Practices and Experiences of General Education Teachers Educating Students with Autism
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 2021, 56(2), 158–172
© Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities
Practices and Experiences of General Education Teachers
Educating Students with Autism
Kelsey A. Oliver-Kerrigan Danielle Christy
MIND Institute, UC Davis Medical Center Sacramento, CA
Aubyn C. Stahmer
MIND Institute, UC Davis Medical Center
Abstract: As the number of students with autism included in general education (GE) increases, researchers
highlight the impact of attitudes, knowledge, and experiences of GE teachers on successful inclusion. One way
to support teachers is to link evidence-based autism practices to existing training initiatives. Universal Design
for Learning (UDL) is an initiative that positively influences inclusion and shares commonalities with Class-
room Pivotal Response Teaching (CPRT), an evidence-based approach for autism. Understanding teachers’
perceptions and utilization of these and other evidence-based autism strategies is important for maximizing the
benefit of inclusion while minimizing teacher burden. Using a qualitative design, this study conducted focus
groups with 12 GE teachers to examine the strategies they used to support students with autism in inclusive
classrooms and identified common themes. Teachers reported using a variety of strategies, including some evi-
dence-based practices for autism, and had generally positive perceptions of UDL and CPRT. Implications for
future research and teacher training are discussed.
The number of students with autism included achievement (Kalambouka et al., 2007; Katz &
in general education (GE) classrooms contin- Mirenda, 2002; Szumski et al., 2017). While
ues to steadily increase (Kurth & Master- this shift towards increased inclusion is a posi-
george, 2010). In 2016, approximately 40% of tive trend, there is still considerable work to
students with autism were included in regular be done to make effective, high quality inclu-
classrooms 80% or more of their day sion a reality for all students with autism. A
(USDOE, 2018). Compared to more segre- thorough examination of the determinants of
gated classrooms, students with autism in in- successful inclusion is critical for this effort.
clusive classrooms demonstrate significantly Two identified barriers impacting success-
better verbal communication, adaptive behav- ful implementation of inclusive practices for
ior, and social competence (Fisher & Meyer, students with autism also suggest mechanisms
2002; Sainato et al., 2015) and show signifi- for potential intervention to improve out-
cant increases in IQ, functional communica- comes for this population. First, GE teachers
tion, cognitive and play skills after inclusion consistently report a lack of adequate train-
(Nahmias et al., 2014; Stahmer & Ingersoll, ing, knowledge, and resources to effectively
2004). Inclusion also has positive effects on
educate students with autism (Able et al.,
typically developing peers, such as improved
2015; Corkum et al., 2014; Lindsay et al.,
social-emotional growth, positive perceptions
2013). More specifically, GE teachers need
of, and comfortability with disability, without
having an adverse impact on their academic strategies and support to adapt their class-
rooms for successful accommodation of the
unique learning needs of students with autism
Correspondence concerning this article should
be addressed to Kelsey A. Oliver-Kerrigan, MIND
(Able et al., 2015).
Institute, UC Davis Medical Center, Department of Second, the attitudes and perceptions of
Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 2825 50th Street, many teachers and school personnel regard-
Sacramento, CA 95817. E-mail: kaeoliver@ucdavis. ing autism and inclusion can influence the
edu success of inclusive placements (Koegel &
158 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental DisabilitiesOliver, 2018). GE teachers often perceive stu- based practices (EBPs) for autism. Addition-
dents with autism to be difficult to teach and ally, exploring GE teacher perceptions and
report concerns about challenging or disrup- utilization of strategies consistent with EBPs
tive behavior (Cassady, 2011; Sansosti & San- for autism may shed light on current knowl-
sosti, 2012). Often, GE teachers believe edge held by a majority of teachers that could
specialized autism instruction cannot be pro- be applied to supporting students with au-
vided in a GE classroom and have concerns tism. That is, understanding which strategies
that simultaneously supporting a student with consistent with EBPs for autism are being suc-
autism and maintaining high standards for cessfully used by GE teachers might be a help-
the rest of the class are incompatible (Cas- ful jumping off point for developing teacher
sady, 2011). Research highlights the signifi- training programs that promote inclusive
cance of these barriers, as teacher training, practices and increase buy-in.
knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions affect One framework GE teachers use to support
their implementation of evidence-based strat- diverse learners is Universal Design for Learn-
egies (Stahmer & Aarons, 2009). Therefore, ing (UDL), a nation-wide initiative described
innovative approaches are needed to facilitate as “a scientifically valid framework for guiding
teacher buy-in for inclusion while also provid- educational practice” (IDEIA, 2004). UDL
ing them with the tools and support they positively influences inclusion efforts by rec-
need. ognizing individual learning differences and
An additional barrier may include leader- creating flexible learning environments to
ship support to teachers as they are asked to accommodate these differences by providing
learn new strategies. For example, when new students with multiple means of engagement,
initiatives are introduced frequently, teachers representation, action and expression (Capp,
often experience initiative fatigue, which can 2017; Hitchcock et al., 2002). UDL provides a
include feelings of stress and failure (Reeves, framework for using a variety of strategies
2012). Rather than introducing something based on student needs. UDL shares a con-
new, such as evidence-based inclusion prac- structivist philosophy and many commonal-
tices for autism, to teachers who are already ities with evidence-based naturalistic autism
inundated with numerous job responsibilities interventions (Schreibman et al., 2015).
and training requirements, tying autism-spe- Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Inter-
cific strategies to educational initiatives to ventions (NDBI; Bruinsma et al., 2020; Schreib-
which GE teachers are already exposed could man et al., 2015) represent a class of evidence-
minimize initiative fatigue, reduce teacher based autism strategies that may fit well with
burden, and increase buy-in. UDL and inclusion. One example of an NDBI
Additionally, research suggests that for adapted in collaboration with special educa-
inclusion to be successful, it is critical that tion teachers for use in public school class-
interventions have good contextual fit. That rooms is Classroom Pivotal Response Teaching
is, if an initiative or intervention does not (CPRT; Stahmer et al., 2011). CPRT is a natu-
align with the values, beliefs, and/or practices ralistic, child-led intervention made up of mul-
of the teachers implementing the strategies tiple strategies that specify how teachers can
and/or the environmental setting in which it set up learning opportunities and respond to
is being implemented, implementation qual- their students to maximize motivation and
ity will be low (Harn et al., 2013). Thus, it is responding. With training and support, special
critical to understand how teachers perceive education teachers can implement CPRT with
evidence-based autism strategies to fit into the fidelity and report it to be acceptable, feasible
context of their GE classrooms and how these and effective to use in their class (Stahmer et
interventions fit within the current initiatives al., 2012; Suhrheinrich et al., 2019). However,
and directives from leaders. researchers have a limited understanding of
One potential solution to address these whether interventions such as CPRT might be
implementation issues may be to explore acceptable to GE teachers.
teacher experiences with certain strategies in To gain a better understanding of GE
order to demonstrate the link between what teacher’s use and perceptions of strategies
teachers are already doing and evidence- that would support positive outcomes for
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 159students with autism in inclusive settings, this grade, 25% taught third grade, and 8%
study focuses on UDL and a specific autism taught fourth grade. One of the participants
EBP, CPRT, as exemplars for examining the had received some training in CPRT, the
potential for linking GE and special educa- remaining teachers had not received train-
tion methods. This represents a first step for ing and had limited information about
determining how to best incorporate evi- CPRT.
dence-based autism strategies into GE teacher
training to positively influence inclusive prac-
Data Collection
tices in GE classrooms. The current study
explored the following questions: Focus groups are a widely used method for
1) What strategies, teaching tools, and/or understanding the subjective opinions and
modifications do GE teachers use to support experiences of individuals regarding a prede-
inclusion of students with autism? 2) How do termined topic (Merton, 1987). For the cur-
these strategies/tools align with and differ rent study, focus group data provided an in-
from evidence-based strategies for students depth examination of teachers’ self-reported
with autism and/or with CPRT and UDL strat- experiences, ensuring support that has a good
egies? 3) What are teachers' perceptions and contextual fit (Harn et al., 2013). Groups were
experiences with CPRT and UDL? What chal- conducted via Zoom, a free, secure web-based
lenges or barriers exist with using these program that allows individuals to connect to a
strategies? virtual discussion space through a computer,
tablet, or phone. Digital audio recordings of
Method the focus groups were made using the record-
ing feature through Zoom. These recordings
were uploaded to OneDrive, a secure online
Participants server, and transcribed using Word for later
The research team distributed an informa- coding.
tional flyer through postings on the University
website and social media outlets and through Procedure
educational listservs. Inclusion criteria
included being the lead teacher in a GE class- This study was determined by the Institutional
room serving students in kindergarten Review Board to be low-risk, so an abbreviated
through eighth grade and having at least one informed consent process was used in which
student with autism in their classroom during participants reviewed an outline of study in-
the past two years. Twenty-seven interested formation, participant expectations, and
teachers contacted the research team via audio recording procedures, and then ver-
email. Of those, 16 responded to an email bally agreed to participation and recording.
regarding scheduling time to participate in a The day prior to the focus group, teachers
focus group. Of the 16 teachers scheduled to received an email containing the focus group
participate, four did not participate due to questions, brief information about CPRT and
scheduling conflicts. Twelve general educa- UDL, and two short hypothetical vignettes
tion teachers participated in one of four focus about two fictional students with autism (see
groups. Table 1).
Participants had an average of 11.8 (SD = The first two authors co-facilitated focus
8.6) years of teaching experience and were groups and have backgrounds in special edu-
100% female. All participants currently had cation research and educational psychology,
students with autism who were included in respectively. Once teachers agreed to partici-
their class at least 75% of the school day. The pate, they received a link to connect to the
majority of participants taught at a public Zoom meeting. Facilitators informed partici-
school (59%), with private (8%) and charter pants the meeting would be recorded. Focus
(33%) schools also represented. The majority groups lasted approximately one hour and
(50%) of participants taught kindergarten, included 1-4 participants per group. The facil-
9% taught first grade, 8% taught second itators followed a pre-established interview
160 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021TABLE 1
Focus Group Questions and Vignettes
Vignette #1
David is a 5-year-old diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder who communicates his wants and needs
through single word utterances and pointing. His vocabulary consists of around 50 words and he inde-
pendently and spontaneously requests for items and activities he wants. He repeats short verbal models
and follows simple directions, such as “come here”. David is very interested in dinosaurs and can identify
many dinosaur names when looking at dinosaur books. He also enjoys simple puzzles and coloring, espe-
cially when they involve dinosaurs. David has difficulty relating to others and infrequently makes eye con-
tact with his peers and teachers. He rarely interacts with other children during play but will engage in
parallel play beside peers. Transitions to new tasks or activities are difficult for David and often lead to dis-
ruptive behavior.
Vignette #2
Ben is an 8-year-old diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. His verbal communication is detailed and
varied. Ben often talks at length about topics of interest to him, like his favorite video game, though he
doesn’t often initiate questions or comments to others. Ben has strong skills in mathematics and enjoys
drawing detailed maps of his favorite cities. He sometimes exhibits frustration when he makes a mistake
and when the schedule changes unexpectedly. Writing tasks are also challenging for Ben and he often
shouts out or tries to leave during these lessons.
Questions
1. What type of supports would you set up for this student if he were in your classroom?
2. Would you need to adapt your current practices if this student were in your classroom? If so, how?
3. What barriers might you anticipate to including this student in your classroom?
4. Please review the specific strategies that are used in Classroom Pivotal Response Teaching. Would you use
any of these strategies? If so, how?
a. Are there any strategies you wouldn’t use or that would be challenging to use?
5. Please review the specific strategies that are used in Universal Design for Learning. Would you use any of
these strategies? If so, how?
a. Are there any strategies you wouldn’t use or that would be challenging to use?
guide (see Table 1). Consistent with a well- Data Analysis
established and widely used format in focus
group methodology (e.g., Merton, 1987), Focus group responses were transcribed using
including focus group research in autism Microsoft Word Processor. Grounded theory
(Suhrheinrich et al., 2012), teachers read the approach was utilized to analyze the qualita-
hypothetical vignettes and information pro- tive data (Harry et al., 2005). First, the team
vided about CPRT and UDL. Moderators then used open coding to search for patterns
asked teachers to discuss any strategies they related to strategies teachers used, and cate-
would use to support the student from the vi- gories and themes were developed based on
gnette in their classroom as well as the benefits these patterns. Open coding was conducted
and challenges to using CPRT and UDL strat- separately by two individuals with doctoral or
egies. The vignettes were meant to give all par- master’s degrees in a field relevant to autism.
ticipants the same jumping off point for Codes were organized into themes using the-
discussion and teachers were encouraged to matic analysis, an approach for identifying
share their own relevant experiences with stu- patterns and common themes in responses
dents they have taught. Participants were not while maintaining the rich complexity of
required to respond to every question, though details (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Vaismoradi et
moderators checked in with each person to al., 2013). The team then utilized collabora-
help ensure equal opportunity to share. Fol- tive coding to provide a more comprehensive
lowing the group, each participant received an analysis, wherein the team discussed codes
electronic $25 gift card to Amazon.com. and themes and reached a consensus on
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 161TABLE 2
Teacher Reported Use of Strategies to Address Student Goals
Goal Domain
Strategy Social Communication Behavior Academic
Sentence starters X
Modeling (adult) X X
Modeling (peer) X X X
Priming X X X X
Visual supports X X X X
If/then contingencies X X
Breaks X X
Support staff X
Reinforcement X X
Scaffolding X
Using student interests X X
Educating peers X
Technology-aided instruction X
disagreements (Saldaña, 2009). Focus groups communication, self-regulation, social inter-
continued until saturation of themes was action, and academic engagement.
reached. To determine whether the teacher-
reported strategy was an EBP for autism, the Sentence Starters. Teachers used sentence start-
research team referred to the meta-analysis by ers to facilitate communication by setting up the
Wong and colleagues (2015) and identified initial part of the sentence for students to fill in
whether each reported strategy aligned with the rest. One teacher described how she used
one of the EBPs from this research. sentence starters to facilitate conversation during
morning circle by presenting the sentence frame
Results “This weekend I. . .” and giving each student a
turn to respond using the sentence.
Themes
Modeling. Teachers used adult modeling to
Primary themes related to support strategies facilitate communication and behavioral skills
teachers currently used in their classrooms, and peer modeling for social, communication,
positive and negative feedback regarding and behavioral support. Teachers reported
CPRT and UDL, and barriers to inclusion. using verbal modeling, or demonstrating spo-
ken examples of the expected responses (Wong
et al., 2015), to support communication skills.
Strategies Used by Teachers
One teacher modeled complete sentences for a
Main strategies teachers reported using to student who spoke in short phrases “so that he
support students with autism were sentence can hear how it sounds.”
starters, modeling, peer-mediated support,
priming, visual supports, if/then contingen- Peer-Mediated Support. Teachers often dis-
cies, breaks, support staff, reinforcement, scaf- cussed peer-mediated support to facilitate
folding, incorporating student interests, and social interactions between students with au-
educating peers (Table 2). Many of these tism and their classmates. One teacher would
strategies aligned with EBPs for autism (Table “choose a child to pair him with that is very
3). Four main themes emerged regarding social, very good at taking those social cues,
how teachers used these strategies: to improve and provide an opportunity for some of those
162 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021TABLE 3
Teacher Reported Practices and Alignment with Evidence-Based Practices for Autism
EBP Examples from Teachers
Antecedent-based interventions Priming vocabulary and conversation skills, “anchor
chart” of questions to use with peers
Differential reinforcement of Alternative, First/then contingencies, reinforcement systems (e.g.,
Incompatible, or Other Behaviors tokens)
Exercise Letting students take breaks to walk/stretch/jump/
run around and move
Modeling Adult and peer modeling: language, appropriate
transitions
Parent-implemented intervention Parents “frontload” (i.e., prime) students with vocab
words, task instructions, examples, etc. at home the
night before the lesson in class
Peer-mediated instruction and intervention Peer modeling expected behavior, supporting academ-
ics and transitions
Prompting Visual, verbal
Reinforcement Reward systems based on interests (e.g., using pre-
ferred items as the tokens in a token economy sys-
tem, earning a preferred item/activity)
Technology-aided Instruction and Intervention Text-to-speech dictation, apps to read digital content
to students, using iPad for academic project
Time Delay Sentence starters (“this weekend I will. . .”)
Visual Support Schedule; support for conversation; timer
back and forth exchanges.” Another teacher discussing written questions that the student
described running “social groups” in which could refer to later. One teacher describes
students work together on a task in a small her process: “Before the activity began I
group, peers model skills, and students rotate would go to my kiddo and ask him the ques-
through these groups to interact with a variety tion and then help prep him or give him
of peers. In regard to self-regulation skills, options.” For a student who exhibited frustra-
teachers mentioned that peers were helpful tion with making mistakes, one teacher would
for modeling and supporting expected behav- “do some frontloading ahead of time” by pull-
iors during transitions, such as having a peer ing the student and a small group of peers to
group for the student with autism who “would give them information. Priming was also fre-
be there to help him through transitions, to quently discussed as a helpful strategy for
help him clean up his things and move on to smooth transitions between tasks. One
the next activity.” Another teacher mentioned teacher said she reminds a student “one to
selecting a peer partner with “a lot of patience three times before we get ready to transition
who can be with him and work with him but that we’re getting ready to make the change.”
kind of learn when they need to back off.” Another teacher would clearly explain the vis-
ual schedule to her students before the day
Priming. Teachers frequently reported using began so they knew what to expect. For pri-
priming, or letting students “preview” the ming for academic tasks, one teacher
expectations of a task or activity ahead of described collaborating with the parent of
time, to address social, communication, be- her student with autism by letting them know
havioral, and academic skills. These strategies the topic of the class writing assignment the
were often referred to as “front loading” by night before so they could brainstorm ideas
teachers, such as when a teacher mentioned to increase the student’s confidence with
front loading vocabulary for a student by writing.
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 163Visual Supports. Teachers often reported regulation. Some described “calming centers”
using visual supports, which are pictures or as areas within or just outside the classroom
text that serve as a guide for what to do with low levels of light and sound that include
(Wong et al., 2015), to facilitate communica- things like noise-canceling headphones, com-
tion. One teacher reported posting a chart on fortable chairs, blankets, bean bags, and
the wall with various sentence starters for stu- fidget toys for students to self-regulate. Some
dents to initiate conversation with peers. mentioned giving students with autism breaks
Another teacher posted speech bubbles on by giving them time with a preferred item or
the wall outlining the steps of a reciprocal activity or letting them stretch, jump, or walk
conversation. A third teacher reported using around.
the Picture Exchange Communication Sys-
tems (PECS; Bondy & Frost, 1994) in the
Support Staff. Utilizing support staff to assist
form of “visual cue cards and prompts they
with the self-regulation of students with au-
can use to help them [students with autism]
tism was another common theme. For exam-
because they cannot necessarily articulate
ple, one teacher felt that for students with
needs and wants so they have picture cards.”
autism who exhibit disruptive behavior in
Visual supports were also frequently referred
class, having “another adult that functions as
to when talking about supporting self-regula-
an instructional aide, that would help because
tion. These supports usually involved a timer
I think that this would be difficult to manage
or digital clock counting down to transition
with just one teacher and a large group of stu-
times or calendars and schedules so that stu-
dents in a general ed classroom with like 25
dents knew what to expect. Teachers reported
other students.”
posting pictures of task directions, steps for
transitioning, and a board of pictures of vari-
ous emotions to help students identify and Reinforcement. Positive reinforcement was
regulate their feelings. Another visual support commonly described as an effective way to
teachers reported using was a poster that support academic skills and teachers seemed
showed a picture of the task with a picture of to find reinforcement to be easily imple-
the reward students earned for completing mented and important for students with au-
the task. tism. One teacher said “it would be very
simple to do a kind of reward system with di-
nosaur stickers or something” that the student
If/then Contingencies. Teachers reported
liked. Another said, “there has to be a payoff
using if/then contingencies for self-regula-
for him to be doing something that is really
tion, which involves first presenting what the
challenging for him.”
task is, then presenting what the student
could earn as reinforcement for completing
the task. To encourage students to complete Scaffolding. Multiple teachers also men-
academic tasks, teachers used if/then contin- tioned using scaffolding, or breaking tasks
gencies by allowing for a choice activity if they into smaller steps or “chunks” and asking the
complete “short bursts of work.” One teacher student to complete portions of the work
described telling her student “if you do a cer- rather than the whole thing at once. One
tain amount of the work that we’re doing teacher described breaking instructions of an
then you can take a break and play with dino- academic task into shorter steps to make it
saurs.” Another mentioned how successful it clearer for the student with autism to under-
had been for her to have an “if/then menu” stand “so he can feel small successes as he
individualized based on the student goals and goes.” Another suggested listing the steps to
interests that listed the target behaviors and a the task on a piece of paper, cutting the paper
variety of rewards the student could choose into strips by steps, and giving the student
for engaging in those behaviors. one strip of paper at a time.
Breaks. Teachers also mentioned letting stu- Incorporating Student Interests. Teachers fre-
dents with autism take breaks to support self- quently mentioned how incorporating
164 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021student interests into academic tasks was ben- well with their teaching style and/or class-
eficial for their motivation, engagement, and room context. One teacher summarized a
task completion. Teachers talked about find- commonly shared sentiment about CPRT
ing a topic that is highly preferred to a stu- components: “while they have this fancy
dent and allowing them to write about that name, they’re just good teaching strategies.”
rather than the assigned topic. For a student Similarly, one teacher felt that “whether or
who loved dinosaurs, one teacher said she not there’s a specific name for these things
would integrate dinosaurs into her curricu- that you would do for children on the spec-
lum as much as possible to “be able to really trum, I think you would just do it naturally for
grab his attention and get him to buy into all children.” The most common CPRT com-
that and be really engaged in the academics.” ponents teachers mentioned that they used or
Another student had strong interests in tech- would use were interspersing easy and diffi-
nology, so that teacher allowed him to create cult tasks, sharing control, providing choices,
a multiplication video using computer soft- reinforcing attempts, responding to student
ware for his math project. interests, and using direct and contingent
reinforcement (Table 4). For interspersing
easy and difficult tasks, teachers mentioned
Educating Peers. Educating typically develop-
that language development for their students
ing peers on diversity and differences was
with autism can be difficult so it is helpful to
found to be an important component of suc-
mix in short tasks. For shared control teachers
cessful inclusion. One teacher discussed
agreed that letting students have a say in what
addressing bullying that might occur and the
they learn is powerful for all students, not just
“strong need to talk about these things when
those with autism. For reinforcing attempts,
they happen and promoting that tolerance
teachers said that providing rewards for incre-
and also making it clear that that is not going
mental progress on a task was helpful for stu-
to be accepted in the classroom and that every
dents with autism. Teachers agreed that
different student’s way of being is correct.”
responding to student interests and incorpo-
rating those into tasks was a helpful strategy.
Technology-aided Instruction. Teachers often Finally, teachers described how providing
described using technology, such as tablets reinforcement, such as preferred items or
and computer software, to facilitate academic activities, was helpful for supporting skill de-
engagement for students with autism. One velopment and task completion.
teacher described giving a student the oppor-
tunity to complete an academic task using a
CPRT Components That Received Mixed Feed-
computer program, another mentioned how
back. While feedback was generally positive
some students used voice-to-text software for
some CPRT components received mixed feed-
academic tasks, and another discussed letting
back, as teachers perceived some things to be
a student video-record their presentation to
challenging to implement and not a good fit
play to the class.
for them, the classroom, and/or student.
These included following the student’s lead,
CPRT Feedback shared control, interspersing easy and diffi-
cult tasks, direct reinforcement, and reinforc-
Overall, teachers generally gave positive feed- ing attempts. Some teachers felt that
back about CPRT strategies (Table 4). following student lead might be challenging if
Themes from teacher responses included their strong interests lead the class “down a
CPRT components that were a good fit for long rabbit hole” and diverted them from
the teacher, classroom, and/or student and what they were supposed to be doing. Teach-
CPRT components that received mixed ers mentioned that it is important to establish
feedback. boundaries with student lead. Similarly, some
teachers reported that providing students
CPRT Components That Were a Good Fit. Teach- with shared control over tasks and interac-
ers often discussed how CPRT components fit tions was challenging, such as if the student
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 165TABLE 4
CPRT Component Definitions and Teacher Feedback
CPRT Component Definition Focus Group Feedback/Examples
Gains attention Have student attention before pre- A) Teachers “definitely use”
senting instruction B) Good for all students
Clear opportunities/ Instruction must be clear and devel- A) Teachers “definitely use”
instruction opmentally appropriate
Choice Provide student with choice of tasks A) Choices within activities, choices
and choices within tasks about how long to do task
B) Aligns well with UDL
C) “Doing this for the whole class
makes it better, not just for one
student”
Interspersing easy/difficult Tasks that are easy must be inter- A) For students still developing lan-
tasks spersed with more difficult tasks guage, including short tasks helps
B) Adding difficult task when stu-
dent not ready might lead to
undesirable response
Shared control/turn-taking Follow the student A) “Letting students have a say in
interests and model appropriate what they learn is really powerful
give-and-take interactions with for all students, not just those
student with autism”
B) Aligns well with UDL
C) Share control but with bounda-
ries because it could “go down a
long rabbit hole” and distract
from work
D) Following strong interests could
lead class away from where they
need to go
E) Student might only want to do
one thing
F) Can be difficult to give up control
to student
Reinforcing attempts Goal-directed attempts to respond A) Rewards for progress and effort
must be reinforced B) Specific feedback for attempt
(“Wow you included great transi-
tion words!”)
C) Difficulty knowing how far to
push them and when to require
more
Direct and contingent Reinforcement is directly related to A) Easy for students to understand
reinforcement the desired behavior and contin- B) Might be more appropriate when
gent on student response you have verbal ability
C) May be challenging for teachers
to provide direct reinforcement
immediately
only wanted to do one specific thing. One choices that I truly want to give and that are
teacher described herself as a “control freak” on the table” and it is important because
and felt that giving students control would be “that’s where you have their buy-in.” Inter-
difficult. One said that sharing control was spersing difficult and easy tasks had generally
tricky at first, but now she only offers “the positive feedback except one participant who
166 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021worried about an undesirable response if she reading comprehension was another example
is “throwing in the difficult tasks when the stu- a teacher gave of an alternative option for
dent’s not ready for it. It’s sometimes difficult comprehension.
to anticipate the reaction that you’re going to Providing students with multiple means of
get.” The only concern teachers expressed action and expression was described as a strat-
about direct reinforcement was that they egy that “catches all students in the net
would not be able to provide it quickly instead of letting some kind of fall through.”
enough. With reinforcing attempts, one Teachers discussed a variety of alternative
teacher worried about knowing when to ways they gave students to communicate, such
require more from her student. She had con- as PECS (Bondy & Frost, 1994). One teacher
cerns that if her student with autism received described providing options for expression
reinforcement for an attempt, they would and communication to facilitate inclusion:
only put forth that amount of effort on future “there are things on a tablet that can help
tasks. modify it [task] for him, and so I allow every-
one to do that to where he feels and appears
to be included so he doesn’t stand out.” In
UDL Feedback terms of options for physical action, several
Teachers generally had positive feedback teachers reported allowing students to take
regarding UDL and gave many examples of breaks for physical movement.
utilizing strategies consistent with the UDL
framework in their classrooms (Table 5). UDL Components That Were Not a Good Fit. Teach-
Themes included UDL components per- ers had largely positive feedback on UDL
ceived to be a good fit for the teacher, class- components and few mentioned strategies
room, and/or student, components perceived they would not use or that would be challeng-
not to be a good fit, and similarities between ing to use. Teachers most frequently men-
and CPRT and UDL. tioned providing options for physical action
to be challenging. One teacher discussed how
UDL Components That Were a Good Fit. One she could not always provide options for phys-
teacher commented that the UDL framework ical action because the timing is not right or
is helpful because she already has “to modify when it is a matter of safety, such as with her
strategies with every student because they all student that elopes. Another said that provid-
have different needs.” Similarly, another ing a variety of seating options, such as rocker
teacher stated: “I feel like UDL is something chairs and wobble stools, has been challeng-
that. . .I sprinkle throughout my practice. I ing because after 30 years of teaching, it was a
think maybe I just intensify it when I have a big adjustment for her to have kids moving
certain student that needs it more than around frequently. Teachers rarely men-
another.” Teachers often reported recruiting tioned strategies that fit with providing
student interest by incorporating students’ options for executive functions and when it
preferences into activities to increase their was mentioned teachers appeared to be
motivation to engage in tasks. Teachers unclear about what it meant. Another teacher
described providing self-regulation strategies with kindergarten students felt this compo-
and explicit teaching to develop learners’ nent was not applicable to her students based
abilities to regulate their emotions. Some on their developmental level. Finally, a
teachers felt that providing options for stu- teacher said that sustaining effort and persist-
dents to express their knowledge was impor- ence would be challenging and would require
tant and described various ways they present a “group effort to work on.”
information, such as visual examples or writ-
ten instructions when speaking, and ways they Similarities Between CPRT and UDL Many
allow students to use a different modality of teachers reported that CPRT and UDL were
representing their knowledge, such as art pro- similar and both examples of good teaching
ject, poster, or oral presentation. Sequencing that benefitted all students, not just those
cards in the correct order to demonstrate with autism. One teacher described the CPRT
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 167TABLE 5
UDL Component Definitions and Teacher Feedback
UDL Component Definition/Description Focus Group Feedback/Examples
Multiple Means of Engagement
Provide options for recruiting Alternative ways to gain interest that reflect individual dif- A) Use student interests as rewards for work completion
interest ferences and preferences B) Embed student interests in task
Provide options for sustaining Supporting learners who differ in motivation, self-regula- A) Do short periods of work and then allow for a choice
effort and persistence tion skills, etc. activity
B) Rewards for progress and effort
Provide options for self-regulation Explicit teaching to develop learners’ intrinsic abilities to A) ‘Calming area’ to regulate
regulate their own emotions and motivations B) Use emotion board to identify feelings, recognize need
for break
C) Allow physical movement break (stand, stretch, jump,
run)
Multiple Means of Representation
Provide options for perception Same information given through different modalities A) Visual aid when teacher speaks or write down directions
(sight, sound, or touch) that is adjustable by user
Provide options for language, Variety of representations of math expressions, symbols, A) Use sentence starters and allow student to repeat after
math expressions, and symbols etc. are provided for clarity and comprehensibility teacher or peer
B) Give prompts such as saying beginning sound of a word
C) PECS for communication
Provide options for Design and present information with necessary scaffolds A) Sequencing cards to show reading comprehension
comprehension B) Break up long tasks into steps
Multiple Means of Action and Expression
Provide options for expression Alternative modalities for expression to allow the learner A) Use break cards or PECS
and communication to easily express knowledge, ideas and concepts B) Show work on different media/material such as white
168 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021
boards, computer, art project, poster, oral/pre-recorded
presentation
C) Speech-to-text on computer
D) Oral assessments instead of written
Provide options for physical Interactive materials to allow physical interaction A) Allow physical movement breaks
action B) Wiggle stools, rocking chairs, cushions, fidget toys
Provide options for executive Expand executive capacity by scaffolding lower level skills A) Break up longer/more complex tasks into steps for stu-
functions dent to completestrategy incorporating student interests stat- autism is sometimes at the expense of the
ing that this “falls really well into UDL.” other students in the class.
Teachers also agreed that the CPRT compo-
nents sharing control and providing choices Perceptions and Support from Administra-
align well with the student-centered approach tion. Teachers referred to the perceptions
of the UDL philosophy. One teacher said that and actions of administration as barriers. For
“doing this for the whole class makes it better, example, multiple teachers described how
not just for one student.” their districts did not understand the level of
support the student needed to succeed in GE
Barriers to Inclusion and that they had to work hard to prove the
student had additional support needs. One
Peer Acceptance. Teachers consistently identi- teacher received pushback from the district
fied peer acceptance of students with autism when trying to get one-on-one support for her
as a barrier to inclusion. One teacher sum- student. Some teachers discussed how districts
marized these concerns well: “you have to be made placement decisions based on little
very proactive about discussing differences, knowledge of student needs and characteris-
and being open and honest with kids that tics, such as recommending placement in GE
we’re not all going to communicate the same after only reading about the student without
way and encouraging tolerance and that ever meeting them. One teacher reflected on
social acceptance element.” Another said, “a how administration placed a student with
huge strategy that I had to learn my first year extreme challenging behaviors in GE without
with that student was taking steps to address recognizing or preparing for the potential
any prejudice you see students displaying negative impact: “they don’t get it. They want
towards that student.” to say it’s the rights of this one kid, but what
about the other rights of the other kid whose
safety is in jeopardy?”
Student Characteristics. Teachers often
expressed concerns regarding characteristics
of students with autism that might interfere Discussion
with successful inclusion. Multiple teachers
The results of this study highlight how CPRT,
mentioned concerns about disruptive behav-
UDL, and evidence-based practices for autism
ior, such as eloping and “outbursts.” One
have multiple applications and benefits in in-
teacher mentioned that addressing disruptive
clusive classrooms, which has implications for
behavior would be challenging while also
research and practice. An encouraging find-
attending to the other students in the class-
ing was that participants identified several
room. Others were concerned about students
practices they use to support their students
having highly preferred interests that might
with autism that align with EBPs for autism
interfere with social interactions and academ-
including modeling, priming, visual supports,
ics, such as becoming hyper-focused on talk-
if/then contingencies, peer mediated sup-
ing about a topic.
port, and reinforcement (Wong et al., 2015).
Illustrating that many EBPs for autism have a
Adult Support in the Classroom. Teachers good contextual fit with existing classroom
reported a lack of additional adult support in practices could help minimize teacher bur-
the classroom to be a barrier to inclusion. den and maximize buy-in and may be an im-
Teachers mentioned that students with au- portant component of teacher training and
tism often needed one-on-one support that professional development.
they could not always provide. One teacher Since the literature reports teacher atti-
said that without having another adult in the tudes to be critical for successful inclusion of
room, it would be challenging to have student students with autism (Koegel & Oliver, 2018),
with autism that leaves the classroom when it is also encouraging that participants gener-
upset. One teacher described how, without ally had positive perceptions of CPRT and
adult support, her focus on the student with UDL strategies. This is consistent with
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 169previous research illustrating that special edu- supports for teachers in inclusive classrooms
cation teachers had positive reports about (Stahmer et al., 2020). For example, leaders
CPRT strategies, with a few minor exceptions should be trained to assess teacher-reported
(Stahmer et al., 2012). However, the current needs and seek out high-quality professional de-
study is notable in that the sample consisted velopment opportunities and other support
entirely of general education teachers which related to these needs. Future research should
offers unique insight into the application of also examine the outcomes of providing sup-
CPRT in inclusive classrooms. In the current port staff with training in EBPs for autism, as
study, multiple participants emphasized that GE teachers emphasize the importance of their
CPRT and UDL strategies were simply good support in inclusive classrooms.
teaching practices and had benefits for all stu- Teacher concern about students with au-
dents in their classrooms, not just those with
tism being the victims of bullying is also con-
autism. Many teachers also pointed out simi-
sistent with the literature (Sreckoic et al.,
larities between UDL and CPRT components.
2014). Teachers often explained that educat-
Demonstrating how an autism-specific inter-
vention such as CPRT aligns with principles of ing the entire class on differences and diver-
a widespread educational framework like sity was a key factor to successful inclusion.
UDL may reduce initiative fatigue and help There are a variety of programs that provide
teachers to feel as though they are not taking disability awareness to typically developing
on the burden of a whole new intervention peers (Lindsay & Edwards, 2013), which
just for autism. If general education teachers should be considered and utilized by teachers
are already receiving pre- or in-service instruc- and school leaders to maximize the benefits
tion in UDL implementation, it might be ben- of inclusion for students with autism and their
eficial to consider how to integrate and/or classmates.
illustrate the connection to CPRT compo-
nents. This might also be an important aspect
of training for instructional aides supporting Limitations and Future Research
students in GE classrooms, who may be less fa-
miliar in UDL and/or CPRT. While overall While the data are compelling, there are a
CPRT and UDL received positive feedback, few limitations. Future research should
there were some components that received explore these topics with a larger sample rep-
mixed reviews. Future research should exam- resenting a wider range of grades across a
ine these elements to gather more informa- larger geographical region and should
tion on what specifically teachers find include male teachers. Since these teachers
challenging about these components and sys- had primarily positive attitudes towards inclu-
tematically examine how essential each com- sion, an important next step would be to hold
ponent is to successful outcomes for students focus groups with teachers with less positive
with autism. attitudes towards inclusion to get a compre-
Much of what teachers reported regarding
hensive understanding of barriers and facilita-
the challenges to including students with au-
tors. Responses may not necessarily be an
tism was consistent with the literature, such as
exact portrayal of what is going on in the
responding to disruptive behavior while trying
classroom due to social desirability, or the
to maintain the rest of the class (Cassady,
2011; Lindsay et al., 2013). This implies that it tendency to provide a socially appealing
is important to provide teachers with effective response rather than one reflecting their true
strategies, ongoing training and support for feelings or experiences (Nederhof, 1985).
managing disruptive behaviors. Teachers also Therefore, it is important to observe GE
consistently reported the need for additional teachers and directly measure their use of
support staff. This has important implications strategies and associated child outcomes.
for how administrators allocate resources to Regardless, this study provides meaningful
best support inclusion. School leaders may insight into teacher experiences and prepar-
need training in leadership practices to pro- ing school personnel to facilitate successful
vide the necessary and appropriate types of inclusion.
170 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021References education classrooms: Educational benefits. Inter-
national Journal of Special Education, 17(2), 14–24.
Able, H., Sreckovic, M. A., Schultz, T. R., Garwood, Koegel, R. L., & Oliver, K. (2018). Inclusive educa-
J. D., & Sherman, J. (2015). Views from the tion. Paul H Brookes.
trenches: Teacher and student supports needed Kurth, J. A., & Mastergeorge, A. M. (2010). Aca-
for full inclusion of students with ASD. Teacher demic and cognitive profiles of students with au-
Education and Special Education, 38(1), 44–57. tism: implications for classroom practice and
Bondy, A. S., & Frost, L. A. (1994). The picture placement. International Journal of Special Educa-
exchange communication system. Focus on Autistic tion, 25(2), 8–14.
Behavior, 9(3), 1–19. Lindsay, S., & Edwards, A. (2013). A systematic
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic anal- review of disability awareness interventions for
ysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychol- children and youth. Disability and Rehabilitation,
ogy, 3(2), 77–101. 35(8), 623–646.
Bruinsma, Y., Minjarez, M., Schreibman, L., & Lindsay, S., Proulx, M., Thomson, N., & Scott, H.
Stahmer, A. (2020). Naturalistic developmental be- (2013). Educators’ challenges of including chil-
havioral interventions. Paul H. Brookes. dren with autism spectrum disorder in main-
Capp, M. J. (2017). The effectiveness of universal stream classrooms. International Journal of
design for learning: a meta-analysis of literature Disability, Development and Education, 60(4),
between 2013 and 2016. International Journal of In- 347–362.
clusive Education, 21(8), 791–807. Merton, R. K. (1987). The focused interview and
Cassady, J. M. (2011). Teachers' attitudes toward focus groups: Continuities and discontinuities.
the inclusion of students with autism and emo- The Public Opinion Quarterly, 51(4), 550–566.
tional behavioral disorder. Electronic Journal for In- Nahmias, A. S., Kase, C., & Mandell, D. S. (2014).
clusive Education, 2(7), 5. Comparing cognitive outcomes among children
Corkum, P., Bryson, S. E., Smith, I. M., Giffin, C., with autism spectrum disorders receiving commu-
Hume, K., & Power, A. (2014). Professional devel- nity-based early intervention in one of three
opment needs for educators working with chil- placements. Autism, 18(3), 311–320.
dren with autism spectrum disorders in inclusive Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with
school environments. Exceptionality Education social desirability bias: A review. European Journal
International, 24(1), 33–47. of Social Psychology, 15(3), 263–280.
Fisher, M., & Meyer, L. H. (2002). Development Reeves, D. B. (2012). Transforming professional devel-
and social competence after two years for stu- opment into student results. ASCD.
dents enrolled in inclusive and self-con- Sainato, D. M., Morrison, R. S., Jung, S., Axe, J., &
tained educational programs. Research and Nixon, P. A. (2015). A comprehensive inclusion
Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, program for kindergarten children with autism
27(3), 165–174. spectrum disorder. Journal of Early Intervention,
Harn, B., Parisi, D., & Stoolmiller, M. (2013). Bal- 37(3), 208–225.
ancing fidelity with flexibility and fit: What do we Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative
really know about fidelity of implementation in researchers. Sage.
schools? Exceptional Children, 79(2), 181–193. Sansosti, J. M., & Sansosti, F. J. (2012). Inclusion for
Harry, B., Sturges, K. M., & Klingner, J. K. (2005). students with high-functioning autism spectrum
Mapping the process: An exemplar of process disorders: Definitions and decision making. Psy-
and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Edu- chology in the Schools, 49(10), 917–931.
cational Researcher, 34(2), 3–13. Schreibman, L., Dawson, G., Stahmer, A. C., Landa,
Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. R., Rogers, S. J., McGee, G. G., Kasari, C.,
(2002). Providing new access to the general cur- Ingersoll, B., Kaiser, A. P., Bruinsma, Y.,
riculum: Universal design for learning. Teaching McNerney, E., Wetherby, A., & Halladay, A.
Exceptional Children, 35(2), 8–17. (2015). Naturalistic developmental behavioral
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improve- interventions: Empirically validated treatments
ment Act (IDEIA), 20 U.S.C. §1401 et seq. for autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism
(2004). and Developmental Disorders, 45(8), 2411–2428.
Kalambouka, A., Farrell, P., Dyson, A., & Kaplan, I. Sreckovic, M. A., Brunsting, N. C., & Able, H.
(2007). The impact of placing pupils with special (2014). Victimization of students with autism
educational needs in mainstream schools on the spectrum disorder: A review of prevalence and
achievement of their peers. Educational Research, risk factors. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders,
49(4), 365–382. 8(9), 1155–1172.
Katz, J., & Mirenda, P. (2002). Including students Stahmer, A. C., & Aarons, G. A. (2009). Attitudes to-
with developmental disabilities in general ward adoption of evidence-based practices: A
Experiences of General Education Teachers / 171comparison of autism early intervention pro- without special educational needs in inclusive
viders and children’s mental health providers. classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research
Psychological Services, 6(3), 223. Review, 21(1), 33–54.
Stahmer, A. C., & Ingersoll, B. (2004). Inclusive pro- U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
gramming for toddlers with autism spectrum disor- Education and Rehabilitative Services. (2018).
ders: Outcomes from the children's toddler school. 40th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(2), 67–82. of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Stahmer, A., Oliver, K., & Schetter, P. (2020). Improv- ERIC Clearinghouse.
ing education for California students via professio- Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T.
nal development. https://edpolicyinca.org/sites/ (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis:
default/files/2020-02/pb_stahmer_feb20.pdf Implications for conducting a qualitative de-
Stahmer, A., Suhrheinrich, J., Reed, S., Bolduc, C., scriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(3),
& Schreibman, L. (2011). Classroom pivotal 398–405.
response teaching: A guide to effective implementation. Wong, C., Odom, S. L., Hume, K. A., Cox, A. W.,
Guilford Press. Fettig, A., Kucharczyk, S., Brock, M. E.,
Stahmer, A. C., Suhrheinrich, J., Reed, S., & Plavnick, J. B., Fluery, V. P., & Schultz, T. R.
Schreibman, L. (2012). What works for you? (2015). Evidence-based practices for children,
Using teacher feedback to inform adaptations of youth, and young adults with autism spectrum
pivotal response training for classroom use. Au- disorder: A comprehensive review. Journal of
tism Research and Treatment, 2012. Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(7), 1951–
Suhrheinrich, J., Rieth, S. R., Dickson, K. S., 1966.
Roesch, S., & Stahmer, A. C. (2019). Classroom
Pivotal Response Teaching: Teacher training out-
comes of a community efficacy trial. Teacher Edu-
cation and Special Education, 42(1), 1–20. Received: 19 March 2020
Szumski, G., Smogorzewska, J., & Karwowski, M. Initial Acceptance: 14 May 2020
(2017). Academic achievement of students Final Acceptance: 18 June 2020
172 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-June 2021You can also read
