August 2018 – Special Educator e-Journal

Table of Contents

• Special Education Legal Alert. By Perry A. Zirkel

• Creating a Climate of Achievement in Secondary Inclusive Classrooms for Students with Behavioral and Learning Difficulties: Features of an Effective Instructional and Classroom Management System. By Craig Darch, Sean Wachsmuth, Eric Darch, Kate Simmons, Vanessa Hinton and Danny Owes

• Model Special Education Letters

• Buzz from the Hub

• Students Get Involved!

• The Barriers to Collaboration, Inclusion and Teamwork within the Special Education Community. By Cecilia Scott-Croff

• From the Latest Issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals (JAASEP): The Impact of Assistive Technology on Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review. By Angela Bollin, Julia VanderMolen and Taylor Bierwagen

• Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) in Children: Fact Sheet for Education Professionals

• Acknowledgments

• Download a PDF of This Issue

---

Perry A. Zirkel

© July 2018

This monthly legal alert addresses Section 504 and IDEA issues, respectively.  First is an update of the national and state-by-state percentages of “504-only” students.  Second is the summary of a recent federal appellate court decision concerning child find and eligibility IDEA.   For automatic e-mailing of future legal alerts, sign up at perryzirkel.com.

The follow-up analysis of the rate of “504-only” students (i.e., those with 504 plans, not “double-covered” students with IEPs) nationally and for each state, based on the 2015–2016 Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) revealed notable changes since the 2013–2014 analysis.  The full version of this analysis will be available next month under the Section 504 and the ADA subheading of the Publications list on perryzirkel.com—“State Rates of 504-Only Students in K–12 Schools: An Update.”
The national average for 504-only students increased from 1.8% in 2013–2014 to 2.3% in 2015–2016.	This increase is surprising to the extent that the liberalized standards for Section 504 eligibility went into effect on January 1, 2009.  Six years later, it would appear that not only the awareness and adherence to these standards may have been slow but also that other contributing factors are in play, including possible over-identification in some states or districts.
The states with the highest average rates are the same although the increases vary in each one: New Hampshire (5.5%à5.8%), Louisiana (5.0%à5.4%), and Vermont (4.4% à5.0%).  The states with the lowest average rates changed to the extent that Kansas (.9%à.1%) moved to the bottom position and New Mexico (.5%à1.3%) moved out of the bottom three; yet, Wisconsin (.5%à.8%) and Mississippi (.3%à.4%) remained there.	This inter-state variance is higher than that for the IDEA IEP rates in terms of the ratio between the highest and lowest percentages.  The likely contributing factors include litigiousness, socioeconomic status, and various interrelated situational features such as responses to high stakes time testing and the corresponding pressures with regard to IDEA identification.  Their interactions and effects continue to vary as evident in not only the state averages but also the extent of the change during these two year.
My next follow-up analyses, which will be at the district and school levels, will reveal even more significant variance within each state.	The inter- and intra-district variance further reflects the same systemic contributing factors, such as socioeconomic status.  The “culture” of the district and, within it, of the school, that form the prevailing practices in identifying 504-only students represent extent of accurate knowledge and available resources, the nature and weight of competing interests and values, and the interaction between past practices and current pressures.  In any event, review of such data warrants consideration of possible under- or over-identification.

 

In Durbrow v. Cobb County School District (2018), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the parents’ child find and eligibility claims on behalf of their son, a student with ADHD in an accelerated program at a selective magnet high school.  The district provided him with a 504 plan, which included extra time on tests and small class sizes, in grade 9.  In grades 10 and 11, he passed all of the classes and scored As in all his final exams.   In his senior year, however, he failed two subjects in the fall and three more in the spring due to late and incomplete work, despite additions to his 504 plan in October (e.g., reduced homework).  At another 504 meeting in May, the parents requested an evaluation for IDEA eligibility, which the district completed by the start of the following school year.  In the meanwhile, due to his Fs, the district removed him from the magnet program and determined that he had not yet qualified to graduate.
For child find, which the parents claimed started as early the second semester of grade 10, the appellate court agreed with the hearing officer and district court that the school district (1) did not have reason to suspect possible IDEA eligibility prior to the parents’ request and (2) proceeded to conduct the evaluation within a reasonable period of time.  The court pointed to ample evidence in the record, including admissions from the parents and the student, that although his passing grades were less than his capability, the discrepancy was due to lack of effort.  Thus, the court concluded that the missing element, in terms of the requisite reasonable suspicion, was the need for special education.	Consistent with the long line of child find jurisprudence, this case identified the two dimensions of the ongoing affirmative obligation of child find under the IDEA: (1) reasonable suspicion, as the trigger, and (2) reasonable period, as the amount of time for initiating the evaluation.  Although directly connected, the time period for completing the evaluation is a fixed number—60 days from the date of consent unless state law specifies a different timeframe.  In this case, the court did not find any “alarming” signs, or red flags, to indicate that the student might need special education, especially due to the overriding lack of effort and the district’s “individualized attentiveness,” including successive 504 plans to his difficulties.  However, this outcome should not be over-generalized.
The Eleventh Circuit, which encompasses Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, also agreed with the hearing officer and lower court that for the same basic reason, the lack of evidence for the need for special education, that the student was not eligible for an IEP.	Again, this outcome is subject to caveats or questions.  For example, the court concluded that the student “displayed some weaknesses not readily available to special education remediation.”  Are procrastination, lack of effort, and organizational skills mutually exclusive from ADHD and special education?  As another example, the district’s evaluation, upon completion, determined that the student was IDEA-eligible.  Why was he eligible at the start of the following school year but not by the early spring of his failed grade 12?[1] Yet, this published appellate ruling illustrates the less than nuanced and district-deferential decision-making of many courts.

 

[1]   Conversely, although the parties did not raise the issue and the court did not comment on it, one wonders whether the student’s relatively early qualification for a 504 plan illustrates the over-identification in some schools.  More specifically, what it the major life activity that the school identified, and how did the knowledgeable team determine that the student’s ADHD substantially limit this major life activity relative to the general population independent of his lack of effort?

 

---

Craig Darch, Auburn University
Sean Wachsmuth, University of Missouri
Eric Darch and Kate Simmons, Auburn University at Montgomery
Vanessa Hinton and Danny Owes, Auburn University

Abstract

Demands on teachers have increased with new levels of accountability, diminishing resources, and an increase in the diversity of learners. Effective instruction and classroom management practices should benefit all students including those with learning and behavioral problems. Strategies to improve instructional and classroom management involve school climate, student achievement, and must be evidence based-practices proven effective across a variety of content areas.  This article discusses instructional classroom management strategies to promote a climate of achievement, encourage respect and responsibility, and maximize student learning and positive behavior among students who are at risk for failure. These methods are applicable across disciplines and grade levels in middle and high school.

Keywords: expectations, pre-correction, active supervison

Introduction

Today’s secondary teachers are faced with the difficult task of ensuring optimal achievement for all students. Demands on teachers have increased with new levels of accountability, diminishing resources, and an increase in the diversity of learners. These factors emphasize the need for evidence-based models of instruction and classroom management teachers can apply to their classrooms to increase student learning and support a climate of achievement.

As students transition to middle and high school the behavioral and learning expectations change. Students are expected to apply skills learned in earlier grades to a new environment (Johnson and Smith, 2008), a task that is challenging to all students but can be especially difficult for students with learning and behavior problems (Forgan and Vaughn, 2000; Letrello and Miles, 2003; Carter, Clark, Cushing, and Kennedy, 2005; Spencer, 2005; LaCava, 2005; Cauley and Jovanovich, 2006). In addition to the shift in educational expectations adolescents are changing physically, socially and emotionally; and these changes affect their needs and values. As a secondary teacher it is important to understand the implications these changes can have on instruction and classroom management.

Classroom Climate

Effective instruction and classroom management practices should benefit all students including those with learning and behavioral problems (Ennis, Royer, Lane, & Griffith, 2017; Emmer & Stough, 2001; Fairbanks, Simonsen & Sugai, 2008; Merrell, Carrizales, Feuerborn, Gueldner, & Tran, 2007).  Understanding that many as 75% of students with disabilities are educated in general education classrooms (Prater, 2003) makes creating an appropriate learning climate a vital step toward effective instruction.  Climate is a broad concept that encompasses students’ feelings about their teachers and peers (Barr, 2016).  It reflects students’ perceptions of instructional rigor, interactions with teachers, and peers; and students’ involvement in the class (Reid & Radhakrishnan, 2003). Each student will develop an individual sense of the classroom environment, however, it is important to know that the classroom climate is a general feeling of all students in the class (Barr, 2016).  Therefore it is important for educators to know techniques for developing effective instructional climates that increases learning for all students, including students with disabilities.

Unique Considerations When Teaching Adolescents

When establishing climate it is important to understand that instruction and management are married concepts in the classroom in that the teacher must be skilled in both to be effective.  Teachers who are masters of their content areas can struggle in the classroom because they have limited management skills. Management problems can be devastating to the success of students with learning and behavioral needs. Researchers have shown that early management problems create an adversarial cycle of negative student behavior and negative teacher responses which damage the student-teacher relationship beyond repair. Kameenui and Simmons (1990) identified the assumption that teaching is a complex task that can be especially difficult in the secondary setting. Designing classroom management within the context of instruction for adolescents is aided when considering this assumption. Adolescents enter the classroom with a new set of characteristics than they presented to teachers in the earlier grades. Adolescence can be a time of turmoil for students associated with a decline in academic motivation, poorer self-concepts, and decreased interest in school. Adolescents also have a higher arrest rate than other age groups and a relatively high rate of drug and alcohol use (Baer, 1999).

While physical and sexual development is the most obvious change of adolescence (Obenchain & Taylor, 2005) significant psychological and emotional changes are taking place beneath the awkward exteriors. As students reach adolescence they begin to question the moral norms they knew during childhood and start to develop their own identity (Brophy, 1985). Students experiment with different identities or roles during middle and high school (Oberchain & Taylor, 2005) often testing these new identities for a few days or a few months while carefully gauging peer and adult responses.

A 2003 study by Cothran, Kulinna, & Garrahy interviewed students concerning their perceptions of effective classroom managers. In addition to clear expectations and consequences the students cited intangible factors such as relationships, respect, and caring as attributes of effective classroom managers. For students with learning and behavior problems, who often see the school environment as uninviting and non-supportive, (Walker and Green, 2009) it is essential for teachers to understand the power of creating a positive, caring atmosphere.  Adolescents are sensitive to being treated negatively by teachers and can respond in kind. Establishing respect with students is essential in the secondary setting. As students seek autonomy from adults during adolescence they begin to view themselves more as equals to adults than subordinates. Teachers must recognize this early and systematically incorporate opportunities to establish mutual respect into their instruction as opposed to assuming respect due to their position as instructor (Cothran et al., 2003).

These challenges of adolescence are compounded for students with learning and behavioral problems. Students with significant instructional and behavioral needs require more supports.  Table 1 shows some of the differences between students with and without significant learning and behavioral problems.  It is advantageous for teachers to make proactive adjustments to their classroom management procedures and instruction, understanding that instruction and the classroom climate are intertwined.

Table 1

Differences between students with and without significant learning and behavioral problems

Descriptions	Students without Learning or Behavior Problems	Students with Learning or Behavior Problems
Attitude toward school	School is a means to achieve success later in life. Regularly interact with teachers.	School is a burden that is required. Often receive lower rates of positive teacher attention like academic interactions, teacher praise, and opportunities to respond. (Sutherland, Lewis-Palmer, Stichter and Morgan, 2008)
Sense of belonging	Perceive their environment to be accepting and inclusive (Walker and Greene, 2009)	Perceive environment to be uninviting and non-supportive (Walker and Greene, 2009)
Learning	Capable of learning required skills through normal student-teacher interactions. Able to access and understand implied or “hidden” academic and behavioral expectations.	Require specialized instruction in specific academic and behavioral skills especially those that are implied or “hidden.”
Social Skills	Able to use social skills to make and keep friends and to establish a sense of belonging	Poor social skills that can lead to lead to social isolation, loneliness and a lack of fulfillment in social settings (Court & Givon, 2003)
Self-determination	Attribute success to hard work and good study habits and able to set and achieve goals. Able to organize more than one goal and transition from simple to complex goals (The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements, n.d.)	Attribute failure to uncontrollable factors such as luck or teacher style. Unorganized and impulsive when dealing with problems (The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements, n.d.)

Instructional Implications to Improve Student Outcomes

The differences among learners outlined in Table 2 can be a source of frustration for teachers. Unfortunately there is no simple step-by-step solution for teachers to close the gap between typical learners and those who struggle in the classroom. This should not leave teachers hopeless though as there are many effective strategies that can be implemented in the classroom to improve instruction and management.

Effective instruction and management is proactive. The teacher must visualize what they expect from students. This means that before a problem behavior occurs the teacher strategically teaches all that is required so students have the skills to behave appropriately (Darch, & Kame’enui, 2004). This proactive approach, along with calculated adjustments to the classroom environment can help improve classroom management and create an effective atmosphere for learning. It is important to note that the ideas and examples set forth below are not discipline specific. That is, they are as applicable for 12^th grade chemistry teacher as they are for a 7^th grade music teacher. Furthermore, this is by no means an exhaustive list of ways to implement instructional classroom management techniques nor does a teacher need to implement every example to improve their classroom atmosphere.

Practical Strategies for Instructional Management

Hallinan (2008) identified liking school as a predictor of student performance. Some students are able to maintain consistent levels of performance simply because school is a place they enjoy being and/or it is valued by family. In addition to this they view school as an opportunity to help them achieve success later in life. Many students with learning and behavior needs do not share this same view of school. Often students with behavior or learning difficulties view school as a necessary evil that must be endured to avoid conflicts with authority figures like the teachers, parents, & police. Students also may have parents who had negative school experiences making the aversion to school generational or they have had traumatic experiences at school like bullying or negative interactions with teachers. While many of these issues are beyond the control of teachers, there are steps teachers can take to make school more inviting, friendly and safe for students with learning and behavior needs. The instructional implications that follow are designed to make school less ambiguous and more relevant for students in the secondary setting. Too often individuals claim that there is nothing they can do if the kids don’t want to be in school. This outlook puts teachers in a powerless position and leads to a dangerous apathetic outlook of their own efficacy because they are focused on factors they cannot control. By shifting focus to factors that can be controlled the teacher is able to stay excited about how they can affect student learning and achievement.

Instructional Techniques in Setting Expectations

One initial step teachers can take toward improving students’ attitude toward school is establishing expectations with the intent of maintaining a positive, productive and safe classroom. Establishing expectations provides students with a form of external guide to their behavior. Unambiguous and consistently enforced expectations outline how to behave in the classroom setting which is a setting that can be confusing for students with learning and behavior problems. It is important for teachers to know that students may have a different set of behavioral expectations at home and in other environments where they spend time. When not explicitly taught a new set of expectations for the classroom students with behavior and learning needs will fall back on the behavioral expectations they know. Unfortunately these behaviors may not align with the teacher’s expectations and can cause some serious management problems.

Martella and Nelson (2003) discussed the importance of carefully establishing classroom rules and outlined several steps to guide teachers in the process (see table 2). It is very important for teachers to go beyond simply posting a list of “Don’ts” in the classroom and then calling on the list when they are down to their last nerve. One important step to consider when working with adolescents is that rules must be developed using the input of students. Adolescents value the opportunity to control parts of their education and can feel more respected when teachers listen to their ideas.

Table 2

Guidelines for Developing Classroom Expectations

1.Discuss the value and purpose of classroom expectations with students. 2.Gather student input to develop expectations. 3.Gain student commitment to expectations. 4.Teach expectations to students explicitly. 5.Post expectations in prominent location. 6.Monitor and assess students expectation following and reteach if needed.

Table adapted from Martella and Nelson, (2003)

Instructional Techniques for Teaching Expectations

After the classroom expectations have been established it is important for teachers to teach students the skills they need to meet the expectations. To many middle and high school teachers this may seem like an elementary process. In fact, many students with learning and behavior needs may not understand simple rules without explicit teaching due to a lack of social skills or limited receptive language skills. In addition to skill deficits teachers are attempting to shift a student’s way of thinking about behavior that has been engrained in them for many years. That is, the behavioral expectations the student has at home are more familiar and much more likely to be followed because it is what the student knows. If these expectations do not align with the teachers expectations it is unreasonable to assume that the students known set of expectations will be erased and rewritten by simply reviewing classroom rules for 5 minutes at the beginning of the school year.

One method of teaching classroom rules is to use a “T” chart that asks students to describe what a certain rule or behavior looks like and sounds like (see Figure 1.). The teacher draws the “T” chart on the board, states the rule or expectation and poses a question to the class. For example, “We are going to talk about rule three, speak respectfully. What does it look like to speak respectfully? What does it not look like?

Figure 1.

Rule 3: Speak Respectfully.

Looks Like

Is Not

The students’ responses are used to fill in the chart and are referred back to it as needed. This method of teaching rules can be applied to new instructional situations as well as a method of pre-correction. Pre-correction is a proactive strategy teachers implement by identifying contexts in which students may need extra behavior support, and facilitate students engagement in appropriate behaviors (Ennis et al., 2017). For example, before transitioning to another setting, the teacher will remind students of desired behaviors to be displayed during the transition and tie the behaviors to existing classroom rules.  By explaining a desired behavior and rule in this manner teachers are able to reinforce students as they follow the rule in the future, as well as know if a student is not following a rule because they choose not to or are unable to. For many students this teaching model must be repeated numerous times throughout the semester or school year and in some cases multiple times every day.

Similar to arranging the physical aspects of the classroom the teacher should establish systems for common student tasks such as handing in homework, labeling papers, sharpening pencils, and storing materials (Kameeniu, 1995; Southerland, Lewis-Palmer, Stichter, & Morgan 2008). While many teachers at this level view middle and high school as the time when students must learn to be responsible for their own belongings it is important to know that students will not automatically learn to be responsible for their belongings simply because they are in middle school. In the same way we teach new academic concepts we must help students establish organizational routines. Students with learning and behavioral needs often struggle with organizational skills. The level of organization required in middle and high school is significantly different than what was required in earlier grades. Teachers who establish systems and routines that students can follow for organizing materials establish external governance for those students who are unable to manage this skill internally. In addition to setting up structure that aids students in organizing materials, the teacher saves valuable instructional time because students more readily locate materials to complete assignments. By establishing systems for these basic student tasks the classroom atmosphere becomes less ambiguous to students allowing them to focus on learning content instead of trying to remember where and how to perform basic tasks. Students must be taught these systems, given opportunities to practice them and be reinforced when the systems are used independently.

Establishing the Classroom Environment

Establishing a safe classroom environment is an essential step toward improving student attitudes toward school. In addition to establishing and consistently enforcing classroom expectations it is essential that students feel safe in class. Safety in class goes beyond students’ physical safety and involves the students’ emotional safety as well. One way to maximize the emotional safety in the classroom is to designate the classroom as a safe haven. A safe haven is a place free from negative or hurtful interactions with both students and teachers. Most teachers are aware that middle and high schools are filled with put-downs and sarcasm that are damaging to a student’s emotional wellbeing. By establishing a safe haven in the classroom free from hurtful comments and interactions students are free to concentrate on academics and learning. In such an environment a student can develop self-confidence and grow. In a safe haven the teacher is responsible for teaching students what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. This can be done in much the same way that classroom rules and expectations are established. The teacher must discuss why the safe haven policy is valuable, gather student input to define safe haven and gain student commitment to the policy. It is important to recognize that the teacher must not only consistently enforce the safe haven policy but must be a constant model for students. This means that the teacher must be mindful of her own interactions with both students and adults to be sure that sarcasm and put-downs are not a part of her vocabulary.

Creating a Sense of Belonging

Students with learning and behavioral problems often do not feel welcome at school. Research suggests that students with behavioral difficulties receive lower rates of positive teacher attention in the form of academic interactions, teacher praise, and opportunities to respond due to their problematic behaviors (Sutherland, Lewis-Palmer, Stichter & Morgan, 2008). This is an unfortunate cycle. Cothran et al., (2003) stated that students identified good classroom managers as teachers who showed students they care. This may involve taking the time to learn about students’ interests or simply making sure that students get equal opportunities to respond during instruction. Consideration of these factors before instruction will allow more time for teachers to focus on content instruction and student learning in the during-instruction phase.  Active supervision is one way teachers can manage their class and demonstrate to students that hey care. When implementing active supervision the teacher (a) moves among students with a special focus on problem areas, (b) scans the environment to look for appropriate and inappropriate behavior, (c) interacts with a variety of students through conversation, initiating pre-correction, or teaching appropriate behaviors; and (d) provides students with frequent positive comments for observed appropriate behaviors (De Pry & Sugai, 2002; Haydon & Kroeger, 2016).

Conclusion

It is important to know that the teacher who has classroom management difficulties also has instructional inefficiencies because both ideas are interconnected. That is, the teacher who is unable to get students to come into class, sit in their seats, and attend to instruction is going to have a difficult time accomplishing his academic objectives. A vital step in the implementation of instruction is establishing a climate that increases learning for all students. Teachers must be skilled in both classroom management and content to be effective educators for all students (Ennis, et al., 2017; Merrell et al., 2007). Instructional techniques include setting expectations and rules students perceive as fair, teaching expectations, establishing a safe classroom environment, and creating a sense of belonging for all students.  All of these considerations and ideas are effective but do require the teacher to take time to implement in the secondary environment where there are so many instructional demands. Teachers can feel that if they have to spend so much time developing and incorporating these management strategies their content instruction will suffer. In reality, the opposite is true. By taking the time to proactively incorporate even a few of these ideas into instruction teachers can create more time for content instruction. In addition to increasing their instructional time, the quality of instruction is enhanced.

References

Baer, J. (1999). Adolescent development and the junior high school environment. Social Work in Education, 21(4), 238-248.

Brophy, J. (1985). Classroom management as instruction: Socializing self-guidance in students. Theory Into Practice, 24(4), 233.

Carter, E., Clark, N., Cushing, L., & Kennedy, C. (2005). Moving from elementary to middle school: Supporting a smooth transition for students with severe disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(3), 8-14.

Cauley, K., & Jovanovich, D. (2006). Developing an effective transition program for students entering middle school or high School. Clearing House, 80(1), 15-25.

Cothran, D., Kulinna, P., & Garrahy, D. (2003). “This is kind of giving a secret away…”: students’ perspectives on effective class management. Teaching & Teacher Education, 19(4), 435. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00027-1.

Court, D., & Givon, S. (2003). Group intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(2), 50-55.

Darch, C., & Kame’enui, E., (2004). Instructional classroom management: A proactive approach to behavior management (Second Edition). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.

Emmer, E., & Stough, L. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 103-112.

Ennis, R.P., Royer, D., J., Lane, K., L., & Griffith, C. E. (2017). A systematic review of precorrection in pk-12 settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 40, 465-496.

Fairbanks, S., Simonsen, B., & Sugai, G. (2008). Classwide secondary and tertiary tier practices and systems. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(6), 44-52.

Forgan, J., & Vaughn, J. (2000). Adolescents with and without LD make the transition to middle school. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(1), 33-43.

Hallinan, M. (2008). Teacher influences on students’ attachment to school. Sociology of Education, 81(3), 271-283.

Haydon, T., & Kroeger, S. D. (2016). Active supervision, precorrection, and explicit timing: A high school case study on classroom behavior. Preventing School Failure, 60 (1), 70-78.

The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements. (n.d.). Understanding Learning Strategies: Instruction to Enhance Student Learning. Retrieved on January 14, 2010, from www.iriscenter.com/srs/cresource.htm

Johnson, E., & Smith, L. (2008). Implementation of response to intervention at middle school. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(3), 46-52.

Kameenui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C., (1990). Designing instructional strategies: The prevention of academic learning problems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: McMillian Publishing.

LaCava, P. (2005). Facilitate transitions. Intervention in School & Clinic, 41(1), 46-48.

Letrello, T., & Miles, D. (2003). The transition from middle school to high school. Clearing House, 76(4), 212.

Martella, R. C., & Nelson, J. R., (2003). Managing classroom behavior. Journal of Direct Instruction, 3(2), 139-165.

Merrell, K. W., Carrizales, D., Feuerborn, L., Gueldner, B. A., & Tran, O. K. (2007). Strong kids–Grades 3-5: A social and emotional learning curriculum. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Obenchain, K., & Taylor, S. (2005). Behavior management. Clearing House, 79(1), 7-11.

Prater, M. (2003). She will succeed! Strategies for success in inclusive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(5), 58.

Reid, L. D., & Radhakrishnan, P. (2003). Race matters: The relation between race and general campus climate, Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9(3), 263-275.

Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based practices in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice. Education & Treatment of Children, 31(3), 351-380.

Spencer, V. (2005). Crossing over. Intervention in School & Clinic, 40(4), 247-249.

Sutherland, K., Lewis-Palmer, T., Stichter, J., & Morgan, P. (2008). Examining the influence of teacher behavior and classroom context on the behavioral and academic outcomes for students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Journal of Special Education, 41(4), 223-233.

Walker, C., & Greene, B. (2009). The relations between student motivational beliefs and cognitive engagement in high school. Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 463-472.

---

There are times when parents may want to communicate in writing with their child’s school about some problem or concern with their child’s education or well-being. Below are a series of model letter templates for you to have on file

Discussing a problem
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/problem/

Requesting a copy of your child’s records
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/records-2/

Requesting an evaluation for special education services
(you’re already here)

Requesting an independent evaluation
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/iee-3/

Requesting a meeting to review your child’s Individualized Education Program (IEP)
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/iep-2/

Requesting a change in your child’s placement
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/placement-2/

Informing the school that you intend to place your child in a private school at public expense
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/private/

Requesting prior written notice
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/notice/

Requesting mediation to resolve a conflict
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/mediation-2/

Requesting a due process hearing to resolve a conflict
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/hearing/

Filing a complaint with the State to resolve a conflict
http://www.parentcenterhub.org/statecomplaint-2/

 

---

All articles below can be accessed through the following links:

She Will Never…
Many of you already know Rene Averitt-Sanzone, formerly of Region 2’s PTAC at ECAC, now the Executive Director of The Parents’ Place of Maryland. In her recent blog, Rene shares the ups and downs of her family’s journey: discovering, screening for, and coming to terms with hearing impairment; and advocating for and watching the incredible successes of her remarkable daughters.

What Matters Most: Research on Elevating Parent Expectations
Put simply, efforts to change the post-school landscape must include a heavy investment in equipping families to hold high expectations from an early age, to aspire toward and advocate for enviable outcomes after high school, and to share this vision with every person whose life intersects with the lives of their sons and daughters.

The Effects of Training on Parent Knowledge and Expectations of Student Post-School Outcomes
A key predictor of successful post-school outcomes for students with disabilities is high parental expectations. This project examined the impact of training parents about transition agency services and found that, yes, providing such training increases parents’ knowledge and expectations for post-school outcomes for their young adult with disabilities.

Do We Really Have High Expectations for All?
The bottom line of this article, written by a middle school educator, is: “We have to match our beliefs about expectations to our daily actions in the classroom.” Teachers will find lots of insight into the subtle and not-so-subtle ways that high or low expectations are communicated to students.

Establishing a Culture of High Expectations
This PDF of a PowerPoint presentation summarizes 10 effective strategies for establishing a culture of high expectations at school.

---

Students Get Involved!

---

Cecilia Scott-Croff, Ed.D. SAS, SDA, CPAC
Borough of Manhattan Community College Early Childhood Center Inc.

Abstract

---

By
Angela Bollin, BS TR, CTRS
Julia VanderMolen, Ph.D
Taylor Bierwagen

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to review the assistive technology (AT) specific assessment models and instruments that have been developed for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in order to provide an overview of the strategies to be employed in rehabilitation and education. Three electronic databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies investigating children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and the use of assistive technology to assist with speech difficulties, little social interaction, and poor motor skills. Relevant studies were independently reviewed and appraised by three reviewers. Methodological quality was quantified using the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association’s levels of evidence. In total, 21 studies were included in the review. We argue that there is a need to develop a more thorough guide for AT professionals in the process of AT assessment for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Introduction

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is related to a range of significant impairments in speech disorders, social interaction, and poor motor skills (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Individuals with autism are characterized by repetitive and ritualistic behavior and often have symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorders (ADHD) while their cognitive development does not follow a homogeneous path (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Furthermore, there has been a steady increase in diagnosis of the disorder (Tarbox, Dixon, Sturmey, Matson, & SpringerLink, 2014). However, it is still unknown if the disorder is due to an individual being born with the disorder or increased awareness and improved diagnosis (Tarbox, Dixon, Sturmey, Matson, & SpringerLink, 2014). Regardless of the cause, as the numbers of ASD continue to rise, the need for intervention is more demanding than ever. Children with autism need language, social and behavioral, and motor skills assistance in order to become independent and successful (Ennis-Cole & Smith, 2011).  Additionally, the majority of them encounter difficulties to achieve their daily life goals and they rely on continuous support from parents and/or caretakers (Farley et al., 2009).

Assistive Technology

Assistive technology (AT) can play an important aspect of intervention for children with disabilities.  Assistive technology has the potential to alter learning opportunities for individuals with ASD. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997), the Technology Related Assistance for Individuals Act (TRAIDA, 1988), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990), and the Rehabilitation Act (1973) define AT as “any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities” (Cardon, Wilcox, & Campbell, 2011, p. 169).

The majority of research available exploring AT and children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) involves picture systems and their ability to increase children’s receptive and expressive language skills. To support the receptive language development, AT often takes the form of picture schedules to assist children with a variety of daily routines and activities (Cardon, Wilcox, & Campbell, 2011). In addition to the low-tech picture systems, research also indicates that high-tech voice output devices have been used to help children with autism between the ages of three and five years request food, help, and gain access to preferred activities (Cardon, Wilcox, & Campbell, 2011).  Assistive Technology (AT) can address the specific needs of a child with autism’s speech difficulties, little social interaction, and poor motor skills. AT can enable them to experience more independent living. AT can be defined as specialized tools that allow those with a disability to independently and fully participate in schools (Ennis-Cole et al., 2011). Assistive Technology includes, but is not limited, to both non-technical auxiliary aids, mechanical and electrical devices, computer software, simulations, virtual reality, and augmentative and alternative communication devices. These technologies can help a child with a disorder, such as ASD; accomplish a task that is otherwise extremely difficult or impossible without these tools (Ennis-Cole et al., 2011).

Purpose

Identifying effective interventions and supportive strategies for people with ASD is a critical issue for researchers, educators, and practitioners (Stasolla, Damiani & Caffò, 2014).  The purpose of this systematic review sets out to examine and evaluate the impact of assistive technologies such as iPad applications, social robots, and neurological exams on speech difficulties, social interaction and the poor motor skills of children in the autism spectrum disorder.

Method

Selection of Research Articles

Between January 2014 and April 2015, the following three electronic databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, and PsychINFO.  To capture as many relevant citations as possible, a wide range of medical, health and educational databases were searched to identify primary studies of the effects assistive technology on children with autism.  To reach this target, we limited the search to recent peer-reviewed articles, as they are more likely to be relevant and adhere to reporting standards.  The search terms used were a combination of the following sets: set 1: autism spectrum disorder AND assistive technology; set 2: assistive technology AND autism; set 3: autism AND assistive technology AND social skills; and set 4: innovative technology AND autism.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Screening criteria were established to identify potentially relevant articles that met minimum methodological standards for acceptance. Inclusion criteria were: studies published between 2007 and 2015, cohort studies, case-control studies and randomized control trials that evaluated the use of assistive technology and focused on children with autism. Three reviewers screened the search results and all seemingly relevant publications. This was a process designed to eliminate only papers not meeting the criteria for inclusion.

Selection of Studies

The titles, keywords, and abstracts of the papers identified by the electronic databases were screened for potential relevance by three researchers. This effort resulted in 739 citations from which relevant studies were selected for the review. The full papers of the remaining 21 citations were assessed to select those primary studies pertaining to assistive technologies impacting speech, social interactions, and motor skills. Studies focusing on adults were excluded, as the main focus of the review is on children with ASD.  After reading the full texts of the selected articles, the 21 most significant evidence-based articles were selected for further analysis in the review. See flow diagram in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Study flow diagram for review of studies pertaining to assistive technology and ASD.

From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

Results

Twenty-one studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. The review used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and guidelines to ensure appropriate and transparent reporting of results (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, & Altman, 2009). Results are summarized in terms of speech difficulties, social interaction and poor motor skills. The main findings are summarized in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3.

Speech Difficulties

Ennis-Cole and Smith (2011) conducted a case-control study in which a large sample size of 85 participants was recruited between the ages of 10 to 17. The outcomes were positive across all studies as they successfully increased a variety of skills of communication, which also increased other skills such as joint attention, self-help, task completion, motivation, and appropriate behavior (Ennis-Cole & Smith, 2011).

Sampath, Agarwal, and Indurkhya (2013) conducted a case-control study using AutVisComm, an assistive communication system. This assistive communication system was developed in collaboration with teachers and parents of children with autism. The study included 24 children with autism all of which were eight years of age. The goal of the study set out to utilize AT, or application AutVisComm, as a means to assist a child in learning to request his or her desired object. Each child had two one-on-one sessions per week with a teacher, in which a food item was placed out of reach of the child and close to the teacher. To receive the food item, the child had to request the AutVisComm and press the appropriate picture on the screen. If they completed this on their own, it was considered to be an independent (IN) response. If the child needed a verbal prompt from the teacher, it was considered to be a verbal prompt (VP). Finally, if the child still did not respond after a VP the teacher would physically assist the child (Sampath et al., 2013). During the initial sessions most children needed to be physically assisted, but as time pressed on the need for this became less frequent and most children started responding to VP. An important finding in this study was that while concentrating on usability of AT for the children was important; the usability for caretakers also needs to be considered (Sampath et al., 2013).

Venkatesh, Greenhill, Phung, Adams, and Duong (2012) conducted a case-control study with 16 autistic children between the ages of two to seven. This group of scholars created an iPad-based application called Playpad that provides automated multimedia early intervention for children with autism. This application teaches basic skills designed by trained therapists, software for delivering therapy activities, and collecting progress results. Over a course of four weeks, therapy using the application was implemented and incorporated into the children’s daily activities at home. The application specifically increased receptive and expressive language skills using partner activities in which the child and parent interact with the iPad and each other (Venkatesh et al., 2012). To increase expressive language, Playpad presents the image of an object and the child is required to verbally name it. Expressive language requires the child to use language as an expression, where the Playpad application says the name of an object and the child selects the image on Playpad (Venkatesh et al., 2012). To increase receptive language, Playpad presents pictures of objects from the categories and prompts the child to identify the correct object. Receptive language requires the child to use language receptively, where the Playpad application shows an object and the child names it (Venkatesh et al., 2012). This particular application was extremely successful because it not only incorporated a reinforcement system to motivate the child participating, but tracks and records each trial conducted. Over time, the children in this study decreased the number of errors created and the level of prompting needed, along with an increased number of correct responses (Venkatesh et al., 2012).

Ganz, Boles, Goodwyn, and Flores (2014) conducted a case-control study that included children with autism between the ages of 8 to 14. The study used computer-based visual scripts on vocabulary, and found that all the participants showed an increased use of verbs or nouns with the treatment materials. Also, all of the children required less prompts as the trials progressed over time.

Hill, Belcher, Brigman, Repper, and Stephens (2013) conducted a study with eight participants over the age of 18 with ASD in which the use of the iPad as an AT was tested. All participants at the beginning of the trial had difficulty in communicating and engaging socially while at the workplace, which resulted in a decrease of productivity (Hill et al., 2013). This study found that the use of the iPad’s many features helped enhance interpersonal skills needed to communicate and contribute to a positive work experience. An important note in this study was that while the iPad does not replace the need for therapeutic engagement, this type of intervention does indeed improve daily communication for those with ASD (Hill et al., 2013). As described in Table 1, there were a wide variety of high technology AT tools tested and used included voice output communication aids, micro-switch communication systems, touch-sensitive screens, and computer-based language tools.

Kasari et al. (2014) conducted a randomized control study of 61 children with ASD.  The study examined the effects of communication interventions which utilized an AT tool created to improve “spontaneous, communicative utterances in school-aged, minimally verbal children with autism” (Kasari et al., 2014, p. 635). The children were randomly assigned a condition of the “developmental/behavioral intervention with or without the augmentation of a speech-generating device (SGD) for 6 months with a 3-month follow-up” (Kasari et al., 2014, p. 2). SGD is a communication AT intervention that “displays symbols that produce voice output communication when selected” (Kasari et al., 2014, p. 3).

In a longitudinal study, the treatment was broken into two phases. In Phase one, all children received 21 one-hour sessions for three months with a clinician, utilizing an SGD. In Phase two, all children received 24 one-hour sessions, for three months with their parents present. It is noted that in phase two, parents received “systematic parent training consistent with the treatment variation to which the child was assigned” (Kasari et al., 2014, p. 5). This experiment, utilizing adaptive interventions, found that in a short amount of time all children improved significantly in spontaneous communication and utterances (Kasari et al., 2014).

Table 1

Results of Assistive Technology Impacting Speech Difficulties

Author	Sample Size	Type of Study	Age of Participants	Measures	Main Findings
Ennis-Cole & Smith (2011)	85	Case-Control	10-17 years	Variety of high-tech AT tools: PDAs, robots, vibrating pagers, switch training, voice output communication aids, microswitch communication systems, touch-sensitive screens, and computer-based language tools	Devices were successfully used to improve a wide variety of skills including communication, self-help, motivation, and appropriate behavior
Sampath et al., (2013)	24	Case-Control	7-8 years	AutVisComm	This application was used at a special school for autistic children in whom each child had two one-on-one sessions per week with a teacher. In order to receive a food item, the child had to use AutVisComm to choose the appropriate picture on the tablet. As sessions progressed, the need for PA and VP became less frequent and the children starting responding independently.
Venkatesh et al., (2012)	16	Case-Control	2-7 years	Playpad	One month of intervention improved receptive and expressive language through trails of matching tasks, verbal interaction, and reinforcement. Learning was apparent because of the decreasing number of errors and increasing proportion of correct responses and unprompted responses.
Ganz et al., (2014)	3	Case-Control	8-14 years	Tablet computer-based visual scripts on vocabulary	Results indicated that all the participants showed increase use of verbs or nouns with the treatment materials, all the participants required less invasive prompts as the project progressed.
Hill et al., 2013	8	Case-Control	18 years +	iPad	Support not only independence in daily living, but enhanced the interpersonal skills needed to communicate and contribute to a positive work experience and success.
Kasari, et al., 2014	61	Randomized-Control

 

Social Interaction

Cramer, Hirano, Tentori, Yeganyan, and Hayes (2011) conducted a cohort study involving sixteen students between the ages of six and ten years old. The study focused on the interactive tool vSked used in a classroom based setting. Unlike some other studies in this systematic review, vSked focuses on the classroom as a unit rather than just the individual. The use of vSked encourages group practices within the classroom using visual schedules, choice boards, and a token-based reward system (Cramer et al., 2011). The study was conducted in two autistic classrooms over the course of a year. Focusing on a sense of classroom community, the screens in front of the classroom allowed students to see their progress throughout the day as well as seeing their classmate’s progress. By awarding tokens as they complete specific tasks and displaying it in the front of the classroom, this encourages students to continue working diligently as well as encouraging their classmates. It is essential for children to feel important and have a sense of community, especially autistic children, and that is the main focus of vSked.

Escobedo, Nguyen, Boyd, Hirano, and Randgel (2012) observed a cohort of twelve children, three who were autistic and nine who were neurotypical (NT), between the ages of eight and eleven year olds in a public school located in Southern California. They studied the examined the effects of a mobile assistive technology named MOSOCO: A Mobile Assistive Tool to Support Children with Autism Practicing Social Skills in Real-Life Situations. MOSOCO is a social compass interactive tool that works on Android smartphones with features that encourage children to make good eye contact, have appropriate spatial boundaries, engage in conversation, identify appropriate communication partners and end an interaction in an appropriate way (Escobedo et al., 2012).

The three students with autism were paired up with NT students as their interaction partners. Video cameras were set up during social exchanges to observe non-verbal communication. Weekly interviews were then conducted to ask participants how the technology was working and how it is impacting their interactions (Escobedo et al., 2012).  MOSOCO had a positive influence on the social aspect of children with autism spectrum disorder and changed the group dynamic of student groups. This study can be related back to vSked in that they both work on the individual social skills, but it also focuses on the group dynamic in a school based setting.

Cannella-Malone et al. (2016) conducted a study in which video prompting was utilized to teach new leisure skills. This study included nine students with severe disabilities, including autism spectrum disorder, aged 10 to 22 years (Cannella-Malone et al., 2016). Prior to the study, parents and teachers completed an interview with each student to rank and select specific leisure tasks they are interested in or have done in the past. All videos used in this intervention were created from the perspective of a spectator, and displayed on an iPhone 4. Each video began with a verbal prompt to begin the task, and consisted of a series of short clips for each step of the task. Video prompting was effective in teaching 14 new leisure skills to eight out of the nine students including origami, darts, Lite-Brite, dominos, and painting nails (Cannella-Malone, et al., 2016). This study suggests that the development of new leisure skills leads to an increase in many other skills such as social interactions, positive emotional effects, and increased activity level (Cannella-Malone et al., 2016).

Kim et al. (2013) conducted a randomized controlled experiment to study the effects of a social robot and its interactions of children with autism.  Twenty-four children between the ages of four and twelve diagnosed with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder were observed. A social robot was programed with ten social interaction behaviors and three non-verbal movements designed to replicate a social interaction. An adult stimulus was present during all robot-simulated situations to control the movements of the robot. It was noted that most children did not interact with the adult while the robot was present, only one participant verbalized suspicion that the adult was controlling the robot (Kim et al., 2013). It was found that there was more verbalization while interacting with the robot. This study suggests that in comparison to real therapy support animals, robot animals can be used as a better interactive tool for autistic children. In that, they can be specially customized for each child, controlled by an adult more easily, and are much more affordable compared to training a service animal (Kim et al., 2013).

Lang et al. (2014) performed a cohort study using video self-modeling. Two students with autism spectrum disorder all who are between the ages of four and five years old were the participants. First, there was video footage of children with ASD interacting with other children. During this time, teachers would encourage students to interact more with their peers. After the footage was captured, the raw footage was edited to cut out the teachers interacting with the children as well as poor behavior or solitary play. The students then watched the footage for seventeen school days. Students were then brought out to play with fellow classmates and teachers were instructed not to interfere. The goal was to prompt participants to socially interact more with peers and increase the occurrence of this without the encouragement of teachers. The results indicated an increase in overall social interactions.

Ploog, Scharf, Nelson, and Brooks (2013) conducted a case-control study using computerized visual representations of emotional facial expressions to simulate real life situations. The use of a 3D avatar was used in three stages to study and improve emotion recognition in children with autism spectrum disorder. Stage one, participants were asked to interpret what emotion the avatar was feeling. Stage two participants were given different scenarios and were asked to guess what emotion the avatar was feeling based on that specific scenario. In stage three, the children were a certain emotion that the avatar was feeling and was asked what scenario or event they thought caused this emotion. This virtual environment indicated that children were able to communicate more effectively with other people and that 90% of the participants were able to interpret, recognize and predict emotions from the avatar (Ploog et al., 2013).

Wainer and Ingersoll (2011) conducted a randomized control study with ten participants’ ages 16 to 40 using computer treatment. Participants were randomly assigned to a computer treatment group or a no-treatment control group. This computer treatment program was an interactive program that used photographs of faces and eyes. There was a significant increase in emotion identification of the pre-test to post-test. This study relates to the previous studies in that it worked to improve the social skills and emotion recognition in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Table 2

Results of Assistive Technology Impacting Little Social Interaction

Author	Sample Size	Type of Study	Age of Participants	Measures	Main Findings
Cramer et al., (2011)	16	Cohort	6-10 years	vSked	Promoted student independence and encouraged consistency and predictability as well as socialization within the classroom between students as well as staff.
Escobedo et al., (2012)	12	Cohort	8-11 years	MOSOCO	Students learned the basic proper steps to a social interaction including the DO’s and DON’Ts and how to help others interact. Learning to apply these skills outside of the classroom was key.
Cannella-Malone et al. (2016)	9		10 to 22 years
Kim et al., (2013)	24	Randomized Controlled	4-12 years	Social Robots	More verbalization during robot interactions. Found that robot animals serve as a better interactive tool for children rather than real live animals, due to the fact that robots can be customized, controlled and more affordable.
Lang et al., (2014)	2	Cohort	4-5 years	Video self-modeling	Students with ASD were able to learn how to visualize themselves being successful in social situations. Demonstrated an increase in social engagement that was maintained after the study concluded.
Ploog et al., (2013)	34	Case Control	N/A	CAT (3-D Avatar)	Was found that 90% of participants were able to interpret, recognize and predict emotions in the avatar. Which lead to children being able to communicate more effectively with other people in real life situations.
Wainer et al., (2011)	10	Randomized Controlled	16-40	Computer treatment	Participants in the computer treatment group made significant improvements in emotion identification compared to the control group.

 

Motor Skills

Ament et al. (2015) conducted a case-control study to find evidence for the specificity of motor impairments such as in catching objects and balance in children with autism. The study consisted of two hundred participants with an age range between eight to thirteen years old. All of the children participating needed to meet on the basis of a clinical judgment and if they were diagnosed. The participants for this study were pulled from local schools, pediatrician’s offices, outpatient clinics, and the local Autism Society of America chapters. The results of the study indicated that two of the standard scores had main effect on the group [F (2, 197) = 62.04, p < 0.001]. Conferroni post hoc test was used during this study to show the differences in the MABC-2 score for the groups. “This test revealed there was a big difference in the total score of MAB-C2 between the TD group (M = 8.90, SD = 2.52), ADHD group (M = 6.38, SD = 2.67), and ASD groups (M = 4.14, SD = 2.19)” (Ament et al., 2015, p. 748).

Barbeau, Meilleur, Zeffiro, and Mottron (2015) conducted a case-control study, which included 39 people ranging from age 14 to 30 years old. The people used in this study were randomly found from database of the Specialized Autism Clinic at the Rivie re-des-Prairies Hospital located in Canada.  The study was on comparing motor skills in autism spectrum individuals with and without speech delay.  For this study the researchers excluded individuals with a visual impairment, used alcohol (more than two drinks a day) or drugs. The procedure for the study addressed the handedness assessment. This assessment includes ten items monitoring a subject’s preferred hand during activities such as throwing a ball. A motor skill assessment was also was completed by subjects. Subjects were required to pay a game with a wooden board made of two parallel rows of ten holes each of them are eight inches apart. “A trial was considered valid when no pegs were dropped and no significant distraction interfered” (Barbeau et al., 2015, p. 685). Simple reaction time was a visual trigger that was used to obtain the approximant movement speed. The participant’s task was to look at the computer screen and each time a black box would appear to the right of the screen they needed to press the button. Results of this study concluded that the use of three standard deviation (3 SD) instead of two standard deviation (2 SD) not affect the overall results. “Planned contrasts revealed that AS-SOD participants were 772, 876, and 913 milliseconds (ms) slower than typical individuals in the DH” (Barbeau et al., 2015, p. 686).

Behere, Shahani, Noggle, and Dean (2012) study was on the motor functioning in Autistic Spectrum Disorders. This is a case-control study; this study focuses on 26 individual’s age ranging from six to twenty years old. These individuals were referred for a neuropsychological evaluation. Thirteen of the 39 original participants were excluded from the study because of missing data. This study was divided with the first group having sixteen patients diagnosed with autism with an age range of six to twenty-three, education ranging from first to twelfth grade and the second study consisting of 10 participants with Asperger’s disorder age ranging from eleven to thirty-two years old with an education of first to twelfth grade. Participants were administered a DWSMB which is “standardized and norm-referenced measure of cortical and subcortical sensory/motor functioning” (Behere et al., 2012). The participants were then scored based on two different score values of ‘W’ (different sampling) and ‘WD’ (norming sample). The results of this study was found by using SPSS “No univariate or multivariate within-cell outliers, at [alpha]=0.001, were found. Assumptions of normality, linearity, homogeneity of variance/covariance matrices, and multicollinearity were met. Also, the covariate of age was found to be reliable for covariance analysis” (Behere et al., 2012, p. 90).

Lloyd, MacDonald, and Lord (2013) study was on Motor Skills of toddlers with Autism Spectrum Disorder. This is a cohort study; this study focuses on a hundred and sixty-two participants ranging from age twelve months to thirty-six months old. This study took place in three different areas including the North Carolina state-funded autism centers; the Chicago autism clinic associated with a private university, and an autism center in Michigan. The participants in this study are part of two investigations for toddlers at risk to become autistic. All of the participants took place in the MSEL testing intended for babies who are from birth to sixty-eight months old. “Scores on the MSEL are organized into five domains including, gross motor, fine motor, visual perception (nonverbal problem solving), receptive language, and expressive language” (Lloyd et al., 2013, p. 4). The calculations that were used during this study was the ratio verbal IQ. This was calculated by taking the mean age; divide by chronological and multiplied by 100. The ratio non-verbal IQ was found by using the age equivalents from fine motor and visual perception tests. The results of the first study revealed no differences in motor skills between the three sites. However, this study showed even though the children had cognitive delays the older children in the study had more delays than the younger children.  The second study showed that the fifty-eight children that are autistic in this study showed a delay in gross and fine motor skills, this means the children had significantly fallen behind their chronological age (Lloyd et al., 2013).

MacDonald, Lord, and Ulrich (2013) study was on the relationship of motor skills and adaptive behavior skills in young children with autism spectrum disorders. This is a cohort study focusing on a hundred and fifty-nine participants aging from fourteen to forty-four months. The type of testing used for this study is GML testing; Almost all of the data collected for this study was in an autism clinic. This study focused on testing the relationship between fine and gross motor skills in autistic children. Both gross and fine motor skills were measured utilizing The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL) (MacDonald, Lord, & Ulrich, 2013). The results for the study were dependent variable on “fine motor skills, nonverbal problem solving, ethnicity and calibrated autism severity” (MacDonald, Lord, & Ulrich, 2013, p. 6). No interactions happened during these results and the fine motor skills were significant of adaptive behavior composite (p < .001), daily living skills (p < .001), adaptive social skills (p < .05) and adaptive communicative skills (p < .001).

LeBarton and Iverson (2013) conducted a cohort study on the fine motor skills that predict the expressive language in infant siblings of children with autism, also diagnosed with ASD. Based off of thirty-four participants age ranging from twelve to thirty-six months, a measure of fine motor skills were used to tap motor planning and fine motor control for the children ranging in age from 12-18 months they also used a measure of vocabulary for the children at 36 months. Along with using both of those during this study they used standardized observational measures of fine motor and language skills as a “complementary source of information” (LeBarton & Iverson, 2013). The results of this study showed that the “composite scores were significantly lower for the HR group (M = 3.62, SD = 1.86) than the LR group (M = 5.20, SD = 1.41) (U = 215.0, p = .001)” (LeBarton & Iverson, 2013, p. 6).

Mostofsky, Burgess, and Larson (2008) study examined increased motor cortex white matter volume as a predictor of motor impairment in children with autism. The case-control study included 56 participants ranging in age from eight to twelve years old. The type of testing used during this study is the Physical and Neurologic Examination of Subtle Signs (PANESS). The study’s goal was to see if the white matter in the primary motor cortex of these children would predict or not predict impaired motor skills in children with Autism. The results for this study had concluded that the groups did not differ from the amount of age difference between each person in the study (Mostofsky et al., 2008).

Table 3

Results of Assistive Technology Impacting Poor Motor Skills

Author	Sample Size	Type of Study	Age of Participants	Measures
Ament et al., (2015)	200	Case-Control	8-13 Years	Clinical judgment, Autism Diagnostic Observation (module 3), stimulant medications, Performance-based assessment evaluating motor skill ability (MABC-2)
Barbeau et al., (2015)	39	Case-Control	14-30 Years	Handedness assessment, Motor Skill assessment, Clinical diagnosis
Behere et al., (2012)	26	Case-Control	6-20 Years	Neurological exams, DWSMB, MANOVA
Lloyd et al., (2013)	162	Cohort	12-36 Months	MSEL
Macdonald et al., (2013)	159	Cohort	14-44 Months	GLM testing,
LeBarton et al., (2013)	34	Cohort	12-36 Months	Non-parametric Mann-Whitney tests.
Mostofsky et al., (2008)	56	Case-Control	8-12 Years	Physical and Neurologic Examination of Subtle Signs (PANESS)

 

The three tables in this section discuss the main findings of research conducted on the impact of assistive technology on children in the autism spectrum disorder. Table 1 explains how the studies pertaining to how AT impacts speech and communication difficulties. Table 2 addresses the information found on how AT impacts social interaction, and Table 3 showcases the studies that found how AT impacts poor motor skills.

Discussion

The majority of the studies found during the search for language improvement and motor skills in autistic children included case-control studies. All of the studies range in age from the time of birth until the age of thirty years old. The average amount of participants in the studies was ninety-six people, ranging from twenty-six up to two hundred participants. The main similarity between the studies on motor skills in children with autism is that the participants were randomly selected and found in an Autism Society of America area. All of the studies found impacting speech in people with ASD were similar in that they either created an application for a tablet or used an iPad.

Studies that focus on the development of social skills in autistic children aim to improve social interactions as well as emotional recognition. The majority of the studies used computer based technology in a classroom setting with both the individual as well as the collective body. Video modeling was also found to be an important tool helping participants improve their emotion recognition as well as social skills. The main takeaway from these studies is that after repetition there was a positive improvement. A sense of success and independence is key for all children but especially for children with autism spectrum disorder.

Limitations and future research

The promising outcomes of this particular systematic review indicate that the use of assistive technology devices with autistic children is warranted, and that available evidence indicates that the devices are likely to promote more effect speech, greater social interaction, and better motor skills of children in the autism spectrum.  The effectiveness of assistive technology devices is no guarantee that children with ASD will be routinely used.  Additionally, findings showed that large numbers of investigators failed to use evidence-based training procedures. Thus, the basic questions that remain open is the importance of future research regarding the effective use of AT and various procedures applicable to individuals with autism and the training or education of professionals and parents.

Conclusion

This systematic review not only discussed the impacts of assistive technology on language, but on social interaction and motor skills. All of the studies selected showed a positive increase in all three objectives with the assistance of AT. This information is not only beneficial to children with ASD, but teachers and parents. Studies focused on the individual as well as students as a collective body. Studies also focused on the importance of an individual with autism to have a sense of independence and a sense of belonging in the community. With new technologies rising, we will be able to better support children with ASD in various aspects of their lives. In conclusion, we have learned that all of the studies we used show an increase in abilities of children with autism.

Autism is a growing occurrence in the world and it is best if people are well informed by researching how technology impacts speech, social interaction, and motor skills.  Furthermore research and assessment is needed to measure the benefits of individualized assistive technology tools to aid with other complications associated with ASD. Additionally, future research regarding best practices in teaching approaches and accessibility to assistive technology to help individual ASD and their families should further be explored.

References

Ament, K., Mejia, A., Buhlman, R., Erklin, S., Caffo, B., Mostofsky, S., & Wodka, E. (2015). Evidence for specificity of motor impairments in catching and balance in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(3), 742-751. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2229-0

American Psychiatric Association. DSM-5 Task Force, & American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5 (5th ed.). Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric Association.

Barbeau, E. B., Meilleur, A. S., Zeffiro, T. A., & Mottron, L. (2015). Comparing motor skills in autism spectrum individuals with and without speech delay. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 8(6), 682.

Behere, A., Shahani, L., Noggle, C. A., & Dean, R. (2012). Motor functioning in autistic spectrum disorders: A preliminary analysis. The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 24(1), 87-94. doi:10.1176/appi.neuropsych.11050105

Cannella-Malone, H. I., Miller, O., Schaefer, J. M., Jimenez, E. D., Page, E. J., & Sabielny, L. M. (2016; 2015;). Using video prompting to teach leisure skills to students with significant disabilities. Exceptional Children, 82(4), 463-478. doi:10.1177/0014402915598778

Cardon, T. A., Wilcox, M. J., & Campbell, P. H. (2011). Caregiver perspectives about assistive technology use with their young children with autism spectrum disorders. Infants & Young Children, 24(2), 153-173. doi:10.1097/IYC.0b013e31820eae40

Cramer, M., Hirano, S., Tentori, M., Yeganyan, M., & Hayes, G. (2011). Classroom-based assistive technology: Collective use of interactive visual schedules by students with autism. Paper presented at the 1-10. doi:10.1145/1978942.1978944

Ennis-Cole, D., & Smith, D. (2011). Assistive technology and autism: Expanding the technology leadership role of the school librarian. School Libraries Worldwide, 17(2), 86.

Escobedo, L., Nguyen, D., Boyd, L., Hirano, S., Rangel, A., Garcia-Rosas, D., Hayes, G. (2012). MOSOCO: A mobile assistive tool to support children with autism practicing social skills in real-life situations. Paper presented at the 2589-2598. doi:10.1145/2207676.2208649

Ganz, J. B., Boles, M. B., Goodwyn, F. D., & Flores, M. M. (2014). Efficacy of handheld electronic visual supports to enhance vocabulary in children with ASD. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 29(1), 3-12. doi:10.1177/1088357613504991

Hayes, G. R., Hirano, S., Marcu, G., Monibi, M., Nguyen, D. H., & Yeganyan, M. (2010). Interactive visual supports for children with autism. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 14(7), 663-680. doi:10.1007/s00779-010-0294-8

Hill, D. A., Belcher, L., Brigman, H. E., Renner, S., & Stephens, B. (2013). The apple iPad(TM) as an innovative employment support for young adults with autism spectrum disorder and other developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 44(1), 28.

Kasari, C., Kaiser, A., Goods, K., Nietfeld, J., Mathy, P., Landa, R., Almirall, D. (2014). Communication interventions for minimally verbal children with autism: A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 53(6), 635.

Kim, E. S., Berkovits, L. D., Bernier, E. P., Leyzberg, D., Shic, F., Paul, R., & Scassellati, B. (2013). Social robots as embedded reinforcers of social behavior in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(5), 1038-1049. doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1645-2

Lang, R., Ramdoss, S., Raulston, T., Carnet, A., Sigafoos, J., Didden, R., & O’Reilly, M. F. (2014). Assistive technology for people with autism spectrum disorders. In AssistiveTechnologies for People with Diverse Abilities (pp.157-1900). Springer New York.

LeBarton, E. S., & Iverson, J. M. (2013). Fine motor skill predicts expressive language in infant siblings of children with autism. Developmental Science, 16(6), 815-827. doi:10.1111/desc.12069

Lloyd, M., MacDonald, M., & Lord, C. (2013). Motor skills of toddlers with autism spectrum

disorders. Autism?: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 17(2), 133–146. doi:10.1177/1362361311402230

Macdonald, M., Lord, C., & Ulrich, D. (2013). The relationship of motor skills and adaptive

behavior skills in young children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders,7(11), 1383-1390.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, DG, (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 6(7), e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

Mostofsky, S. H., Burgess, M. P., & Gidley Larson, J. C. (2007). Increased motor cortex white matter volume predicts motor impairment in autism. Brain, 130(8), 2117-2122. doi:10.1093/brain/awm129

Ploog, B. O., Scharf, A., Nelson, D., & Brooks, P. J. (2013). Use of computer-assisted technologies (CAT) to enhance social, communicative, and language development in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(2), 301-322. doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1571-3

Sampath, H., Agarwal, R., & Indurkhya, B. (2013). Assistive technology for children with autism – lessons for interaction design. Paper presented at the 325-333. doi:10.1145/2525194.2525300

Stasolla, F., Damiani, R., & Caffò, A. O. (2014). Promoting constructive engagement by two boys with autism spectrum disorders and high functioning through behavioral interventions. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(4), 376-380. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2013.12.020

Tarbox, J., Dixon, D. R., Sturmey, P., Matson, J. L., & SpringerLink (Online service). (2014). Handbook of early intervention for autism spectrum disorders: Research, policy, and practice. New York, NY: Springer New York.

U.S. Department of Education. (2001, October). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 1997/Services to Parentally Placed. Retrieved September 17, 2016, from www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/nonpublic/idea1.html

Venkatesh, S., Greenhill, S., Phung, D., Adams, B., & Duong, T. (2012). Pervasive multimedia for autism intervention. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 8(6), 863. doi:10.1016/j.pmcj.2012.06.010

Wainer, A. L., & Ingersoll, B. R. (2011). The use of innovative computer technology for teaching social communication to individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5(1), 96-107. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2010.08.002

About the Authors

Angela Bollin, BS TR, CTRS: Angela Bollin is a graduate from Grand Valley State University with a degree in Therapeutic Recreation and Psychology, and a Certified Therapeutic Recreation Specialist. Angela Bollin’s research interests include therapeutic recreation, public health, and assistive technology.

Julia VanderMolen, Ph.D: Dr. Julia Vander Molen is an Assistant Professor in the Master’s Public Health program within the College of Health Professions at Grand Valley State University. Dr. VanderMolen’s research interests include health literacy, community health, health assessment and assistive technology.

Taylor Bierwagen: Taylor Bierwagen is a graduate from Grand Valley State University with a degree in Psychology.

---

When teaching adolescents or younger children with ME/CFS, it can be helpful to understand more about the problems faced by these students. A key to helping students with ME/CFS is to work as a team with their teachers, parents, administrators, other education professionals, and healthcare professionals. This team approach can provide flexibility with educational plans and school resources that are customized to target and reflect the student’s needs.

ME/CFS affects each student differently. Each child may experience different symptoms and the duration of their symptoms may differ as well. Symptoms can fluctuate from day to day and week to week, affecting a young person’s ability to attend school regularly and perform consistently.

ME/CFS can affect children and adolescents in many ways, including their:

• Attendance
• Ability to participate both inside and outside of the classroom
• Relationships with peers
• Ability to complete assignments
• Overall school success

Understand How ME/CFS Affects Students Inside and Outside the Classroom

Teachers and administrators who are not familiar with ME/CFS could mistake a child’s illness and fatigue for laziness or avoidance of social interaction. Below are a few examples of how ME/CFS can affect students:

• School performance or attendance can be affected by a student’s ME/CFS symptoms, such as memory or concentration problems, unrefreshing sleep, and headaches.
• Adolescents and younger children with ME/CFS can experience problems when trying to do several things at once—for example, doing their homework and keeping track of time.
• Many children with ME/CFS experience more severe symptoms in the morning hours and may have trouble getting to school on time or staying alert in the morning at school.
• Children with ME/CFS can have problems with attention, response time, information processing speed, and delayed recall of verbal and visual information.
• Teachers may notice that students with symptoms mentioned above may be able to complete grade-level tasks, but might require more time to do so.

Tips for Teachers and Administrators*

Because ME/CFS is a complex disorder that affects how students learn and participate in school, teachers and administrators may want to be creative in developing strategies to foster an encouraging learning environment for their students with ME/CFS. Teachers and administrators may want to:

• Help students with note taking.
• Give them extended time on exams and assignments.
• Schedule rest periods during class or throughout the day.
• Avoid information overload.
• Be open to combining school and home tutoring.
• Permit students to attend school in shorter periods rather than a full day, as necessary.
• If advised by the student’s doctor, allow students to participate in modified physical education classes, or exempt them from class, if needed.
• Give students an extra set of books to use at home.
• Offer and encourage the use of organizers, schedulers, and other tools for time management.

*NOTE: The list above is not exhaustive. Teachers and administrators may need to explore other strategies to accommodate the particular needs of each individual student with ME/CFS.

---

---

*Special Education Teacher – Oakes Children’s Center’s Counseling Enriched Education Program, or CEEP, is a school-based mental health program for children in grades K – 8, who present with significant emotional and academic needs. Most students are referred to Oakes’ CEEP because they have been unsuccessful in small classrooms within their district and need a school with on-site mental health providers. To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teacher – Chester Community Charter School (CCCS) proudly serves students in grades K-8 on four campuses in nine school buildings in the Chester Upland Community. More than 4,000 students — two thirds of the district — call CCCS their school. We are offering competitive salaries AND a $6,000 signing bonus for full-time Special Education teachers hired for the 2018-2019 school year! To learn more – Click here

*Director of Diverse Learners/Special Education – Responsibilities include; Supervise, direct, coach SPED teachers, Supervise, direct, coach paraprofessionals, Create/oversee all SpEd team structures Support teachers in progress monitoring for IEPs and Attend all Chicago Public Schools SpEd policy meetings and communicate outcomes/updates to team. To learn more – Click here

* Special Education Teacher – will provide support to the instructional process by serving as a teacher with specific responsibility for developing diverse learners success in academics, interpersonal skills and other activities. The special education teacher will collaborate closely with all other teachers at Moving Everest Charter School to ensure the success of diverse learners. To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teacher – EdTheory is currently looking for Special Educational Teachers (SPED) for multiple full-time positions in the Hollister,Santa Rosa and San Jose area in California. Candidates with certification and experience working with children preferably in school based settings are welcome to apply!. To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teacher – AppleTree Early Learning Public Charter School seeks a motivated, passionate, and experienced Special Education Teacher to provide case management and direct services to children identified for special education and related services. The Special Education Teacher ensures that all children and families with special needs receive optimal developmentally appropriate educational experiences. The Special Education Teacher will implement students’ Individual Education Plans (IEPs) in inclusion, push in and/or pullout settings.To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Coordinator – AppleTree Early Learning Public Charter School seeks a motivated, passionate, and experienced Special Education Coordinator to provide case management for students identified for special education and related services. The Special Education Coordinator ensures that all children and families with special needs receive optimal developmentally appropriate educational experiences. To learn more – Click here

*Certified Special Education Teachers: K-12 (TEXAS) – Uplift Education has Special Education Teacher positions open at primary, middle, and high school levels at our schools in the Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas area. Uplift Education is the largest public charter school network in North Texas. Our schools have received national recognition and 100% of our graduates have been accepted to college.To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teacher – Rivermont Schools are now hiring special education teachers at multiple locations throughout Virginia. Sign on bonus of $2,000 and relocation assistance of $5,000 are available for those who qualify. To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Manager – The Special Education Manager supports teachers, administrators, and staff in ensuring that AppleTree Early Learning Public Charter School and AppleTree@ programs (collectively “AppleTree”) provides optimal support to all children. The Special Education Manager develops knowledge of all stakeholders of the inclusion setting in order to best support students with disabilities. The Special Education Manager ensures high quality specialized instruction and optimal compliance within special education law. This is a supervisory position. To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teacher – Primary Level – The duties of this job include providing specialized instruction to meet the unique needs of students with disabilities. The teacher will evaluate and assess student progress. The teacher will be responsible for classroom instructional activities and implementation of IEP’s, including behavior plans. To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teacher – DCD Center Based at Roosevelt Elementary School – Provides research-based specialized instruction to address the instructional goals and objectives contained within each student’s IEP. Assesses student progress and determines the need for additional reinforcement or adjustments to instructional techniques. Employs various teaching techniques, methods and principles of learning to enable students to meet their IEP goals. To learn more – Click here

*Head of School – The Parish School www.parishschool.org is a private, non-profit, coeducational school, for children ages 2-12, with a maximum enrollment of 150. The person chosen to assume the Head of School will be offered an extraordinary opportunity.  This national search will identify a candidate who will inherit a qualified and tenured faculty, devoted families, and excellent institutional reputation.  To learn more – Click here

*Special Education Teachers-All Areas – Stafford County Public Schools is actively seeking certified Special Education-All Areas Teachers for the upcoming 2018-2019 school year. We also offer Travel Reimbursement for out of state applicants available ONLY with a signed contract. To learn more – Click here

To top

Acknowledgements

Portions of this or previous month’s NASET’s Special Educator e-Journal were excerpted from:

• Center for Parent Information and Resources
• Committee on Education and the Workforce
• FirstGov.gov-The Official U.S. Government Web Portal
• Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals (JAASEP)
• National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth
• National Institute of Health
• National Organization on Disability
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
• U.S. Department of Education
• U.S. Department of Education-The Achiever
• U.S. Department of Education-The Education Innovator
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• U.S. Department of Labor
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration
• U.S. Office of Special Education

The National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET) thanks all of the above for the information provided for this or prior editions of the Special Educator e-Journal

---

Download a PDF Version of This e-Journal

To View or Download a PDF file for this issue of the Special Educator e-Journal  –  CLICK HERE

To top