Looking for File Folder Activities

I found this great blog about file folder activities for teaching students with autism:  http://theautismteacher.blogspot.com/2009/10/file-folder-activities.html

I am looking for more file folder activities for teaching autism.  Know of some great resources?  Please share!

Nature of Autism Final Synthesis

Lee Ann Melchor

EEX 6246 Nature of Autism

University of Central Florida

April 2012

 

The Nature of Autism

Autism is a developmental, neurological disorder. Primarily, individuals with autism display abnormal patterns in social interactions, communication, and often eccentric, repetitive behavior. Autism is a spectrum disorder that encompasses an umbrella of disorders including Asperger's Disorder, Rhett's Disorder, PDD-NOS, Autism and CDD. The number of children with autism in the United States continues to rise, according to a new statistics released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The latest data estimate that 1 in 88 children in the U.S. has some form of autism spectrum disorder. This estimate is an increase of 78% compared to statistics released a decade ago. Boys are 5 times more likely to develop autism than girls. However, despite its prevalence, there is no known cure for ASD and there continues to be mixed information regarding the etiology of autism.

The Field of Autism / Effective Practices

These staggering numbers combined with the lack of identifiable cure or cause of autism, leaves many parents vulnerable to miracle cures and ineffective and unproven treatment options. While there is no documented cure for autism, autism can be managed effectively using a combination of behavioral, education and biological interventions. In reviewing treatment options, autism and school professionals should consider the following questions: (a) Are these treatment programs effective? (b) What are the common elements of these programs? (c) What steps need to be taken to improve treatment outcome research for children with autism? (d) What implications do the answers to the above 3 questions have for school psychologists? (Gresham, 2000). Two primary distinctions are made when evaluating a treatment option: the efficacy of the treatment or the reduction in the autism symptoms while increasing functional skills and effectiveness across the settings in which the treatment options will be used.

In 1996, Bristol and his colleagues released a report to the National Institute of Health (NIH) in which he raised issue with the methods and the statistical data in autism interventions that must be addressed in order to gain a better understanding of what autism interventions work. These findings include:

• Research studies should use experimental designs and treatment comparison models.
• Use of randomly assigned children to treatment conditions.
• Treatment should be conducted across a wide variety of natural and laboratory settings in which a wide variety of behaviors and skills are assessed.
• Outside evaluators who are not vested in outcomes of research should not be used.
• Procedural integrity of the interventions should be consistently assessed.
• Longevity studies should be used to evaluate the long term effects of treatment over time.

The Clinical Child and Pediatric Psychology / Division 12 of the American Psychological Association (APA), formed a task force to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of research on childhood five childhood disorders, including autism. The goals of the task force include identifying what treatments are most effective for individuals with autism and under what circumstances. 
 

In evaluating several of the leading programs for children with autism, including UCLA’s Young Autism Project (YAP), Project TEACCH, LEAP, ABA Therapy and the Denver Health Science Program, several key flaws were found. In the YAP program, which relies primarily on discrete trial training, the research studies utilized to evaluate YAP’s effectiveness, failed to randomly assign children to the research groups. Further research studies, failed to replicate the exact outcomes in later studies. Project TEACCH uses collaboration, sharing of information, as well as education programs for both the child and the parent. Project TEACCH uses a framework that combines vocational, social skills, and living skills. Research studies have been completed on the effectiveness of TEACCH in the classroom, but not on the effectiveness of the interventions being used in the home setting. LEAP program is a federally funded model that was one of the first to utilize inclusive practices for young children with autism and their families. LEAP emphasizes the use of a home-school alliance to promote academic outcomes of children. There is little data to support that LEAP has more effective outcomes than other autism programs. ABA Therapy is considered one of the most effective interventions for children with autism as it focuses on the role of the child’s environment impact on the child’s behavior. 

This article, however, focused on two ABA programs: Rutgers University’s Douglas Developmental Center and Princeton’s Child Development Institute. This article criticized that the studies conducted at Rutgers failed to use a control group and a comparison group, thereby nullifying the validity of the data collected. Princeton’s study also had several flaws including failing to randomly assign children, neglecting to use a comparison group receiving another treatment, failing to identify the treatment program adequately and poorly defined outcomes.

It has become clear that the autism field is hampered by the lack of adequately proven interventions. The lack of documented proven interventions is centered around the lack of an established, uniform criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of treatment options in the field of autism. If professionals in the field cannot agree on an established method for evaluating programs, how can they determine the most effective intervention programs available? It is therefore, understandable why educators and parents of children with autism struggle to determine which treatment options and strategies are most effective for their child.

The Role of the Educator

Over the last decade, there has been little information available to the general public as to what works. This is greatly hampered by the lack of agreement between professionals and educators on how to best identify and effectively evaluate and measure effective practices. Under NCLB, an attempt has been made to identify programs that are scientifically based by research “that involves the application of rigorous, systematic and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs” (NCLB, 2002). Shortly thereafter, the U.S. Department of Education awarded $18.5 million to the What Works Clearinghouse to assess and identify effective programs. 

Recently, a publication by NCLD provided a prime example of how teachers are continually working to improve student outcomes while working within state and federal frameworks and on limited resources.  There is stress placed on teachers to meet annual yearly goals, improve test scores and ensure students are meeting the requirements under NCLB in order for the districts to receive federal funding.  Many children with autism are educated in the general education classroom or in co-taught settings with self contained classrooms serving those with moderate to severe autism. 
 

General education teachers may find increasing numbers of children with autism in their classrooms. Teachers of exceptional students including those with autism are under increased pressure because exceptional students are required to achieve AYP at the same rate of their non-disabled peers, as well as being required to pass assessments at the same level as their non-disabled peers.  Not only must general education teachers ensure that this is achieved, but must be able to use reasonable accommodations and modifications to ensure students meet those goals.  
 

Many general education teachers have not been adequately trained to deal with the medical, physical, mental and other challenges of a special needs child.  Children with autism have unique educational needs that includes communication, social skills and behavioral interventions. There is a lot of stress on general education teachers to combine the special needs education into a general education setting, combining both disabled and non-disabled students, tailoring instructional strategies to meet each student’s individual needs, writing lesson plans, attending staff and parent meetings, administrative duties and other duties as required.  In addition, many programs and processes designed to assist students with special needs, such as the IEP process and RtI, require general education teachers to devote a large amount of time for data collection, research and documentation before the child can be referred for special education services or more intensive interventions.

Recently, there has been increased criticism of teachers of autistic children who have allowed their stresses of educating an autistic child to impair their judgment and actions in the classroom. Most notably, have been teachers and teaching assistants who have bullied and harassed children with autism by name calling, using inappropriate comments or displaying a lack of sensitivity for the child's disability. This clearly is a signal that some teachers are often inadequately trained for the rigorous and stressful demands of teaching a child with autism.

Educating a child with any disability can be a huge burden for teachers.  Teachers must continually use their time and resources effectively to deliver the most effective level of instruction, in the most efficient manner possible.  Teachers need adequate training, professional and parental support and a strong knowledge of the resources and skills they have available. Teachers also need the right temperament and the ability to handle stressors well. At the state, federal and district level, incentives must be provided for teachers to invest their time and energy into costly training programs to further their education and training.  It is one thing for state, federal and district requirements to be placed on teachers, but without adequate training and support, teachers simply will fail to meet expectations and will not adequately meet the needs of their students. 

It is important for teachers of autistic students to understand their unique needs and deliver effective strategies on a consistent basis. Teachers must also be open to the input of parents as parents that are involved in their child's education, can provide a source of additional support to the teacher and ensure that there is a continuum of strategies between home and school.

The Role of the Parent

With the passing of both IDEA and NCLB, several restructuring efforts to identify the role of the parent and increase parental involvement have been made. In 2001, NCLB sought to ensure that children with disabilities have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in obtaining a high-quality education as that of their non-disabled peers. To measure this, providing standards-based curriculum and measuring annual yearly progress (AYP) became the expectation for all students. 

Parents play a vital role in recognizing the signs of autism and developmental delays long before the child's doctors may suspect something is wrong. Parents are their child's primary advocate when obtaining a diagnosis, selecting treatment options, seeking early intervention services, obtaining an I.E.P. and monitoring the school for compliance with services written in the I.E.P.

Parents of children with the life-long disability of ASD face the challenge of not knowing the root cause of the child's disability, understanding their child's disability and knowing what information to trust due to the over flooding of misinformation in the general public about autism. Additionally, there is no universally accepted course of successful treatment (Simpson, 2005) for autism as what may work for one child with autism may not work for another due to the individuality of the symptoms of autism.

Parents of children with ASD, are often desperate to find both a cause of their child's disability and cure. 

Unfortunately, there are many individuals and companies that prey upon the vulnerability of the parents by promising extraordinary and often unproven results. These unproven methods have encouraged unhealthy, unrealistic and often improbable expectations and have impeded the field of ASD (Simpson, 2005).

Websites, testimonials, vitamin makers, the media and even supposed educational and medical companies all promise miracle cures. Parents must become better consumers of intervention methods for children of ASD by utilizing 3 important questions: (1) What are the efficacy and anticipated outcomes that align with a particular practice, and are the outcomes in harmony with the needs of the student? (2) What are the potential risks associated with the practice, and (3) What are the most effective means of evaluating a particular method or approach? (Simpson, 2005). 

Furthermore, parents need to be involved in their child's education as well as other treatment options. Parents can provide additional support for the teacher and the child and ensure a continuum of services between home and school. Parents can also ensure that their child receive effective interventions on a consistent basis. Parents that are involved in their child's treatment and education are more likely to identify any situation or an environmental factor that could negatively impact their child. This may include who and what their child is exposed to both at school. Parents should work to continually establish and maintain open communication with their child's teacher, school and others involved in their child's care. Parents should be diligent in their efforts to monitor what is working for their child and to openly communicate when something is not.

Conclusion

In summary, there is increased prevalence of children diagnosed with autism. However, despite the prevalence, there is often limited or conflicting information available to parents and educators of children with autism. The field of ASD is dependent upon identifying effective methods, treatments and interventions and the information needs to be made more readily available to the public. This is critical not only to the field of ASD, but also to reduce the amount children with ASD are exposed to questionable and ineffective treatments. The field of autism is based on a circle of partners between parents, educators, medical and research providers and federal and state legislation all working together to build effective resources and strategies to best serve those impacted by autism. It is important that parents and educators and other partners unite in developing effective intervention methods and to work together as a team to best serve the needs of the child as well as improving the autism field.

References

Blanton, L., et al. (2011) Preparing General Education Teachers to Improve Outcomes for Students with Disabilities.  AACTE and NCLD Publication. 

Gresham, F. et al (2000). A Selective Review of Treatments for Children with Autism: Description and Methodological Considerations. School Psychology Review, 28(4), pp. 559-575.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 20 U.S.C. 70, 6301 (2002).

Simpson, R., et al (2005). Evidence Based Practices and Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disorders, 20(3), 140-149.

FDLRS Summer Schedule

If you are a Central Florida Educator, check out the summer course offering available through FDLRS:

http://www.fdlrs.ocps.net/Docs/Summer%20Calendar.pdf

Article Review: Effective Interventions for Individuals with High Functional Autism

Lee Ann Melchor

University of Central Florida

College of Education and Graduate Studies

and

Autistic Middle School Teacher

 

Article Review:  Effective Interventions for Individuals with High Functional Autism

Ann X. Huang

John J. Wheeler

Children with high functioning autism have a unique challenge than that of both their non-disabled peers and children with more moderate or severe autism.  Children with high functioning autism (HFA) may look and sometimes act normal resulting in being misunderstood or perceived as being a bad child when they display the behaviors associated with Asperger's disorder or autism.  There is a need to identify, develop and to review effective educational approaches and interventions for students with high functioning autism.  This article is a review of several effective, evidence based strategies specifically for children with HFA.

Autism is a disorder that is characterized by behavior.  Children with HFA often have unique needs and interests than that of children with more moderate to severe autism.  Having more up-to-date knowledge of this population including their characteristics, strengths, needs and interests is more important than simply a diagnosis (Kunce & Mesibov, 1998).  After the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and 1970s and the passing of key disability legislation such as NCLB and IDEA, there has been a great interest and need for developing programs and interventions that are individualized and comprehensive.  Successful interventions for children with autism include improving the daily living skills and increasing their communication skills.  Students with HFA need more individualized strategies and interventions that meet the unique needs of HFA than that of an autism one-size fits all approach. 

Several evidence based practices and effective interventions used by special educators and other professionals in the autism field have been identified.  These strategies include structured teaching approaches, peer mediated interventions, self-monitoring and self management techniques, video modeling and the use of social stories.  Structured teaching environments are most effective because they make the classroom environment meaningful to the target children and make necessary modifications to better cater to their successful needs (Kunce & Mesibov, 1998).  Hand-in hand with this approach, comes the use of routines and schedules as children with HFA are highly dependent on established routines.  Children with HFA are primarily visual learners, and therefore, tend to be able to conceptualize classroom expectations through the use of schedules and pictures.  Researchers at TEACCH found the use of routines and schedules enables children to establish consistency and predict expectations, thereby reducing anxiety, decrease behavioral problems and promote student learning (Huang, 2006).

Adaptive instructional strategies are idea for students with HFA because they cannot benefit or learn from traditional teaching methods.  Adaptive instructional methods include:  adjusting the language of the instruction and simplify it into terms students can understand, using written information whenever possible that is clearly organized and contains visuals aids, and capitalizing in on students' individualized interests.  Using peer mediated approaches such as providing a more reciprocal, sharing learning environment in which peers can learn from each other and provide feedback provides opportunities for students to develop generalization of skills across settings, increases social skills and provides students with feedback from their peers that is more meaningful than that of teacher to student feedback.

Self-monitoring and self-motivation has become increasingly utilized as it empowers students to correct their own behavior as well as develop coping skills.  Using self-monitoring enables the teacher to direct more of her time and resources toward instructional time and students with more challenging needs and behaviors.  It also is an easier skill for students to master, thereby promoting independence and self reliance skills.  In order for students to learn self-monitoring and self-management skills, students need to be instructed through the use of modeling whether this is done by video, teacher or peer.  This enables students to see the expected appropriated behavior and encourages students to mimic this behavior.  In addition to modeling, teachers can also use social stories to help the student target the specific behavior in need of intervention.  Students with HFA have difficulty understanding people's thoughts, using empathy and interpreting emotions, reading others intentions and the desired expected outcomes.  Through the use of social stories, students can navigate complex and confusing social situations and pinpoint the appropriate expectations (Huang, 2006).

In conclusion, students with HFA have unique needs that are in need of specifically targeted interventions.  This article clearly identified several evidence based interventions that have stood the test of research and time. 

Huang, A. & Wheeler, J. (2006).  Effective Interventions for Individuals with High Functional Autism.  International Journal of Special Education. 21(3), 165-175.

Kunce, L. & Mesibov, G.B. (1998),  Educational Approaches to High-Functioning Autism and Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism.  227-261.

Article Review: A Selective Review of Treatments for Children with Autism: Description and Methodological Considerations

Lee Ann Melchor

University of Central Florida

College of Education - Graduate Studies

A Selective Review of Treatments for Children with Autism: Description and Methodological Considerations

Recently, the CDC announced that roughly 1 in 88 children are diagnosed with autism with boys 5 times more likely to develop autism than girls. These staggering numbers combined with the lack of identifiable cure or cause of autism, leaves many parents vulnerable to miracle cures and ineffective and unproven treatment options. Of all the treatment options available, several programs were identified as being the most cited and most visible autism programs available. These programs include: UCLA’s Young Autism Project (YAP), Project TEACCH, LEAP, ABA Therapy and the Denver Health Science Program.

While there is no documented cure for autism, autism can be managed effectively using a combination of behavioral, education and biological interventions. In reviewing treatment options, autism and school professionals should consider the following questions: (a) Are these treatment programs effective? (b) What are the common elements of these programs? (c) What steps need to be taken to improve treatment outcome research for children with autism? (d) What implications do the answers to the above 3 questions have for school psychologists? (Gresham, 2000). Two primary distinctions are made when evaluating a treatment option: the efficacy of the treatment or the reduction in the autism symptoms while increasing functional skills and effectiveness across the settings in which the treatment options will be used.

In 1996, Bristol and his colleagues released a report to the National Institute of Health (NIH) in which he raised issue with the methods and the statistical data in autism interventions that must be addressed in order to gain a better understanding of what autism interventions work. These findings include:

• Research studies should use experimental designs and treatment comparison models.
• Use of randomly assigned children to treatment conditions.
• Treatment should be conducted across a wide variety of natural and laboratory settings in which a wide variety of behaviors and skills are assessed.
• Outside evaluators who are not vested in outcomes of research should not be used.
• Procedural integrity of the interventions should be consistently assessed.
• Longevity studies should be used to evaluate the long term effects of treatment over time.

The Clinical Child and Pediatric Psychology / Division 12 of the American Psychological Association (APA), formed a task force to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of research on childhood five childhood disorders, including autism. The goals of the task force include identifying what treatments are most effective for individuals with autism and under what circumstances.

In evaluating several of the leading programs for children with autism, including UCLA’s Young Autism Project (YAP), Project TEACCH, LEAP, ABA Therapy and the Denver Health Science Program, several key flaws were found. In the YAP program, which relies primarily on discrete trial training, the research studies utilized to evaluate YAP’s effectiveness, failed to randomly assign children to the research groups. Further research studies, failed to replicate the exact outcomes in later studies. Project TEACCH uses collaboration, sharing of information, as well as education programs for both the child and the parent. Project TEACCH uses a framework that combines vocational, social skills, and living skills. Research studies have been completed on the effectiveness of TEACCH in the classroom, but not on the effectiveness of the interventions being used in the home setting. LEAP program is a federally funded model that was one of the first to utilize inclusive practices for young children with autism and their families. LEAP emphasizes the use of a home-school alliance to promote academic outcomes of children. There is little data to support that LEAP has more effective outcomes than other autism programs. ABA Therapy is considered one of the most effective interventions for children with autism as it focuses on the role of the child’s environment impact on the child’s behavior. This article, however, focused on two ABA programs: Rutgers University’s Douglas Developmental Center and Princeton’s Child Development Institute. This article criticized that the studies conducted at Rutgers failed to use a control group and a comparison group, thereby nullifying the validity of the data collected. Princeton’s study also had several flaws including failing to randomly assign children, neglecting to use a comparison group receiving another treatment, failing to identify the treatment program adequately and poorly defined outcomes.

From this article, it has become clear that the autism field is hampered by the lack of adequately proven interventions. The lack of documented proven interventions is centered around the lack of an established, uniform criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of treatment options in the field of autism. If professionals in the field cannot agree on an established method for evaluating programs, how can they determine the most effective intervention programs available? Furthermore, if professionals cannot agree on the most effective interventions available, how more confusing is it to parents of children with autism to determine which treatment options are most effective for their child?

In summary, it is clear that there is a high need for a uniform set of procedures and criteria to be established to evaluate the effectiveness of programs. It is imperative for this to be established for advances to be made in the autism field. This is critical for not only protecting parents and children with autism but the field of autism as well.

Gresham, F. et al (2000). A Selective Review of Treatments for Children with Autism: Description and Methodological Considerations. School Psychology Review, 28(4), pp. 559-575.

Article Review: Evidence-Based Practices and Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders

by Lee Ann Melchor

University of Central Florida and

Middle School ASD Seclusion Teacher

note: A full copy of this article and the successful interventions referenced in the article can be found at https://depts.washington.edu/pdacent/Publications/Simpson/Simpson2.pdf

With the passing of both IDEA and NCLB, several restructuring efforts to identify the role of the parent and increase parental involvement have been made. In 2001, NCLB sought to ensure that children with disabilities have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in obtaining a high-quality education as that of their non-disabled peers. To measure this, providing standards-based curriculum and measuring annual yearly progress (AYP) became the expectation for all students.

For children with ASD, this is becoming increasingly challenging. In recent years, the increased prevalence of those diagnosed with ASD has increased. Unlike other disabilities, educators and parents of children with the life-long disability of ASD face the additional challenge of not knowing the root cause of the child's disability as well as no universally accepted course of successful treatment (Simpson, 2005). Parents of children with ASD, are often desperate to find both a cause of their child's disability and cure. Unfortunately, there are many individuals and companies that prey upon the vulnerability of the parents by promising extraordinary and often unproven results. These unproven methods have encouraged unhealthy, unrealistic and often improbable expectations and have impeded the field of ASD (Simpson, 2005).

Over the last decade, there has been little information available as to what works. This is greatly hampered by the lack of agreement between professionals and educators on how to best identify and effectively evaluate and measure effective practices. Under NCLB, an attempt has been made to identify programs that are scientifically based by research “that involves the application of rigorous, systematic and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs” (NCLB, 2002). Shortly thereafter, the U.S. Department of Education awarded $18.5 million to the What Works Clearinghouse to assess and identify effective programs.

Despite these measures, there has not been adequate progress made in the field of ASD. Primarily, the wide range of symptoms among those diagnosed with ASD make it difficult to pinpoint effective methods as a method that may work for one individual may not necessarily work for another. It is also difficult to define how results will be measured as many of the results are based upon the observer’s perception, rather than scientifically based data collected.

For parents, this can be very confusing. Websites, testimonials, vitamin makers, the media and even supposed educational and medical companies all promise miracle cures. Simpson recommends parents and professionals become better consumers of intervention methods for children of ASD by utilizing 3 important questions: (1) What are the efficacy and anticipated outcomes that align with a particular practice, and are the outcomes in harmony with the needs of the student? (2) What are the potential risks associated with the practice, and (3) What are the most effective means of evaluating a particular method or approach? (Simpson, 2005).

In short, Simpson encourages professionals and parents to identify the specific, individual needs of the child. Next, determine what common goal they hope to achieve. Like in an I.E.P., parents and professionals should identify goals that are realistic, clearly defined and able to measured and obtained. Parents and professionals should also evaluate the risk to the child and the emotional and financial risk to the family unit. Finally, parents and professionals should determine how results will be measured, rather than relying on their feelings and attitudes.

So, what does work? Simpson and his team identified several interventions and treatments for children with ASD. Within the skill based category: ABA therapy, discrete trial training, LEAP and pivotal response training all meet the standard of scientifically based practices. Medications and other medically based interventions were not included in the evaluations possibly as the medications primarily treat the symptoms such as behavioral disorders and aggression, rather than overall ASD disorder.

In summary, the field of ASD is dependent upon identifying effective methods, treatments and interventions. This is critical not only to the field of ASD, but also to reduce the amount children with ASD are exposed to questionable and ineffective treatments.

References:

Simpson, R., et al (2005). Evidence Based Practices and Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disorders, 20(3), 140-149.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 20 U.S.C. 70, 6301 (2002).