Transcript Education and learners on the autism spectrum: learning

Education & learners on the autism
spectrum: learning from the past &
building for the future
Professor Rita Jordan
Autism Centre for Education & Research
University of Birmingham
Autism Cymru: 3rd International Autism
Conference: Developments in Autistic Spectrum
Disorders – Past, Present and Future:
Cardif 2008
What’s Special about ASD?
• need to learn explicitly what others acquire
intuitively or through social tutoring
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
identity of self/ other
saliency of social signals
agency and intention
relevance and priority
social/cultural meaning
nature of communication
emotional consciousness
Total Exclusion
• with sld most excluded from education until 1971 - no
provision until 7
• Oswin (1971) the Empty Hours
• Tizard: Brooklands Experiment - added value of film over
statistics on socialisation & adaptive functioning
Sometimes we do not need research as much as
humanity
The Growth of Education for
ASD
• 1st specialist school 1962 in UK (possibly earlier
in Denmark)
• most specialist provision on parent initiative as
result of dissatisfaction with existing services
• initially differentiation from more generic SEN
• gradually more the result of failure/ dissatisfaction
with, or exclusion from, mainstream
Teaching Approaches/
Interventions
• started with ABA as for sld
• little long-term benefit until Young Autism Project
(Lovaas, 1989)
• crucial variable?
–
–
–
–
nature of programme - drills?
intensity & duration?
age and intellect?
inclusion?
Specialist Approaches
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Montessori -> structured teaching
based on research for rationale
parents as co-therapists
visual & explicit vs. social & linguistic
compensatory & remedial
social & communicative understanding
timing
attention grabbing
Conceptualisation
• medical classification
– category vs.. dimension
– pathology vs. difference
– DSM V
•
•
•
•
undiagnosed females?
cultural issues
‘stretching’ of category
‘triad of impairments / differences’
– back to dyad or even single area
– different triad -soc/commun; play; rigidity
• groups from ‘overlaps’ with other conditions?
– SPD/ NVL/ SreceptLI
Voice of individual
•
•
•
•
in educational research in general
authors, speakers, blogs
as part of National Curriculum in Citizenship
NICCY research
– youths with Asperger’s syndrome & families 11-16 year olds
• short term breaks
Diagnosis & Screening
•
•
•
•
•
possible screens
parental /staff feedback valid
‘diagnosis’ from 1 year?
CAST - primary AS
gold standard (e.g. SIGN guidelines) - ADI-R/ ADOS-G.
DISCO wider
• medical screens as necessary
• diagnosis in adults
– Royal Society training for psychiatrists
Possible scenarios from
neuroscience
• identify subgroups on basis of neurological
patterns
• proper scientific study to determine
environmental/ dietary effects on neural and
behavioural functioning
• genes for cognitive style identified but not
for disorder or pathology
Social categorisation
• subtypes - valid
• variation with time/ training/ mental health
• basis for style of teaching:
–
–
–
–
withdrawn - didactic 1:1 & desensitisation
passive - interests, engaging, motivation, structure
active but odd - rules & structure, self control
eccentric - mentor & buddy
Mental Health Issues
• more prevention/ resilience
– e.g. FRIENDS for 9-10 year olds
• training of adult psychiatrists in ASD
• treating anxiety as well as ASD
• CBT
– more accessible forms
– e.g. Homunculi programme
More ICT
• virtual/ augmentative realities as tools
• extension of AutismPro (or webautism?) for all
• gadgets for:
– passage of time
– location
– prompting
• social networking for development, fun
• support for staff/ those with ASD
• aiding school subject/ adult job/ leisure activities
Training of Professionals
• European standards for Masters
programmes
• recommendations from review reports
everywhere
• increase in programmes for training
including web-based ones
Understanding
• increasing ‘bottom-up’ understanding to inform
teaching & learning situation
–
–
–
–
–
attention
time
memory
concept formation
emotion
• commitment
Single vs Eclectic Curricula
Single
• enables staff expertise
• better monitoring &
easier evaluation
• builds staff & parent
confidence
• enables positive views
Eclectic
• can match to goal
• all needs can be
addressed
• needs compatibility
checks & child
perspective
• take strengths from
each
Evidence
• no single approach
• evidence for:
– structure
– behavioural methods
– training parents in social interaction & communication
techniques
• in all studies some do well and some do not
• in all studies children tend to learn only what are
explicitly taught
Building on specific approaches
•
•
•
•
choose on basis of principles - not chance
understand the principles of each approach adopted
individualise
take perspective of individual and examine interaction - i.e.
the effect of the whole
• use professional judgment
• treat each situation as a single study to assess
Conclusion
• no ‘autism’ curriculum or single approach
• needs to fit:
–
–
–
–
–
–
individual
family
practitioner
context
current goals
prognosis
Re-examine old issues in a new
light
Could we research:
• effects of parental styles without parent-blaming?
• effects of culture on conceptualisation & treatment without
bias?
• helpful staff characteristics without being discriminatory?
• effects of diets while still supporting science?
• issues round the MMR debate (e.g. fever treatment)
without claiming that MMR causes autism?