curriculum,   teaching   staff,   instructor,   school 
activities,   living   environment,   cutural   factors)   and   subjective   factors 
(artistic quality, active participation, career love, life experiences).
Conclusion of chapter 1
         The social intelligence of preschool students could be understood to 
be:   the   combination   of   cognitive   abilities,   self­awareness,   preschoolers, 
preschool students’ parents, friends, teachers; the ability to establish and 
maintain   social   relationships;   the   ability   to   get   on   well   with   preschool 

education environment and adapt to the preschool education environment; 
the ability to solve social situations to achieve certain goals. The social 
knowledge   of   preschool   students   was   influenced   by   many   subjective 
factors (artistic competence, activeness, career love, life experience) and 
objective factors (curriculums, lecturers, groupwork).
Chapter 2. ORGANIZATION AND RESEARCH METHODS
2.1. Research area and subjects
2.2. Organization
The research was conducted through the following stages: Building 
the   theoretical   foundation   and   designing   tools   for   measuring   the 
intellectual level of social intelligence of preschool students; Studying the 
status and the expression level of social intelligence of preschool students; 
experimentalizing   the   methods   of   psychological   impact   on   the 
development of social intelligence of preschool students.
2.3. The level of social intelligence of preschool students
 Table 2. 1
  : Assessment level of social intelligence of preschool students
Level
Expression
­ Students participated in the interaction rigidly without having 
creative expression of social intelligence
­ Students showed the low or relatively low expression level of 
Low
social   intelligence   without   having   interactions   with 
surrounding people.
­ Students took part in the interactions awkwardly
­ Students took part in interactions with simple creativity
Medium ­ Students took part in moderate interactions
­ Students took part in interactions at an unstable level

7

­   Students   took   part   in   interactions   flexibily   with   certain 
creativity
­ Students showed the high or relatively high expression level 
High
of   social   intelligence   when   they   engage   interactions   with 
surrounding people.
­ Students took part in interactions at a stable level
2.4. Reseach methods 
2.4.1. Research methods on documents
       Systematizing and clarifying the opinions of researchers in the world 
and Vietnam about intelligence, social intelligence and social intelligence 
of pre­school students; Building the social intelligence model of preschool 
students; analyzing the social intelligence of preschool students to clarify 
the subjective and objective factors that affect the social intelligence of 
preschool students. 
­ Presenting a theoretical basis of the Dissertation
2.4.2. Practical research methods
2.4.2.1. Questionaire survey
Practical research method was used to find out the level of social 
intelligence of preschool students. As a result, we found out the factors 
affecting the social intelligence of preschool students.
 Table 2. 2
  :  Reliability of the scale
Number
Scale
Reliability 
coefficients

The whole scale
0,824
1.
Social awareness
0,927
2.
Establishing   and   maintaining 
0,812
relationships
3.
Getting on well 
0,726
4.
Adapting 
0,783
5.
Solving social situations
0,735
2.2.4.2. Observation
+ Checking the results of the students' responses in the feedback form 
to   know   whether   their   answers   are   appropriate   for   their   activities   and 
communication during practice.


8

+   Collecting   additional   practical   information   from   other   research 
methods to supplement the documents and materials
+ The information obtained from this method contributes to clarify the 
expression and the level of social intellifence. As a result, we have a better 

understanding about the reality of social intelligence.
2.2.4.3. In­depth interview
Interviews   for   experts   of   social   intelligence   and   lecturers   of 
preschool   education   were   conducted   according   to   the   interview 
questionnaire   to   obtain   direct   information   on   the   importance,   the 
expression and the level of social intelligence of preschool students as well 
as the measures of training social intelligence to preschool students.
2.2.4.4. Situational exercises
Building   a   scale   of   situational   exercises   to   measure   the   specific 
expression   levels   of   social   intelligence   of   preschool   students   in 
pedagogical   activities.   On   that   basis,   we   point   out   the   strengths   and 
weaknesses   in   social   intelligence   of   preschool   students.   There   are   20 
scenarios   that   are   divided   equally   into   five   expression   levels   of   social 
intelligence in which each expressions contains four situational exercises 
for the assessment of students’ interaction level in pedagogical activities 
and communication.
2.2.4.5. Typical psychological portrait analysis
Identifying specific psychological expressions of social intelligence 
of   preschool   students   for   the   purpose   of   accurately   and   objectively 
evaluating   basic   psychological   expressions   and   the   expression   level   of 
social   intelligence   of   preschool   students.   Thus,   the   correctness   of   the 
arguments for the establishment of a model of social intelligence structure 
of preschool students was confirmed. 
2.4.3. Experimentalizing pedagogical impacts
This method aimed to confirm the necessity and effectiveness of the 
training   measures   of   social   intelligence   in   the   learning   process   of 
preschool students to improve the learning outcomes of students.
2.4.4. Processing data by mathematical statistics
SPSS version 20.0 software was used to process the collected data 
for the analysis of data during the study to process data obtained from the 

reality survey and the post­experimental surveys.


9

Conclusion of chapter 2
The process of organizing dissertation research was conducted in the 
three   phases:   theoretical   study,   practical   research   and   experimental 
organization.   Research   methods   include   researches   on   text   documents, 
written  investigation,  in­depth  interview,  observation  method,  analyzing 
typical   psychographic   portrayal,   experiment,   situational   exercises.   The 
data   was   processed   quantitatively   and   qualitatively   in   a   scientific   and 
explicit   way   with   the   support   of   the   SPSS   Data   Processing   Software 
version 20.0. 


10

Chapter 3.  FINDINGS
3.1. General assessment of the status of social intelligence of preschool 
students
3.1.1.   The   status   of   social   intelligence   of   preschool   students   through  
self­assessment   scale  3.1.1.1.   The   status   of   social   intelligence   of  
preschool students through self­assessment scale (in whole sample)
 Table 3. 1
  .   Social intelligence of preschool students (in whole sample)
Results
Rank 
Avera Standar
Components

Expression
ge 
d 
score deviati
on
1 Social awareness
Communicat
3,87
0,74
.
ion 
Activities 
3,54
0,76
Average score
3,71
0,75
1
2 Establishing
 
and  Communicat
3,58
0,79
. maintaining relationships ion 
Activities 
3,36
0,82
Average score
3,47
0,80

2
3 Getting on well
Communicat
.
ion 
3,26
0,81
Activities 
3.07
0,85
Average score
3.16
0,83
4
4 Adapting   to   the  Communicat
3.61
0,87
. environment 
ion 
Activities 
3.29
0,78
Average score
3,45 
0,83
3
5 Solving social situations
Communicat
2.65
0,75

.
ion 
Activities 
2,58
0,93
Average score
2,62
0,84
5
                                 The total average score
3.28
0,81


11

Note: Low level  < 2,47; 2,47 ≤  Medium level < 4,09; High level  

≥ 4,09
According   to   the   five   surveyed   responses,   the   expression   "social 
awareness" and "establishing and maintaining relationships" was 3.71 and 
3, 47 respectively, ranked the first and the second.  Expression of "adapting 
to preschool education activities" was 3.45, ranked the third. However, the 
ability   to   "get   on   well   the   preschool   education   environment"   was  3.16, 
ranked the fourth. Meanwhile, the ability to "solve social situations in a 
specific interaction" is at the lowest level with an average score of 2.62, a 
standard   deviation   of   0.84,   ranked   the   fifth.   Measures   to   improve   the 
ability   to   solve   social   situations   in   a   specific   interaction   of   preschool 
students need to be addressed.
3.1.1.2. The status of social intelligence of preschool teachers in terms of  

parameters
a. The status of social intelligence of preschool teachers in training  
institutions 
 Table 3. 2
  : Social intelligence of preschool teachers by training  
institutions
Training institutions
Accred
Hanoi National 
Hong Duc 
itation 
University of 
University
TT
Components
T
Education
Averag Standard  Averag Standard 
e score deviation e score deviation
1 Social awareness
3,72
0,77
3,69
0,73
0,83
.
2 Establishing   and 
. maintaining 
3,48
0,79

3,46
0,82
0,56
relationships
3 Getting on well
3,12
0,82
3,21
0,84
1,35
.
4 Adapting   to   the 
3,48
0,78
3,42
0,88
0,74
. environment
5 Solving
 
social 
2,64
0,87
2,59
0,82
1,18
. situations


12

Total

3,29

0,80

3,27

0,82

       
Average score in Hanoi National University of Education (3,29) is 
higher than that in Hong Duc University (3,27). It means that scores of 
entrance exams in Hanoi National University of Education is higher than 
that   in   Hong   Duc   University.   Preschool   students   in   Hanoi   National 
University   of   Education   reached   up   the   highest   score   (3,72)   of   ocial 
awareness and the lowest score (2,64) of solving social situations. They 
had the same score (3,48) of establishing and maintaining relationships and 
adapting to the environment
b. The status of social intelligence of preschool students by academic year
 Table 3. 3
  :   Expression of social intelligence by academic year
Academic year
1st year
2nd year 3rd year 4th year
Aver Sta Ave Sta Ave Sta Av Stan Accred
age  nda rag nda rag nda era dard  itation 
Components
score rd  e  rd  e  rd  ge  devi

F 
dev sco dev sco dev sco atio
iati re iati re iati re
n
on
on
on
1. Social awareness 3,29 0,81 3,62 0,71 3,87 0,73 4,03 0,77 5,16**
2.   Establishing   and 
maintaining   social  3,27 0,76 3,42 0,86 3,54 0,91 3,66 0,69 4,17*
relationships
3. Getting on well
2,83 0,81 3,19 0,85 3,30 0,84 3,35 0,81 6,63**
4.   Adapting   to   the 
3,17 0,82 3,43 0,82 3,60 0,86 3,61 0,80 5,31**
environment
5.   Solving   social 
2,40 0,86 2,53 0,89 2,79 0,80 2,76 0,81 6,74**
situations
The total average  
2,99 0,81 3,24 0,83 3,42 0,83 3,48 0,78
score
The results showed that the level of social intelligence of preschool 
students in all four years was at an average level. Comparing the social 
intelligence of the preschool students showed that social intelligence of 


13

students is directly proportional by academic years. Specifically: the first 

year students had the lowest level of social intelligence (average score = 
2,9), the fourth year students had the highest level of social intelligence 
(average score = 3,48).

c. The status of social intelligence of preschool students (by learning ability)
Table 3.4: Social intelligence of preschool students (by learning ability)
Learning capacity

TT

Components

1 Social 
. awareness

Average and 
Good and 
above average 
excellent
Accredit
Expression Averag Standar Avera Standard 
ation T
d 
e score
ge  deviatio
deviati score
n
on

Communic

ation 
Activities 
Average score
2 Establishing and  Communic
ation 
. maintaining 
Activities 
social 
relationships
Average score
3 Getting on well Communic
ation 
.
Activities 
Average score
4 Adapting   to   the  Communic
ation 
. environment
Activities 
Average score
5 Solving   social  Communic
situations
ation 

3,54

0,95

4,19

0,53

3,27
3,41

0,85
0,90

3,81
4,00

0,67
0,60

3,28

0,83

3,88

0,75

3,15

0,86

3,57

0,78

3,22

0,85

3,73

0,77

3,17

0,76

3,35

0,85

2,91
3,04

0,97
0,87

3,23
3,29

0,73
0,79

3,32

0,95

3,90

0,79

3,16
3,24
2,59

0,82
0,89
0,73

3,41
3,66
2,71

0,74
0,77
0,76

4,98**

4,15*

3,93*

3,85*

14

Activities 
Average score
The total average score

2,48
2,54
3,09

1,02
0,88
0,87

2,67
2,69
3,47

0,84
0,80
0,74

3,76*

According to the survey results, average and above average students 
gained   the  average   score  below  3,09  (SD   =  0,87).  Good  and  excellent 
students   gained  average   score   over   3,47   (SD=   0,74).   Thus,   there   is   a 
positive correlation between the learning outcome and the scores of social 
intelligence   of   preschool   students.   Specifically,   the   higher   the   learning 

outcome is, the higher the social intelligence is and vice versa. Thus, the 
learning   ability   has   a   direct   influence   on   the   social   intelligence   of 
preschool students.
3.1.1.3.  The   social   status   of   pre­school   students   in   term   of   expression  
components
a. Social awareness
The   ability   to   "understand   nonverbal   signs   of   children’s 
communication” was best demonstrated by students with average score at 
4.02, ranked the first.   The ability to "explain the different behaviors of 
children" was at 3.95, ranked the second and the ability to "recognize the 
change   in   the   mood   of   teachers   towards   students"   was   at   3.95,  ranked 
third. The ability to "exactly predict the feelings of parents" was at 3.91, 
ranked the fourth.
b. Establishing and maintaining social relationships
According   to   the   findings,   establishing   and   maintaining   the   social 
relationships of preschool students was at medium level. Students express 
their ability to establish and maintain social relationships reflected in their 
communication   during   practice   (average   score   =   3.58)   better   than   their 
activities (average score = 3.36).
c. Getting on well with preschool education environment
In   students’   communication   to   get   on   well   with   the   preschool 
education environment, "actively making friends with children and their 
parents   "was   ranked   the   first   at   the   average   score   of   3.48,     ; 
"Communicating confidently and comfortably with the children’s  parents" 
was   ranked   the   second   at   the   average   score   of   3.36;   "Actively 
communicating with preschool teachers in the kindergarten" was ranked 
the average score of 3.34. “Communicating with preschool children and 


15

probationary students” is the most difficult thing facing preschool students 
(average scores =2,93 and 3,15)  
d. Getting on well with preschool education environment
            In communication during practie, ability to "get acquainted 
with   children"   (average   score   =   3.84)   was   the   first;   the   ability   to 
"communicate   with   the   children’s   parents"   (average   score   =   3.76)   was 
ranked the second; the ability to "unite with their classmates to perform 
activities   at   school"   (average   score   =   3.59)   was   ranked   third.   The 
expressions   are   evaluated   at   a   lower   level   than   ever   before:   "Getting 
acquainted   with   communication   during   the   practice"   (average   score   = 
3.57),   "Cooperating   with   teachers   to   better   perform   school   activities. 
(average score = 3.52)," Positively communicating with teaching staff of 
the internship school" was ranked the lowest level (average score = 3.38)
e. Solving social situations
 Table 3. 5
  : Solving social situations
Expression

Communication 
1. 
With preschool children
2.
With children’s parents
3.
With classmates
4.
With teachers
Average score
Activities

1
Learning
2. 
Practicing pedagogical skills
3. 
Pedagogical internship 
4. 
Community activities
Average score

Standard 
Average 
deviatio
score
n

Rank

2,83
2,45
2,50
2,80
2,65

0,77
0,74
0,69
0,84
0,75

1
4
3
2

2,37
2,72
2,55
2,59
2,58

0,95
0,85
1,00
0,91
0,93

4
1
3
2

As   a   result,   preschool   students’   skills   to   solve   social   situations   in 
specific interactions reach up a medium level. In particular, the ability to 


16

solve communicative situations during practice (average score = 2.65) is 
better activities during practice (average score = 2.58).

g. Correlation among components of social intelligence of preschool 
students
Through the correlation among components of social intelligence of 
preschool   students,   there   are   five   components:   social   awareness; 
establising   and   maintaining   social   relationships;   getting   on   well   with 
preschool   education   environment;     adapting   to   pre­school   education 
activities;     dealing   with   social   situations   in   specific   interactions   was 
moderately   correlated   with  the  social  intelligence  of  preschool   students 
with r = 0.563; 0.457; 0,438; 0.492; 1. Regression results show that all five 
components   have   an   impact   on   the   social   intelligence   of   preschool 
students.
3.1.2. The status of social intelligence of preschool students through the 
scale of  experimental measurement exercises
3.1.2.1. The status of social intelligence of preschool students through the 
scale of  experimental measurement exercises 
 Table  3.
   6
  :    Summary results of situational exercises
Components
Expression Average  Standard  Rank
score deviation
1. Social awareness
Communicat
2,21
0,46
ion 
Activities 
2,21
0,44
Average score

0,45
1
4. Establishing   and  Communicat
2,21
0,41
maintaining   social  ion 
Activities 
2,13
0,44
relationships
Average score
0,43
2
7. Getting on well
Communicat
2,09
0,52
ion 
Activities 
2,06
0,41
Average score
0,47
3
10 Adapting   to   the  Communicat
2,02
0,45
.
environment
ion 

Activities 
1,90
0,47


17

Average score
0,46
4,5
13 Solving
 
social  Communicat
1,89
0,45
.
situations
ion 
Activities 
2,02
0,44
Average score
0,45
4,5
The total average score
2,07
0,45
        
Social   intelligence   of   preschool   students   through   the   scale   of 
experimental measurement exercises was at medium level (average score = 

2.07).   With   the   above   results,   it   can   be   affirmed   that   many   preschool 
students’ social intelligence was at medium level and ony a few preschool 
students’ social intelligence was at high level. There is some differences 
among   five   components.   Specifically,   "Social   awareness"   and 
"Establishing and maintaining social relationships" were performed better 
than   "getting   on   well   with   preschool   education   environment"   (average 
score = 2.21 and 2.16 respectively compared with 2.08). "Adapting to the 
environment " and "Solving social situations in specific interactions" is so 
difficult for with the lowest scores (average score = 1, 96).
3.1.2.2.  Expression of social intelligence through the scale of situational  
exercises
a. Social awareness
Preschool students have a better understanding of the feelings of the 
others (average score = 2.27) than their ability to control the feelings of the 
others (average score = 2.15). Together with activities, we presents two 
exercises 7 and 15 (average score = 2.20) to evaluate the emotional ability 
of students. The social awareness of preschool students in their activities 
and communication was equal (average score = 2.21).
b. Establishing and maintaining social relationships
Table 3.7: Establishing and maintaining social relationships
Components

Establishing 

Expression

Exercises

Average  Standard  Rank
score

deviation

Establishing social relationships
Communica
11
2,24
tion
Activities
13.2
2,13

0,39

1

0,46

2


18

Average score
2,19
2,43
Maintaining social relationships
Communica
2.1
2,18
0,43

1
and maintaining  tion
Activities
6
2,07
0,41
2
social 
Average score
2,13
0,42
relationships
The total average score
2,16
0,43
Review:
The ability to establish social relationships (average score = 2.19) 
was higher than the ability to maintain relationships (average score = 2.13) 
and   both   of   them   were   below   medium.   It   is   easy   to   understand   that 
establishing a social relationship was on the first stage which was only at 
the fundamental level; maintaining a social relationship was on the second 
stage   which   needs   to   meet   higher   requirements   and   have   mutual 
understanding an interaction. The ability to establish and maintain social 
relationships   was   performed   better   in   students’   communication   than   in 
their activities .
c. Getting on well with preschool education environment
 Table 3. 8
  : Getting on well with preschool education environment
Components

Expression

Communication

Exerci Average  Standard  Rank
ses
score
deviation

2.4
9

Average score
Activities
3
10
Average score
The total average score

Getting on 
well  

2,12
2,05
2,09
2,03
2,08
2,06
2,08

0,49
0,55
0,52
0,38
0,44
0,41
0,47

1
2
1
2

Review:
Through the scale of situational exercises, students’ ability to get on 
with   preschool   education   environment   was   medium   (average   score   = 
2.08). The ability to get on well with preschool education environment was 
performed better in students’ communication (average score =2,09) than in 


19

their activities (average score =2,06). However, the difference is negligible 
and expressions were below medium. 
d. Adapting to preschool education environment
 Table 3. 9
  : Adapting to preschool education activities
Components
Exerci Averag Standa Rank
ses

e score
rd 
Expression
deviati
on
Adapting to 
Communic
12
2,06
0,47
1
2.5
1,98
0,43
2
preschool 
ation
Average score
2,02
0,45
education activities
Activities
14
1,95
0,52
1
13.1
1,84
0,41
2

Average score
1,90
0,47
The total average score
1,96
0,46
Review:
The   ability   to   adapt   to   preschool   education   environment   was 
performed better in students’ communication (average score =2,02) than in 
their   activities   (average   score   =1,90).   However,   both   of   them   were 
medium.   Getting   on   well   with   preschool   education   environment   in   the 
scale of measurement exercises was lower than that in the self­assessment 
scale (average score = 1,96 compared with average score = 3,45)
e. Solving social situations in a specific interaction
 Table 3. 10
   :  Solving social situations
Components

Exercis Averag Standa
es
e score
rd 
Expression
deviati
on

Communica
2.2
2.3
tion

Average score
Solving social 
Activities
4
situations
5
Average score 
The total average score

1,97
1,80
1,89
2,05
1,98
2,02
1,96

0,39
0,51
0,45
0,45
0,42
0,44
0,45

Rank

1
2
1

2


20

Review:
The ablity to solve social situations was at the medium level (average 
socre = 1,96). The ability to solve social situations was performed better in 
students’   practice   (average   score   =2,02)   than   in   their   communication 
(average   score   =1,89).   Solving   social   situations   in   the   scale   of 
measurement exercises was lower than that in the self­assessment scale. 
This   means   that   students’   social   intelligence   was   self­evaluated   higher 
than what they have.
g. The total survey results of social intelligence level of preschool students 
Table 3.11: The general level of social intelligence of preschool students
Components 
below 
high
medium
medium
N
%
N
%
N
%
2.
Social awareness
77
15

394 77
40
8
3.
Establishing and 
82
16
400 78
29
6
maintaining social 
relationships
4.
Getting on well
94
18
385 75
33
6
5.
Adapting to the 
84
16
397 78
31
6
environment
6.
Solving social situations 104
20

383 75
25
5
The total average score
88
17
392 77
31
6
 Review :   
 
There was a clear distinction in the level of social intelligence of 
preschool students. Medium level reached up 77%; below medium level 
made up 17% and high level accounted for 6%. Thus, measures to improve 
the level of social intelligence for students should be given to solve this 
problem.
h.   Correlation   of   the   finding   on   the   level   of   social   intelligence  
components   of   preschool   students   by   questionnaire   and   situational  
exercises
Among   five   components,   scores   of   self­assessment   questionnaire 
were   higher   those   of   situational   exercises.   Preschool   students   well 
performed   their   social   awareness   and   their   ability   to   “establish   and 
maintain social relationship”. However, there was a rather big gap between