Main Page ASW Newsletter Index
Materials needed: several small polished stones (and a pouch to keep them in).
The stones are:
Quartz - clear white
Apache tear or equivalent - uniform deep black
Hematite - silver/chrome
Leopardskin - complex multicolored patterns
Amethyst - violet at one end, white at the other
Tiger Eye - lustrous shifting patterns inside
There are many, many people in the world. Some of them are unusual, just like some of the stones on a beach are unusual. The unusual stones can help us to understand the unusual people who are autistic.
Look at the first stone (quartz). You can see clear through it - nothing is hidden. Some autistic people hide nothing, revealing themselves completely to anyone who cares to see.
Now the second stone (Apache tear). Nothing can be seen about it at all. Some autistic people hide everything, and remain a mystery to everyone.
And now the third stone (hematite). The bright chrome finish is very striking. It says just one thing about the stone, but in a way that captures our attention. Some autistic people have one special interest, or one special ability, which captures our attention the same way.
Now the fourth (leopardskin). There are many complex patterns, some so intricate and detailed that we cannot see them without help. Some autistic people have many rituals, and structures, and rules for how things need to be.
And the fifth (amethyst). Hold the stone so that only the violet end shows. Now hold it so that only the white end shows. It looks like two completely different stones, but it is still the same one. Some autistic people look quite different, depending on one's viewpoint: is a particular characteristic an asset or a liability? Can it be appreciated and enjoyed, or does it seem to just get in the way? Would the person be better off with it or without it?
Finally, the tiger eye. With good light, and time to spend gazing at it, and the inner quiet to pay attention to it, the stone seems almost alive as we shift it in our hands and see how the light is transformed inside it. The
lustrous, shifting patterns have always been there, waiting to be discovered... like the way of being known as autism.
August Index ASW Newsletter Index
ASW homepage
My three year old son was diagnosed with autism 10 months ago and is only now starting to receive support from provincial programs. Since the diagnosis I have been investigating private treatments for autism. What I found were dozens of available treatments ranging from “swimming with the dolphins” to vitamin/herbal supplements, special eyeglasses, listening to radio static, “holding therapy,” and simply accepting my child as is. With so many different treatments, how does a parent decide which one is the best?
Most parents I’ve spoken to use the services offered to them by the government. Yet they feel the need to do more and they are turning to private practitioners. From what I’ve seen, private practices are growing in number and variety. With government cutbacks, this trend is bound to continue.
Decisions concerning treatment are among the most important a parent will make for their autistic child. The history of autism is filled with notorious examples of miracle cures that attracted large numbers of patients and media attention, only to be proven completely ineffective. We must change that model where we are passive parents reacting to each treatment as it is offered. We must become proactive, researching all available treatments.
Unfortunately Consumer’s Reports does not review different treatments for autism. What parents can do is develop a checklist of what they are looking for, then apply their criteria to all available treatments. I offer the following to add to your decision making toolbox:
For further ideas, I recommend Behavioural Intervention for Young Children with Autism: A Manual for Parents and Professionals, edited by Catherine Maurice (Pro-Ed Inc., Publisher, Texas, 1996). The chapter on “Evaluating
Claims about Treatment for Autism” is particularly useful.
August Index ASW Newsletter Index
ASW homepage
Excerpts from the Indiana Resource Center for Autism’s Spring 1998 Issue of Reporter (Vol. 3, No. 3)
Despite research which highlights practical recommendations for involving students with autism in general education settings and documented examples of success, there continues to be tremendous variability in the type and quality of programming delivered to students with autism. It appears that decisions and practices for students are often influenced by the philosophical beliefs of a specific school district, the geographical location of the student, administrative issues and the skills of those involved rather than on the educational needs of students. This variability in services highlights the need to not only identify those factors which are critical for student success, but to prepare those involved in implementing these procedures.
In 1997, family members and professionals of middle school-aged students were surveyed to examine the various educational services, instructional strategies and administrative supports which were in place to assist teachers in educating students with autism. For example, educators were asked to rank their access to collaboration, paraprofessional supports, planning time, external professional consultants, training and administrative support for inclusion. Parents were questioned about their satisfaction concerning their son/daughter’s educational program, and to determine those factors which promoted their satisfaction. The study took place in two parts, with the administration of parent surveys preceding those of the teacher surveys.
Teamwork and collaborative planning are considered essential for successful inclusion (Simpson, 1995). The student’s team, consisting of special and general education teachers, administrators, family members and the student should have the opportunity to meet regularly to plan appropriate services and to determine realistic outcomes for the student. These team meetings allow each member to share their expertise and to voice any concerns. Simpson (1995) believes that including parents in the individualized education program (IEP) process has a great influence on the quality of the IEP. A feature which can either greatly hinder or promote successful teamwork is the quality of the relationship between parents and school staff. A positive relationship and ongoing communication between staff and family members plays a central role in the educational success of all students. For students with autism, it takes on an even greater importance.
Participants
Twenty-one parents of middle school-aged children with autism participated in the present study. Students ranged in age from 12-14 and all resided in the state of Indiana. A majority of the students in the sample were place in a combination of general and special education classrooms during the school day. Only three students were placed in full-time self-contained classes, three participated in general education classes on a full-time
(100%) basis and 15 received combined services. Therefore, for purposes of this study, students with autism were placed into one of two groups: integrated or segregated based on whether the students were included in
structured or non-structured academic classes. Those in the integrated group were included in structured academic classes (e.g., math, English, reading, social studies). Those in the segregated group were either not included at all in general education settings, or only participated in non-structured activities (e.g., music, p.e., lunch). Final group distribution broke down to 10 in the integrated group and 11 in the segregated group.
Summary of Results
The first step in analyzing the data was to examine differences between the responses of parents with children in the integrated setting and the responses of parents with children in the segregated setting. The results show that parents of children in integrated settings were:
More satisfied with the staff’s commitment to the education of their son/daughter;
More satisfied with their child’s academic progress; and
Slightly more satisfied with their child’s behavioral progress.
The next step in analyzing parent responses was to examine factors which influenced parent satisfaction with the academic progress of their child. To do this, we compared the responses of parents who were satisfied with
their child’s academic progress with the responses of parents who were not satisfied. The results show that parents who were satisfied with their child’s educational progress also tended to be:
More satisfied with the staff’s commitment to the education of their child;
More satisfied with the staff’s knowledge of autism;
More satisfied with the staff’s ability to communicate with parents; and
More satisfied with the dedication of the staff to teamwork involving the parents.
The results of this study suggest that parents who have children in integrated placements tended to be more satisfied with their child’s academic progress and with the staff’s commitment to the education of their child. Only slight differences in parent satisfaction with behavioral progress were observed. In addition, parents who were satisfied with their child’s academic progress tended to view the relationship between themselves and school staff as more positive and collaborative. These parents also rated the school staff as more committed to the education of their child and better able to communicate with parents.
In summary, the results support the importance of a positive parent-professional relationship and highlight the role of collaboration and teamwork in the educational programming of students with autism. School systems that exclude parents from key decision-making, and fail to promote a sense of teamwork between themselves and parents are significantly limiting their chances for successfully delivering services to students with autism. Parents have proven to be vital resources for professionals working with children. Nobody knows the child better than the parent. School staff should capitalize on the parent’s personal expertise. The results of this study suggest that parents and professionals who work collaboratively as a team increase their chances of delivering effective services to students with autism and promote educational success.
References:
Simpson, R.L. (1995). Children and youth with autism in age of reform: A perspective on current issues. Behavioral Disorders, 21, 7-20.
Simpson, R.L. (1995). Individualized education programs for students with autism: Including parents in the process. Focus on Autistic Behavior, 10, 11-15.
August Index ASW Newsletter Index
ASW homepage
Traditional formal communication assessment typically focuses on language structure, language form and labeling vocabulary skills, and relies on elicited responses. As individuals with autism typically exhibit communication difficulties in the areas of language use (including social use), many formal assessment protocols have limited application for students with autism other than for establishing developmental levels with regard to the above areas. In addition, most formal test instrumentf do not allow for input by people familiar with the child’s communicative interaction in various contexts, nor do they allow for assessment of the child’s spontaneous initiation of language as the child is typically directed only to respond in most formal assessment protocols (Schuler, Prizant and Westby, 1997).
Therefore, to appropriately assess the communication skills of a child with autism, we need to include a thorough descriptive narrative evaluation report regarding the student’s overall communication skills to document speech/language eligibility.
Interview others highly familiar with the child (e.g., parent, child specific assistant, teacher, etc.) because of their extensive experiences with the child in a variety of communicative contexts.
Observation in naturalistic environment(s).
Communication behavior sampling-staged communicative situations.
Does the child demonstrate communicative intent, either verbally or nonverbally/conventionally or unconventionally?
Does the child demonstrate knowledge of the power of language?
What is the communicative functionality (verbal/nonverbal, conventional/unconventional): behavior regulation to request, protest or to satisfy immediate physical needs (least social). Social interaction - greeting, calling, requesting social routine (e.g., peek-a-boo). Joint attention - commenting, requesting information, providing information (most social).
Social-Communicative, Social Interaction and Socioemotional Abilities. Social relatedness: social orientation, attachment, joint reference/attention, imitation, emotional expression. Social interaction skills: topic management skills, topic initiation, topic maintenance, asking contingent questions to continue topic. Turn-taking skills: nonverbal language skills, use of gestures, eye gaze, body language/oriententation.
Symbolic capacity: ability to understand relationships between picture symbols/sign language and communicative intent (AAC), play skills.
Unconventional Verbal Behavior (UVB): functional/nonfunctional, echolalia-delayed/immediate, perseverant speech, incessant questioning.
Comprehension skills - both within context and out of context/routine: given only auditory message, given visual and auditory cues (including contextual cues), note any delays in processing language
The information gathered for this narrative evaluation will provide an appropriate guideline for planning future goals and objectives for intervention. It is important to note if any challenging behaviors (unconventional communicative mode) might possibly be serving as a communicative intent. If so, it would be advantageous to substitute a more appropriate mode to communicate than by exhibiting a challenging behavior, as an initial objective. It is also important to recognize and be aware of any sensory sensitivities which might also be contributing to the child’s occurrence of challenging behaviors, which could also be more readily communicated via more appropriate mode.
It is important to note that language learning should be surrounded by a natural incentive that serves to highlight the communicative function served (Wetherby, Schuler & Prizant, 1997). Thus language intervention
should provide motivating contexts, including opportunities and needs to communicate. This implies that language learning should largely take place in the natural environment, capitalizing on the notion of incidental teaching and joint activity routines (Cavallaro, 1983; Hart, 1985; Kloegel, O’Dell & Koegel, 1987; Snyder-Mclean, McLean, Etter-Schroeder, & Rogers,
1984; Wetherby, Schuler & Prizant, 1997). In conclusion, it is important to keep in mind that there is a continuum of communicative ability in persons with autism at language stages, rather than a clear dichotomy
(Prizant, Schuler, Wetherby & Rydell, 1997).
August Index ASW Newsletter Index
ASW homepage