Children with Autism Less Physically Fit - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

Children with Autism Less Physically Fit - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

As the incidence rate of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) increases, so does the interest in the health and well-being of individuals on the spectrum. Similar to their typically developing peers, children and youth with ASD face increased rates of obesity and decreased engagement in physical activities. Reviews of physical activity patterns indicate that older adolescents with ASD are less physically active than their younger peers with ASD. Profiles of motor skills and physical fitness in children and youth with ASD have also documented delayed performance levels.

A research study published in the peer-reviewed journal, Autism Research and Treatment found that children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are less physically fit and active than their typically developing peers. The purpose of the study was to examine the physical activity and fitness of school-aged children with ASD in comparison to typically developing peers. Participants with ASD completed diagnostic and developmental assessments and a series of physical fitness assessments. The results indicated that children with ASD were less physically fit, in the strength domain, and less physically active than their peers without disabilities. Even though the children with ASD were less active, the researchers found that they were similarly capable in nearly all of the fitness tests. “That’s really exciting, because it means those underlying fitness abilities are there,” said Megan MacDonald of Oregon State University who coauthored the study.

The results of the study provide further evidence that children with an ASD face health differences, and that efforts to promote physical activity in school and through public health initiatives need to include children and youth with ASD. The findings also present important evidence for parents and teachers that children on the autism spectrum are capable, but may need more opportunities to be active. This has implications for intervention and program planning. For example, adapted physical activity programs are one avenue with intervention potential to battle the lower levels of physical activity and fitness found in children with ASD. Parents, teachers, and administrators are encouraged to include students with an ASD in physical fitness and physical activity assessments and provide them with individualized information about related behaviors that can impact their health into adulthood. Lastly, additional research is needed to understand why individuals with autism spend more time in sedentary activities.

Kiley Tyler, Megan MacDonald, and Kristi Menear, “Physical Activity and Physical Fitness of School-Aged Children and Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorders,” Autism Research and Treatment, Volume 2014, Article ID 312163, 6 pages.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/312163

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, CCBT, NCSP is author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. He is also editor of a text in the APA School Psychology Book Series, Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention in Schools and author of the soon to be released book, Overcoming Anxiety and Depression on the Autism Spectrum: A Self-Help Guide Using CBT.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: What The District Is Not Addressing

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: What The District Is Not Addressing

Real Life Statistics

According to a National Autistic Society survey of over 450 children and adults with autism, an astonishing 70% of adults with autism are unable to live independently. Of these individuals, 49% live with family members, creating a huge financial burden on aging parents, and 32% live in residential care facilities, which offer little or no privacy, autonomy, or stimulation.

Only 3% of adults with autism live fully independently. In terms of employment, only 6% of adults hold paid, full-time jobs. Regarding mental health, over half of adults with autism have been diagnosed with depression some time in their adult life while 11% say they have suffered a "nervous breakdown."

And even though the majority of adults surveyed had participated in at least two autism interventions in childhood, 65% continue having difficulty making friends. Of teens surveyed, 74% stated that they had difficulty making friends. Of children under 13 years old, 31% participated in no social activities at all.

Clearly this data shows the burden on quality of life for adults with autism, issues such as independence, self-determination, employment, mental health, social support, and meaningful relationships are virtually ignored when planning treatments, assessing treatment outcomes, or evaluating an overall program’s effectiveness.

Adults with autism are in need of treatment programs which focus on improving family life, self-perception, self-esteem, confidence, ability to compete in employment opportunities, the ability to live in the least restrictive environment, ability to decrease depression, anxiety, and other mental health concerns, for more successful outcomes.

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Erosion of Our Rights

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Erosion of Our Rights



The District wants the Missouri Human Rights Act to be realigned with Federal Standards in their self-serving way as Legislative Priority 8 states but when it comes to everything else basically, they want the Feds to butt out.

I think we need to work together to get Legislative Priority Item 8 removed from the Legislative Platforms of the 30 school district members of the CSDGKC. 


I would like to see that patrons understand that LSR7 Legislative Platform PRIORITY POSITION #8 HAS NO EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE.  I do not want my tax dollars used to erode civil and human rights of the citizens of Missouri.  I believe the CSDGKC and LSR7 are getting too involved in politics considering the purpose of both is supposed to be EDUCATION.   

The Cooperating School Districts of Greater Kansas City (CSDGKC Inc.) operates as a Missouri EDUCATIONAL Service Agency (ESA).  A CSDGKC sister  organization, the CSDGKC Foundation holds 501(c)(3) status.  In order to provide consistency and continuity, the board of directors for the CSDGKC Foundation is the same as the CSDGKC board.

CSDGKC Inc. is a  diverse, accomplished educational cooperative association.  CSDGKC represents 29 school districts and provides cutting-edge, state-of-the-art collaborative professional development services to another 19 school districts or schools.  CSDGKC serves rural, suburban, and urban communities from 13 Missouri Counties.  We represent over 188,000 students and 30,000 employees.  CSDGKC Inc. is governed by public  school districts in Bates, Buchanan, Caldwell, Cass, Clay, Clinton, Jackson, Johnson, Lafayette, Platte, and  Ray Counties.

Adrian R-III School
Archie R-V School District
Belton School District #124
Blue Springs School District
Center School District 
Excelsior Springs School District 
Fort Osage R-1 School District
Grain Valley School District
Grandview C-4 Schools
Harrisonville Schools
Hickman Mills C-1 School District 
Independence School District
Kansas City Public Schools
Kearney R-1 School District 
Lathrop R-II Schools
Lee’s Summit R-7 School District 
Liberty Public Schools
Lone Jack C6 Public Schools
North Kansas City Schools
Oak Grove R-VI School District
Park Hill School District
Platte County School District
Pleasant Hill R-III School District
Raymore-Peculiar School District 
Raytown School District 
Richmond R-XVI School District
St. Joseph School District 
Smithville R-II School District 
West Platte School District

Missouri Human Rights Act to federal standards.  It isn't to benefit education and students, it is to shield administrators from financial accountability for their acts of discrimination.  It is also to please the school district's business donors and please the local Chamber of Commerce.  This will make it hard to prove discrimination even when that is what has happened.  The erosion of the Missouri Human Rights Act is a big step back in civil rights progress made in this country.  This is why it is critical to spread the word in our communities that we as Patrons/Stakeholders want this removed from the Legislative Platform of our school district.  This impacts school populations and all people who experience discrimination in their jobs, housing and public accommodations in the state of Missouri.  This change in the MHRA will impact all who experience discrimination in Missouri.

The Missouri Commission on Human Rights will take your charge and investigate the alleged discrimination, harassment ... If they find discrimination, then they will either help the parties settle or if the MCHR feels they should have a hearing about the case, they do that.  The parents of the child or the school employee who experienced discrimination, does not have to file a lawsuit, they don't have to hire an attorney.  The MCHR helps with all of this, holding the person and entity involved responsible for the discrimination if they find that in the case.  The school district's officials will be shielded from financial liability if the MHRA is eroded.  Governor Nixon has vetoed Bills two times.  Schools are using their Legislative websites to promote their agenda, which includes #8. 

What Do School Personnel Know About Autism? - West Palm Beach Asperger & Education | Examiner.com

What Do School Personnel Know About Autism? - West Palm Beach Asperger & Education | Examiner.com

Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) affect approximately 1 to 2 % of the school-age population. The majority of children with autism are educated within the public school system, most often in general education classes, either full- or part-time. Thus, teachers (regular and special education) and other school personnel must be familiar with current best practices for identifying and treating children with ASD. However, many do not have formal training in educating and intervening with this group of children. To address the increased need for services in school settings, it has been recommended that school personnel participate in trainings to develop the skills and competencies necessary to provide effective services to students with ASD. Although a review of the literature suggests that school personnel are receiving some specialized training related to autism, there continues to be a pressing need for more continuing education opportunities and improved preparation. It is vital that school personnel understand this complex disorder in order to help students achieve positive outcomes, especially since they share the responsibility of educating the increasing number of children being identified with ASD.

Pilot Study

Although there is a paucity of research focusing on school personnel's perceived and/or factual knowledge of autism, a pilot survey published in the School Psychologist provides us with an exploratory investigation of teacher, counselor, and paraprofessional knowledge of autism. The survey attempted to answer the following questions: (a) To what extent do school personnel (teachers, counselors, and paraprofessionals) perceive that they are competent in their understanding of autism?, (b) What is school personnel's factual knowledge of autism (definition, assessment/diagnosis, and treatments)?, and (c) To what extent do school personnel that work directly with students with autism differ in their perception and factual knowledge of autism in comparison to those who do not work with students with autism?

Participants

Fifty-four school personnel from a southwestern state participated in the pilot survey. Participants were school district employees enrolled in various graduate level majors who were attending a small university (within the college of education) in the Southwestern United States. The sample included 26 general education teachers, 14 special education teachers, 7 school counselors and 7 paraprofessionals. Seventy percent indicated that they worked directly with students diagnosed with autism (instructor, interventionist, care-provider, etc.), while approximately 30 percent indicated that they indirectly served students with autism (consultant, academic planning, multidisciplinary team member, etc.). A majority indicated that they had never participated in autism training(s) and when asked whether they would like to take part in future training(s), most indicated that they did not have a desire to participate.

Participants completed two measures developed by the authors, a Perceptions Survey and a Knowledge Survey. Both measures contained items derived from empirically-supported findings in the research literature. The Perceptions Survey items were designed to assess the respondents' perceived competence of their knowledge and ability to implement research findings. The Knowledge Survey items were designed to assess the respondents' factual knowledge of research findings about autism (definition, assessment/diagnosis, and treatment).

Results

The results of the survey indicated that overall, the perceived competence of general and special education teachers, school counselors, and paraprofessional regarding their knowledge of autism was average. Although school personnel that work directly and indirectly with students both reported having average perceived competence, those providing direct service had a statistically significantly higher level of perceived competence. The results of the Knowledge Survey indicated that school personnel who work directly with students correctly defined the disorder, while those that do not demonstrated moderate knowledge with some errors. However, school personnel's factual knowledge about the assessment/diagnosis and treatment of autism was low, regardless of whether services were delivered directly or indirectly.

Discussion

The findings of this pilot survey raise several important questions about school personnel’s perceived and factual knowledge about autism. A majority of participants indicated they had no prior training and expressed little interest in receiving education related to autism in the future. This is concerning, given that all participants working with students with autism, either directly or indirectly, reported average perceived competence yet demonstrated a low level of factual knowledge. This divergence suggests that teachers, school counselors, and paraprofessionals may overestimate their factual knowledge about autism and as a result, fail to see a need for additional training.

Despite the study’s limitations (e.g., small sample size) and need for further research relating to school personnel’s perceptions and knowledge, the results have significant implications for school-based practice. For example, administrators, supervisors, and support professionals such as school psychologists should exercise caution when assuming that school personnel have an adequate factual understanding and working knowledge of autism. It is also important to recognize that anecdotal reports are insufficient when determing the need for training and that direct assessment of factual knowledge is required. Failure to correctly identify training needs can have a negative effect on screening/assessment and intervention selection, planning, and implementation. The results also raise an important question as to what extent school personnel’s perceived knowledge about autism might limit their willingness to participate in training and contribute to resistance in consultation.

Concluding Comments

There is a critical need for more coordinated efforts among community and school professionals for the training of teachers in evidence-based instruction and behavioral management practices for children with ASD. Because the knowledge base in ASD is changing so rapidly, it is imperative that school personnel remain current with the research and up to date on scientifically supported approaches that have direct application to the educational setting. For example, some intervention and assessment procedures require a specific knowledge base and skills for successful implementation. It is vital that service providers understand best practice procedures across school, community, and home settings. School personnel can help to ensure that students with ASD receive an effective educational program by participating in training programs designed to increase their understanding and factual knowledge about assessment and intervention /treatment approaches.

Williams, K., Schroeder, J. L., Carvalho, C., & Cervantes, A. (2011). School personnel knowledge of autism: A pilot survey. The School Psychologist, 65, 7-9.

The complete article is available at http://www.apadivisions.org/division-16/publications/newsletters/school-psychologist/2011/04/autism.aspx

Wilkinson, L. A. (2010). A best practice guide to assessment and intervention for autism and Asperger syndrome in schools. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

School Psychologists Need More Training in Autism - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

School Psychologists Need More Training in Autism - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

More children than ever before are being diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now estimates that 1 in 88 eight year-old children has an ASD. The occurrence of autism is also evident in the number of students with ASD receiving special educational services. Data collected for the Department of Education indicate that the number of children ages 6 through 21 identified with autism served under the Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA) quadrupled between 2000-01 and 2009-10; rising from 93,000 to 378,000 students and increasing from 1.5 to 5.8 percent of all identified disabilities.

Given the dramatic increase in ASD, school psychologists and other school-based professionals are now more likely to be asked to participate in the screening, identification, and educational planning for students with ASD than at any other time in the past. Moreover, the call for greater use of evidence-based practice has increased demands that school psychologists be knowledgeable about evidence-based assessment and intervention strategies for students with ASD. Guidelines and standards have been developed recommending best practice procedures for the assessment and treatment of ASD. There is a large and expanding scientific literature base that documents the existence of two major elements of evidence-based practice: assessments shown to be psychometrically sound for the populations on whom they are used and interventions with sufficient evidence for their effectiveness. Although school psychologists are often called on to assume a leadership role in evaluating, identifying, and providing interventions for students with ASD in our schools, there is little research to show how closely school psychologists align their practices with the parameters of best practice. Due to the increase in the number of children receiving special education services under the classification of autism, research is needed regarding the preparedness of school psychologists and schools to address the needs of children with ASD.

Recent Surveys

Although there is a paucity of research focusing on the delivery of school psychological services for students with ASD, there are several national surveys which provide exploratory information regarding school psychologists’ level of knowledge in the area of autism assessment and intervention; assessment methods, measures, and techniques; level of training; and perceived level of preparation and confidence.

• Aiello & Ruble (2011) investigated school psychologists’ knowledge and skills in identifying, evaluating, and providing interventions for students with ASD. A total of 402 participants from 50 states completed their survey. Results indicated that despite a limited amount of training received during their graduate education or pre-service training for working with the autism population, most school psychologists’ self-reported knowledge of ASD was in the expected direction for agreement. However, there were gaps in knowledge regarding the differences between emotional and behavioral disorders and autism, developmental delays and autism, and special education eligibility versus DSM-IV diagnoses that need to be addressed through more training. The survey also indicated the need for additional training opportunities in providing interventions, strategies, and supports for students with autism in the following areas: developing family-centered educational plans; training peer mentors; and translating assessment information into teaching goals and activities.

• Rasmussen (2009) also completed a national survey of school psychologists to determine their level of knowledge in the area of autism assessment; level of training; and perceived preparation and confidence in providing services to children with ASD. Results indicated that training positively affected school psychologists’ knowledge about autism; their levels of involvement with students with autism; and their perceived levels of preparation to work with this population. Of the 662 participants, the majority accurately identified diagnostic features and true and false statements about autism, suggesting an adequate understanding of autism. Participants with more training reported an increased level of involvement on multidisciplinary teams and an ability to diagnose autism when compared to those with less training. Brief rating scales were among the most commonly used instruments, while more comprehensive and robust instruments were among the least-often employed, suggesting school psychologists are either not trained or are limited in the time and resources needed to use evidence-based instruments. Participants felt more prepared to provide consultation and assessment services and less prepared to provide interventions. Although a majority (96.5%) of the respondents reported they had attended workshop presentations or in-service trainings on autism, less than half (43.7%) had completed formal course work in autism in their training program and less than one third (32.3%) had internship or residency experience with autism. These data and previous research suggest school psychologists need more formal training and experience in meeting the needs of individuals identified with autism.

• Singer (2008) surveyed 199 school psychologists regarding the frequency with which they were called upon to provide services to students with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD); services they actually provided to those students; and their perceptions of the training and experience they had pertaining to the assessment and treatment of ASD. Additionally, the study surveyed 72 graduate programs in school psychology to determine the extent to which these programs prepared new school psychologists to work with children who have ASD. A majority of respondents (64%) reported using only brief screening instruments to identify students. Although able to identify the “red flag” indicators of ASD, very few school psychologists perceived their training as adequate. Only 12.6 % of respondents indicated that they had sufficient coursework in ASD and only 21% indicated that they had sufficient practicum experience. Just 15% indicated that their overall training with ASD was “completely adequate.” Only 5 of the 72 (16.9%) school psychology programs surveyed offered a specific course in ASD; most indicating that the topic was addressed in other courses. According to the author, the survey data suggest that school psychologists lack adequate knowledge about evidence-based instruments and procedures available to screen, assess, and intervene for ASD.

Conclusion and Recommendations

As more and more children are being identified with ASD and placed in general education classrooms, school psychologists will play an ever increasingly important role in identification and intervention, as well as offer support, information, consultation, and recommendations to teachers, school personnel, administration, and families. Therefore, it is essential that they be knowledgeable about evidence-based assessment and intervention strategies for this population of students. Despite the limitations inherent in survey research, the data from these studies suggest that school psychologists are not adequately prepared to provide evidence-based assessment and intervention services to children with ASD. The survey research illustrates a significant discrepancy between best practice (evidence-based) parameters and reality when it comes to the practice of school psychology and ASD in the schools. Federal statutes require that school districts ensure that comprehensive, individualized evaluations are completed by school professionals who have knowledge, experience, and expertise in ASD. Although surveys indicate sufficient knowledge of the signs and symptoms associated with ASD, there is a critical need for school psychologists to be trained and develop competency in evidence-based assessment and identification practices with children who have or may have an ASD. For example, a majority of survey respondents reported using brief screening measures such the GARS and/or GADS in assessment and identification, both of which are not recommended for use in decision-making (Brock, 2004; Norris, M., & Lecavalier, 2010; Pandolfi, Magyar & Dill, 2010; Wilkinson, 2010). In contrast, evidence-based tools such as the ADOS, ADI-R, CARS, and SCQ were used less a third of the time in ASD assessment. Thus, while evidence-based instruments are available for the reliable, thorough assessment of students with ASD, school psychologists either do not have access or lack sufficient training to make them a part of their practice in the schools.

Because the knowledge base in ASD is changing so rapidly, it is imperative that school psychologists remain current with the research and up to date on scientifically supported approaches that have direct application to the educational setting. School psychologists can help to ensure that students with ASD receive an effective educational program by participating in training programs designed to increase their understanding and factual knowledge about best practice assessment and intervention /treatment approaches. Recommendations culled from the survey findings include the following: (a) school psychologists need more in-depth, formal training complete with supervision and consultation; (b) school psychology training programs should focus more energy on teaching intervention strategies for students with autism and include a separate course in ASD as part of the curriculum; (c) increase the use of more psychometrically sound autism instruments such as the ADOS and ADI-R in schools to provide better identification and more complete intervention strategies; (d) consider resident ASD specialists within the school and train teams of school professionals to work as a unit with the autism-related cases to ensure that the personnel are well-trained and have the experience necessary to conduct reliable and valid assessments and treatment planning; (e) provide training for all school psychologists on best practice guidelines for screening and assessment of ASD and identify measures with and without empirical support; and (g) develop closer relationships with ASD experts and service providers in the community. School districts may also want to consider levels of training, levels of education, and years of experience when assigning school psychologists who work with children who have ASD. Finally, the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) may consider developing guidelines and recommendations regarding the minimal competencies needed in order to work with special populations such as students with ASD.

Aiello, R., & Ruble, L. A. (2011, February). Survey of school psychologists’ autism knowledge, training, and experiences. Poster presented at the annual convention of the National Association of School Psychologists, San Francisco, CA.

Brock, S. E. (2004). The identification of autism spectrum disorders: A primer for the school psychologist. California State University, Sacramento, College of Education, Department of Special education, Rehabilitation, and School Psychology.

Norris, M., & Lecavalier, L. (2010). Screening accuracy of level 2 autism spectrum disorder rating scales: A review of selected instruments. Autism, 14, 263-284.

Pandolfi V., Magyar C. I., & Dill C. A. (2010). Constructs assessed by the GARS-2: factor analysis of data from the standardization sample. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 40, 1118-30.

Rasmussen, J. E. (2009). Autism: Assessment and intervention practices of school psychologists and the implications for training in the united states. Ball State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 192. UMI Number: 3379197

Wilkinson, L. A. (2010). A best practice guide to assessment and intervention for autism and Asperger syndrome in schools. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, CCBT, NCSP is author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Dr. Wilkinson can be reached at http://bestpracticeautism.com

SUGGESTED LINKS

• The School Psychologist's Guide to Autism
• What is the Best Practice Assessment for Children with Autism?
• What Do School Personnel Know About Autism?
• Evidence-Based Practice and Autism in the Schools
• Educating Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD)

• Report this content

School-Based Assessment of ASD: Best Practice Guidelines - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

School-Based Assessment of ASD: Best Practice Guidelines - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

There has been a dramatic worldwide increase in reported cases of autism over the past decade. The prevalence rates have risen steadily, from one in 150, to one in 110, and now to one in every 88 children. This represents a 78 percent increase in the number of children identified with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) over the past decade. Yet, compared to population estimates, identification rates have not kept pace in our schools. It is not unusual for children with less severe symptoms of ASD to go unidentified until well after entering school. As a result, it is critical that school-based educational support personnel (e.g., special educators, school counselors, speech/language pathologists, social workers, and school psychologists) give greater priority to case finding, screening, and assessment to ensure that children with ASD are identified and have access to the appropriate intervention services.

The primary goals of conducting an autism spectrum assessment are to determine the presence and severity of an ASD, develop interventions for intervention/treatment planning, and collect data that will help with progress monitoring. Professionals must also determine whether an ASD has been overlooked or misclassified, describe coexisting (comorbid) disorders, or identify an alternative classification. Interviews and observation schedules, together with an interdisciplinary assessment of social behavior, language and communication, adaptive behavior, motor skills, sensory issues, atypical behaviors, and cognitive functioning are recommended best practice procedures.

There are several important considerations that should inform the assessment process. First, a developmental perspective is critically important. While the core symptoms of are present during early childhood, ASD is a lifelong disability that affects the individual’s adaptive functioning from childhood through adulthood. Utilizing a developmental assessment framework provides a yardstick for understanding the severity and quality of delays or atypicality. Because ASD affects multiple developmental domains, the use of an interdisciplinary team constitutes best practice for assessment and diagnosis of ASD. A team approach is essential for establishing a developmental and psychosocial profile of the child in order to guide intervention planning. The following principles should guide the assessment process.

• Children who screen positive for ASD should be referred for a comprehensive assessment. Although screening tools have utility in broadly identifying children who are at-risk for an autism spectrum condition, they are not recommended as stand alone diagnostic instruments or as a substitute for a more inclusive assessment.
• Assessment should involve careful attention to the signs and symptoms consistent with ASD as well as other coexisting childhood disorders.
• When a student is suspected of having an ASD, a review of his or her developmental history in areas such as speech, communication, social and play skills is an important first step in the assessment process.
• A family medical history and review of psychosocial factors that may play a role in the child’s development is a significant component of the assessment process.
• The integration of information from multiple sources will strengthen the reliability of the assessment results.
• Evaluation of academic achievement should be included in assessment and intervention planning to address learning and behavioral concerns in the child’s overall school functioning.
• Assessment procedures should be designed to assist in the development of instructional objectives and intervention strategies based on the student’s unique pattern of strengths and weaknesses.
• Because impairment in communication and social reciprocity are core features of ASD, a comprehensive developmental assessment should include both domains.

A comprehensive developmental assessment approach requires the use of multiple measures including, but not limited to, verbal reports, direct observation, direct interaction and evaluation, and third-party reports. Assessment is a continuous process, rather than a series of separate actions, and procedures may overlap and take place in tandem. While specific activities of the assessment process will vary and depend on the child’s age, history, referral questions, and any previous evaluations and assessments, the following components should be included in a best practice assessment and evaluation of ASD in school-age children.

• Record review
• Developmental and medical history
• Medical screening and/or evaluation
• Parent/caregiver interview
• Parent/teacher ratings of social competence
• Direct child observation
• Cognitive assessment
• Academic assessment
• Adaptive behavior assessment
• Communication and language assessment

Children with ASD often demonstrate additional problems beyond those associated with the core domains. Therefore, other areas should be included in the assessment battery depending on the referral question, history, and core evaluation results. These may include:

• Sensory processing
• Executive function and attention
• Motor skills
• Family system
• Coexisting behavioral/emotional problems

The above referenced principles and procedures for the assessment of school-age children with ASD are reflected in recommendations of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,American Academy of Pediatrics, and a consensus panel with representation from multiple professional societies. A detailed description of the comprehensive developmental assessment model and specific assessment tools recommended for each domain can be found in A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools.

© Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, CCBT, NCSP is author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

SUGGESTED LINKS

• Autism Guide is a "Gold Standard" Resource
• Award-Winning Autism Resource Guide: Read It On Kindle!
• Autism Continuing Education and Training
• Book Review: Autism and Asperger's in Schools
• Autism Spectrum Disorder in Schools – New CE Course Includes DSM-5 Changes

Legal and Appropriate Educational Programs for Children with Autism - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

Legal and Appropriate Educational Programs for Children with Autism - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

More children than ever before are being diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now estimates that 1 in 68 eight year-old children has an ASD. This dramatic increase in the prevalence of children with ASD over the past decade, together with the clear benefits of early intervention, have created a need for schools to identify children who may have an autism spectrum condition. It is not unusual for children with milder forms of autism to go undiagnosed until well after entering school. In fact, research indicates that only three percent of children with ASD are identified solely by non-school resources. As a result, school professionals are now more likely to be asked to participate in the screening and identification of children with ASD than at any other time in the past.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) are the two major systems used to diagnose and classify children with ASD. The DSM-5 is considered the primary authority in the fields of psychiatric and psychological (clinical) diagnoses, while IDEA is the authority with regard to eligibility decisions for special education. The DSM-IV was developed by clinicians as a diagnostic and classification system for both childhood and adult psychiatric disorders. The IDEA is not a diagnostic system per se, but rather federal legislation designed to ensure the appropriate education of children with special educational needs in our public schools. Unlike the DSM-5, IDEA specifies categories of ‘‘disabilities’’ to determine eligibility for special educational services. The definitions of these categories (there are 13), including autism, are the most widely used classification system in our schools. According to IDEA regulations, the definition of autism is as follows:

(c)(1)(i) Autism means a developmental disability significantly affecting verbal and nonverbal communication and social interaction, generally evident before age 3, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance. Other characteristics often associated with autism are engagement in repetitive activities and stereotyped movements, resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines, and unusual responses to sensory experiences. The term does not apply if a child’s educational performance is adversely affected primarily because the child has an emotional disturbance, as defined in this section.

(ii) A child who manifests the characteristics of ‘‘autism’’ after age 3 could be diagnosed as having ‘‘autism’’ if the criteria in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section are satisfied.

This educational definition is considered sufficiently broad and operationally acceptable to accommodate both the clinical and educational descriptions of autism and related disorders. While the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria are professionally helpful, they are neither legally required nor sufficient for determining educational placement. It is state and federal education codes and regulations (not DSM-5) that drive classification and eligibility decisions. Thus, school professionals must ensure that children meet the criteria for autism as outlined by IDEA and may use the DSM-5 to the extent that the diagnostic criteria include the same core behaviors (e.g., difficulties with social interaction, difficulties with communication, and the frequent exhibition of repetitive behaviors or circumscribed interests). Of course, all professionals, whether clinical or school, should have the appropriate training and background related to the diagnosis and treatment of neurodevelopmental disorders. The identification of autism should be made by a professional team using multiple sources of information, including, but not limited to an interdisciplinary assessment of social behavior, language and communication, adaptive behavior, motor skills, sensory issues, and cognitive functioning to help with intervention planning and determining eligibility for special educational services.

Legal and special education experts recommend the following guidelines to help school districts meet the requirements for providing legally and educationally appropriate programs and services to students with ASD.

1. School districts should ensure that the IEP process follows the procedural requirements of IDEA. This includes actively involving parents in the IEP process and adhering to the time frame requirements for assessment and developing and implementing the student’s IEP. Moreover, parents must be notified of their due process rights. It’s important to recognize that parent-professional communication and collaboration are key components for making educational and program decisions.

2. School districts should make certain that comprehensive, individualized evaluations are completed by school professionals who have knowledge, experience, and expertise in ASD. If qualified personnel are not available, school districts should provide the appropriate training or retain the services of a consultant.

3. School districts should develop IEPs based on the child’s unique pattern of strengths and weaknesses. Goals for a child with ASD commonly include the areas of communication, social behavior, adaptive skills, challenging behavior, and academic and functional skills. The IEP must address appropriate instructional and curricular modifications, together with related services such as counseling, occupational therapy, speech/language therapy, physical therapy and transportation needs. Evidence-based instructional strategies should also be adopted to ensure that the IEP is implemented appropriately.

4. School districts should assure that progress monitoring of students with ASD is completed at specified intervals by an interdisciplinary team of professionals who have a knowledge base and experience in autism. This includes collecting evidence-based data to document progress towards achieving IEP goals and to assess program effectiveness.

5. School districts should make every effort to place students in integrated settings to maximize interaction with non-disabled peers. Inclusion with typically developing students is important for a child with ASD as peers provide the best models for language and social skills. However, inclusive education alone is insufficient, evidence-based intervention and training is also necessary to address specific skill deficits. Although the least restrictive environment (LRE) provision of IDEA requires that efforts be made to educate students with special needs in less restrictive settings, IDEA also recognizes that some students may require a more comprehensive program to provide FAPE.

6. School districts should provide on-going training and education in ASD for both parents and professionals. Professionals who are trained in specific methodology and techniques will be most effective in providing the appropriate services and in modifying curriculum based upon the unique needs of the individual child.

References and Further Reading

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. Pub. L. No. 108-446, 108th Congress, 2nd Session. (2004).

Mandlawitz, M. R. (2002). The impact of the legal system on educational programming for young children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32, 495-508.

National Research Council (2001). Educating children with autism. Committee on Educational Interventions for Children with Autism. C. Lord & J. P. McGee (Eds). Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Twachtman-Cullen, D., & Twachtman-Bassett, J. (2011). The IEP from A to Z: How to create meaningful and measurable goals and objectives. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Wilkinson, L. A. (2010). Best practice in special needs education. In L. A. Wilkinson, A best practice guide to assessment and intervention for autism and Asperger syndrome in schools (pp. 127-146). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition (2007).

Yell, M. L., Katsiyannis, A, Drasgow, E, & Herbst, M. (2003). Developing legally correct and educationally appropriate programs for students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18, 182-191.

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, CCBT, NCSP is author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. He is also editor of a new Volume in the APA School Psychology Book Series, Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention in Schools.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

SUGGESTED LINKS

• Preparing Teachers for Students with Autism
• School Psychologists Need More Training in Autism
• What Do Teachers Know About Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)?
• Autism and Inclusive Education
• Positive Behavior Support (PBS) Strategies for ASD

Study Calls for Improved State Definitions of Autism and Evaluation Procedures - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

Study Calls for Improved State Definitions of Autism and Evaluation Procedures - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

The dramatic increase in the number of students qualifying for special education under autism in our schools may have been caused, in part, by vague definitions together with ambiguous, variable, and irrelevant evaluation procedures, according to a study published in the open access journal, Autism Research and Treatment. The study examined the definition of autism published by each state education agency (SEA) and the District of Columbia, as well as SEA-indicated evaluation procedures for determining student qualification for autism. The researchers compared components of each SEA definition to aspects of autism from two authoritative sources: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA-2004). They also compared SEA-indicated evaluation procedures across SEAs to evaluation procedures noted in IDEA-2004.

The results indicated that many more SEA definitions incorporate IDEA-2004 features than DSM-IV-TR features. However, despite similar foundations, SEA definitions of autism displayed considerable variability. Many of the definitions were too vague to be of much use. Evaluation procedures were found to vary even more across SEAs. There often was little concordance between the definition (what autism is) and evaluation procedures (how autism is recognized). Definition components often were not addressed by evaluation features, even in a cursory way. One of the least recommended evaluation features was the requirement to administer an autism-specific evaluation as part of the eligibility process. Of the SEAs that included an autism assessment in the evaluation process, none specified the use of a recognized instrument such as the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) or the Childhood Autism Rating Scales (CARS). Although several of these SEAs did indicate the required use of a state-created autism checklist, none gave any reference to a source or psychometric characteristics of those checklists

Recommendations for state and federal policy changes are discussed. For example, the researchers suggest that the publication of DSM-5 provides SEAs with the opportunity to expand and update their current definition of autism. They note that the DSM-5 criteria encompass all of the elements stated by the current IDEA definition with the exception of allowing for the coexistence of potential emotional disorders. The DSM-5 also recognizes the salience of sensory processing problems and the possibility of coexisting (comorbid) mental health disorders. The study recommends that SEAs consider elements of DSM-5 autism spectrum disorders as they consider revisions to their state definition of autism and corresponding procedures by which assessors will provide data for eligibility determination. Likewise, IDEA-2004 is overdue for Congressional reconsideration and possible amendment, so there is an opportunity to also update and clarify the federal educational definition of autism. Improved, more specific definitions and evaluation procedures will enable SEAs and school districts to better serve students with autism and better allocate resources.

Malinda L. Pennington, Douglas Cullinan, and Louise B. Southern, “Defining Autism: Variability in State Education Agency Definitions of and Evaluations for Autism Spectrum Disorders,” Autism Research and Treatment, vol. 2014, Article ID 327271, 8 pages, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/327271

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, CCBT, NCSP is author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. He is also editor of a text in the APA School Psychology Book Series, Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention in Schools and author of the soon to be released book, Overcoming Anxiety and Depression on the Autism Spectrum: A Self-Help Guide Using CBT.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

Supreme Court Seeks Input On IDEA Case - Disability Scoop

Supreme Court Seeks Input On IDEA Case - Disability Scoop

The U.S. Supreme Court is asking the Obama administration to weigh in on a case involving who should pay for private school tuition while special education disputes are litigated.

The high court asked the U.S. solicitor general on Monday to provide an opinion on a case known as Ridley School District v. M.R. which centers on the “stay-put” provision of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Under the law, school districts must pay for students to remain in their existing educational placements while special education disputes between parents and schools are sorted out.

However, the Ridley School District in suburban Philadelphia — joined by a handful of education groups — is arguing that a district’s obligation to pay for a private placement should end once a court rules in the schools’ favor, no matter if a child’s parents continue to pursue their claims.

The issue arose in the case of a child known as E.R. in court papers. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia decided earlier this year that the Ridley School District remains responsible for private school tuition for E.R. while the child’s family continues to appeal their dispute even though a lower court found in favor of the district.

The Ridley School District was joined this summer by the National Association of State Directors of Special Education, the National School Boards Association and the Pennsylvania School Boards Association in asking the Supreme Court to take up the issue.

Rather than accept or decline the case, however, the Supreme Court signaled on the first day of its new term that it will seek input from the nation’s solicitor general before determining whether or not to consider the “stay-put” provision