Education for Pupils with Autism Spectrum DisordersEducation for Pupils with Autism Spectrum Disorders highlights the variety of provision and arrangements for meeting the needs of

Education for Pupils withAutism Spectrum Disorders

PHOTO REDACTED DUE TO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS OR OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

Education for Pupils withAutism Spectrum Disorders

EDUCATION FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS

ii

© Crown copyright 2006

ISBN: 0 7053 1105 8

HM Inspectorate of EducationDenholm HouseAlmondvale Business ParkAlmondvale WayLivingstonEH54 6GA

Produced for HMIE by Astron B48923 10/06

Published by HMIE, October, 2006

This material may be copied without further permission by education authoritiesand education institutions in Scotland for use in school self-evaluation and planning.

The report may be produced in part, except for commercial purposes, or in connectionwith a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.

FOREWORD

In the introduction to Count Us In, I said that themost effective schools were those which valuedeach child as an individual. Meeting the needs ofindividual children is the key purpose of anyeducational organisation, whether it is an earlyyears centre, a school or a service providingoutreach provision for pupils in a range of settings.We know also from HMIE’s Missing Out report thatthe group of pupils with individualised educationalprogrammes, which includes most children withautism spectrum disorders, is at risk of missing outon educational opportunities.

Autism spectrum disorders, as the name suggests,do not represent a single nor straightforward set ofneeds to be met. The challenges facing educationand other professionals, and the young peoplewhose needs are being addressed, are considerable.The key is to see past the presenting issues, oftenbehavioural in nature, to the communicationdisorders beyond that and to find what works foreach individual concerned. This report is about theextent to which the needs of pupils with autismspectrum disorders are being met across a range ofeducational establishments and services. Itevaluates the progress pupils make in their learningand the extent to which they achieve to their fullestpotential within the various forms of provision.

Education for Pupils with Autism Spectrum Disordershighlights the variety of provision andarrangements for meeting the needs of pupils withASD. Across the various forms of provision, the taskgroup found that most pupils were making goodprogress towards the targets in their individualisededucational programmes. However, theseprogrammes were frequently deficient in either theattention given to addressing the underlying ASDneeds or conversely in addressing achievementacross the curriculum. Also, in many cases, theprogress of pupils was not tracked systematically,with the result that schools and authorities did nothave sufficiently detailed information about the

achievement of pupils with ASD. In addition,parents were not always kept fully informed aboutthe range of provision available for their children.Training for all staff involved in the education ofpupils with ASD was also a key area fordevelopment. We need to do better in thesehighlighted aspects. It is important to get themright because if things go wrong, they can haveserious consequences.

This report was produced in response to therequest of the Scottish Ministers that HMInspectorate of Education (HMIE) carry out a task toevaluate and report on the educational provisionfor pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). As part of that task, HMIE was charged withidentifying good practice and makingrecommendations for moving forward.

As part of their evaluative activity, HMIEcommissioned the National Centre for AutismStudies to produce a literature review relating toASD. The literature review provides background toASD and includes information about the range ofapproaches used to teach children with thiscondition. It is published as Appendix 3 of thisreport and can be downloaded from the HMIEwebsite, www.hmie.gov.uk.

Ensuring that all pupils succeed is a fundamentalaim of Scottish education and essential to theachievement of excellence for all. I commend thisreport to you as an important contribution to ourunderstanding of autism spectrum disorders andthe extent to which the needs of pupils with theseconditions are currently being met.

Graham DonaldsonHM Senior Chief InspectorOctober 2006

iii


iv

CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction 1

2. Conclusion 3

3. Task methodology 4

4. What are autism spectrum disorders? 6

5. Provision for pupils with autism spectrum disorders 8

6. Approaches used to teach pupils with autism spectrum disorders 13

7. What outcomes have schools achieved for pupils with autism spectrum disorders? 15

8. How well do schools meet the needs of learners and their families? 18

9. How good is the management of provision for pupils with autism spectrum disorders? 24

10. How good is the leadership of provision for pupils with autism spectrum disorders? 29

11. Summary of recommendations 30

Appendix 1: Glossary 31

Appendix 2: Membership of the Advisory Group 35

Appendix 3: Literature review (available on www.hmie.gov.uk ) 36

v

CONTENTS


vi

Introduction

1. INTRODUCTION

At the request of Scottish Ministers, Her Majesty’sInspectorate of Education (HMIE) carried out a taskto evaluate and report on the educational provisionfor pupils1 with autism spectrum disorders (ASD2)in Scotland. The remit for the task was to:

• identify and report on the range of educationalprovision for pupils with ASD, including otherspecialist and mainstream services such as speechand language therapy services, where theseimpinge on education;

• evaluate provision;

• identify and report on good practice; and

• make recommendations for moving forward.

An advisory group3 commented on the work of thetask as it developed. The remit for the group ofexpert professionals and stakeholders was to:

• advise HMIE during the planning andimplementation of the review of educationalprovision for children and young people withASD in Scotland;

• assist in the process of identifying key areas thatshould be investigated;

• comment on proposed arrangements forundertaking the task and emerging findings;

• draw the attention of the task team to relevantsources of evidence, material and expertise asappropriate; and

• comment on the draft conclusions andrecommendations of the review.

Legislative background

The Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc Act 2000

This Act places duties upon local authorities toensure that schools meet the needs of all theirpupils and encourage them to achieve their fullpotential, and to raise educational standards.

The Education (Additional Support for Learning)(Scotland) Act, 2004

This Act (known as the ASL Act) requires educationauthorities to replace the system for assessment andrecording of children and young people with specialeducational needs with a new framework aroundadditional support needs. The Act defines additionalsupport needs more broadly than special educationalneeds. The Act extends the duties of local authoritiestowards pupils, as outlined in the Standards inScotland’s Schools Act, to individual pupils. Childrenare defined as having additional support needs underthe terms of the ASL Act if they require additionalsupport to that which might normally be provided ina school to ensure that they make good progress intheir learning. Schools have a key role to play inmaximising the potential, raising the achievementand addressing the learning needs of all learners. Atthe commencement of the Act4, Records of Needscould no longer be opened. Advice for schools andeducation authorities on implementing the terms ofthe Act are contained in Supporting children’slearning: code of practice (2005)5.

The framework for the task

The aim of the task was to evaluate provision forpupils with ASD and to determine how well theneeds of individual pupils with ASD were being met.To carry out the task, HMIE made reference to theevaluative framework set out in How good is ourschool?.6 This framework, used in all schoolinspections, contains a set of generic qualityindicators which are used to evaluate the quality ofeducation. To the generic evaluative framework, thetask team brought extensive knowledge of ASD andexperience of working with pupils with ASD. Theliterature review added to the collective knowledge ofthe team. In this way, the task team was able to applyan ASD specific ‘lens’ to the generic framework.

1

1 The term ‘pupil’, for the purposes of this report, includes children under the age of five who attend pre-school provision.2 Autism spectrum disorders. Appendix 1: Glossary contains definitions of this and other terms used in this report.3 Appendix 2: membership of the advisory group.4 The Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 was commenced on 15th November 2005. From the date of commencement, the

concept of ‘special educational needs’ as defined in the Education (Scotland) Act, 1980 ceased to exist. The new act introduced the wider concept of‘additional support needs’.

5 supporting children’s learning: code of practice, Scottish Executive, 20056 How good is our school?: Self evaluation using quality indicators, HMIE, 2002 edition

The evaluative framework for the task consisted of aselection of quality indicators from How good is ourschool?. The task team organised these indicatorsunder a set of high level questions which areincreasingly being used by HMIE and otherinspection bodies throughout Scotland as aframework to evaluate quality:

• What outcomes have we achieved?

• How well do we meet the needs of learners andtheir families?

• How good is the education we provide?

• How good is our management?

• How good is our leadership?

These questions are used later in this report asorganisers to set out the findings of the task.

Evaluation instruments and interview scheduleswere developed for the task. These were based onHMIE inspection models and informed by theliterature review and the knowledge and expertiseof the task team. They are available on the HMIEwebsite: www.hmie.gov.uk.

Description of evaluative terms used in thisreport

Throughout this report the six-point scale from How good is our school? (updated version, 2005) isused to describe evaluations:

level 6 excellent - outstanding, sector-leading

level 5 very good - major strengths

level 4 good - important strengths with areas forimprovement

level 3 adequate - strengths just outweighweaknesses

level 2 weak - important weaknesses

level 1 unsatisfactory - major weaknesses.

The following words are used to describe numbersand proportions throughout the report:

almost all over 90%

most 75–90%

majority 50–74%

less than half 15–49%

few up to 15%.


2

Conclusion

2. CONCLUSION

HM Inspectors found much good practice inrelation to the work of education authorities andschool and other professional practice thatsupported pupils with autism spectrum disorders.Pupils’ achievements were often good in relation tothe targets set for them. Nevertheless, considerablechallenges remain for authorities, schools andpartner agencies. Gaps in strategy at educationauthority level need to be examined and addressed.More attention needs to be paid to whatapproaches to learning and teaching work for thisgroup of young people and less to analysis of thekind of provision. Targets set out in individualisededucational programmes need to have appropriatebreadth and level of challenge. Above all, thosewith responsibility for delivering services to pupilswith autism spectrum disorders should ensureconsistency in the quality of services provided. Thisis a challenging agenda since each individual youngperson affected will need a support package fit forpurpose and aimed specifically at addressing theirindividual needs.

This task carried out by HMIE found that educationauthorities across Scotland have a variety ofprovision and arrangements to meet the needs ofpupils with autism spectrum disorders. In the bestexamples, provision ranged from integration intomainstream primary and secondary schools toplacement in special schools. However, educationauthorities often did not share with parentsinformation about the provision for autismspectrum disorders available to them. In somecases, provision was developed in response topressing and immediate need rather thanproactively as part of a wider strategy to support allpupils who have additional support needs.

Staff training and continual professionaldevelopment play a crucial role in the ability ofeach school to meet pupils’ individual learningneeds, particularly in an area in which pupils oftenpresent challenging behaviour and apparently poorattitudes to learning. Teachers and support staffshould be provided with high quality training toenable them to meet the needs of pupils withautism spectrum disorders and to ensure that thesepupils do not miss out on the educationalopportunities they deserve.

3

HMIE carried out the task between January 2005and March 2006. The task consisted of twoseparate phases.

The first phase of the task was carried out betweenJanuary and March 2005. It involved two aspects.

1) A literature review relating to ASD7.The National Centre for Autism Studies wascommissioned to produce this up-to-dateliterature review of ASD as a background tothe task. The literature review providesinformation about the background to ASD, itscauses and diagnosis. The review includesinformation from the United Kingdom andfrom international studies about the range ofapproaches used to teach children with ASD,and the extent to which each approach isused. The review includes a collation of thepublished evidence of the effectiveness of thevarious approaches.

2) An analysis of a questionnaire which wasissued to all education authorities (EAs) inScotland.Each EA was asked to provide informationabout the number of children with ASD intheir authority and the provision which wasmade for ASD. The questionnaire also askedfor information about provision for stafftraining.

The second phase of the task took place from April2005 to March 2006. During this phase, a taskteam was deployed to visit a sample of EAs. Theteam consisted of HM Inspectors with particularqualifications and knowledge of children withadditional support needs and ASD, and secondedteam members including a speech and languagetherapist, a social work services manager, a deputeheadteacher of a large unit for pupils with ASD andan educational psychologist. The task team madevisits to six EAs throughout Scotland to interview

key staff and to evaluate practice. The six whichwere selected (Fife, Glasgow, North Lanarkshire,Scottish Borders, South Ayrshire and Shetland Isles)provided a representative sample across Scotlandand a balance between large and small, and urbanand rural authorities. In addition to visiting the EAs,the task team also visited independent, residentialprovision at Daldorch School (managed by theNational Autistic Society) and New Struan School(managed by the Scottish Society for Autism).

During each of the visits to an EA, the task teamcarried out a similar set of activities. Theyinterviewed:

• education officers with responsibilities for pupilswith additional support needs;

• educational psychologists;

• social work officers with responsibilities foradditional support needs and disability;

• a manager of speech and language services;

• a focus group of headteachers; and

• a group of parents of children who had ASD8.

The task team visited around six schools9 withineach authority. The number and type of schoolsvisited varied depending on the size of theauthority, the number of pupils with ASD and howthe EA had organised its provision. In almost allEAs, the team visited pre-school centres, or nurseryclasses, primary schools, a secondary school, aspecial school or, where appropriate, units forpupils with ASD which were located withmainstream schools. The team carried out a similarset of activities on the visits to Daldorch School andNew Struan School. Visits to schools weresupplemented by inspections undertaken withinHMIE’s general programme. Schools for pupils withASD which were inspected as part of the generalinspection programme during 2005-2006 wereincluded in the data set for this task.


3. TASK METHODOLOGY

4

7 Appendix 3: Literature Review is available on the HMIE website: www.hmie.gov.uk8 The groups of parents were selected by officers from the authorities. A number of other parents also contacted HMIE independently to provide more personal

views of provision for their children.9 Throughout this document the term ‘schools’ is taken to mean pre-school centres, special schools, primary schools and secondary schools.

TASK METHODOLOGY

Total number of schools visited for the task

Pre-school centres and nursery classes 5

Primary schools 14

Secondary schools 10

Special schools and units attached to 3 (schools)mainstream schools (schools) 8 (units)

National centres for autism 2

In each school the team:

• interviewed the headteacher;

• interviewed teachers and support staff;

• observed learning and teaching;

• interviewed a speech and language therapist;

• where appropriate, interviewed pupils; and

• where it was possible, met with individualparents.

5

“Autism is a severe disorder of communication,socialisation and flexibility in thinking andbehaviour, which involves a different way ofprocessing information and of seeing the world.”10

In 1943, Kanner11 coined the term ‘early infantileautism’ to describe children with unusual behaviourpatterns that had been present from earlychildhood. His original paper gave detaileddescriptions highlighting extreme autism,obsessiveness, good relationships with objects, adesire for sameness, stereotypy and echolalia.Around the same time, Asperger12 published hisoriginal paper in which he described four slightlyolder and very intellectually able individuals. In hissummary of the typical features of the group,Asperger writes about the children’s appearance;their distinct intellectual functioning including theirlearning difficulties and attention problems; theirproblematic behaviour in social situations; and theimpairment of their emotions and instincts. Thesebehaviour patterns differed from, but alsooverlapped with those of Kanner’s autism group.

Typically, autism spectrum disorders arecharacterised by a ‘triad of impairments’13

identified by Wing and Gould in 1979. The triadrepresents three broad and interacting aspects ofASD, all of which will be inconsistent with thepresenting individual’s chronological age. Thefollowing, by Jordan, is an adaptation of the triad.

Prevalence of autism spectrum disorders

From the most recent and most rigorous studies,the most accurate overall population estimateavailable for the prevalence of ASD in children isapproximately 60 per 10,000 children (0.6%).However, findings about the sub-groupings withinthis differ and variations in prevalence may exist ata local level.14

The following set of charts and tables presents asynopsis of the information provided by educationauthorities in response to the HMIE questionnaire.The questionnaire asked each education authorityabout their provision for pupils with ASD. Thecharts and tables cover the range of provision inauthorities and the numbers of children supported,along with the types of specialist educationtherapies used to meet the needs of pupils withASD.


4. WHAT ARE AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

6

The triad of impairments

Social

Impaired, deviant and delayed or atypical socialdevelopment, especially interpersonaldevelopment. The variation may be from ‘autisticaloofness’ to ‘active but odd’ characteristics.

Language and communication

Impaired and deviant language andcommunication, verbal and non-verbal. Deviantsemantic and pragmatic aspects of language.

Thought and behaviour

Rigidity of thought and behaviour andimpoverished social imagination. Ritualisticbehaviour, reliance on routines, extreme delay orabsence of ‘pretend play’.

10 Jordan, R. (1999) The Nature and Definition of Autism. In: Autistic Spectrum Disorders: An introductory handbook for practitioners. London: David FultonPublishers Ltd.

11 Kanner, L. (1943) Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217-250.12 Asperger, H. (1944) ‘Autistic psychopathy’ in childhood. In U. Frith (ed) (pp.37-92) Autism and Asperger syndrome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.13 Wing, L. & Gould, J. (1979) Severe impairments of social interaction and associated abnormalities in children: epidemiology and classification. Journal of Autism

and Developmental Disorders, 9, pp.11-29.14 Public Health in Scotland Autistic; Spectrum Disorders Needs Assessment Report, NHSScotland, 2001.

WHAT ARE AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

There is no simple relationship between the numberof pupils in each authority and the number identifiedwith ASD. Chart 1 shows the total pupil populationin each education authority. Chart 2 shows thenumbers of pupils with ASD, as reported by each EA,as a percentage of the total school population withineach authority. Throughout the country, education

authorities use different criteria to determine thosechildren and young people for whom they will makeprovision. Some authorities make provision for thosewho have a formal medical diagnosis of ASD. Othersmake provision for all learners who displaycharacteristics of ASD whether or not this issupported by a formal medical diagnosis.

Total pupil population by EA (Scottish Executive, 2003 figures)

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

Abe

rdee

nC

ity

Abe

rdee

nshi

re

Ang

s

Arg

yll&

Bute

Cla

ckm

anna

nshi

re

Dum

frie

s&

Gal

low

ay

Dun

dee

City

East

Ayr

shire

East

Dun

bart

onsh

ire

East

Loth

ian

East

Renf

rew

shire

Edin

burg

h,C

ityof

Eile

anSi

ar

Falk

irk Fife

Gla

sgow

City

Hig

hlan

d

Inve

rcly

de

Mid

loth

ian

Mor

ay

Nor

thA

yrsh

ire

Nor

thLa

nark

shire

Ork

ney

Isla

nds

Pert

h&

Kinr

oss

Renf

rew

shire

Scot

tish

Bord

ers

Shet

land

Isla

nds

Sout

hA

yrsh

ire

Sout

hLa

nark

shire

Stirl

ing

Wes

tD

unba

rton

shire

Wes

tLo

thia

n

Chart 1

Pupils with autumn spectrum disorders as a percentage of total pupil population

Abe

rdee

nC

ity

Abe

rdee

nshi

re

Ang

s

Arg

yll&

Bute

Cla

ckm

anna

nshi

re

Dum

frie

s&

Gal

low

ay

Dun

dee

City

East

Ayr

shire

East

Dun

bart

onsh

ire

East

Loth

ian

East

Renf

rew

shire

Edin

burg

h,C

ityof

Eile

anSi

ar

Falk

irk Fife

Gla

sgow

City

Hig

hlan

d

Inve

rcly

de

Mid

loth

ian

Mor

ay

Nor

thA

yrsh

ire

Nor

thLa

nark

shire

Ork

ney

Isla

nds

Pert

h&

Kinr

oss

Renf

rew

shire

Scot

tish

Bord

ers

Shet

land

Isla

nds

Sout

hA

yrsh

ire

Sout

hLa

nark

shire

Stirl

ing

Wes

tD

unba

rton

shire

Wes

tLo

thia

n

Chart 2

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

7

Specialist pre-school provision

Half of all authorities made specialist provision forpre-school children with ASD and almost all offeredsome support within their overall provision forchildren with a range of additional support needs.Some authorities were developing pre-schoolprovision which aimed to ensure early identificationof ASD and other learning difficulties through inter-agency working, and to provide related support forchildren and their families. In the best practice,authorities did not limit support to those childrenwith a formal medical diagnosis of ASD. Someauthorities were unclear whether certain childrenhad been diagnosed or not. This was the case inaround 10% of the national total of children inspecialist pre-school provision. Survey results aresummarised in Table 1. (Comprehensive data onthe actual numbers of children with ASD inmainstream nurseries was not gathered in thissurvey.)

Table 1: Provision in pre-school specialist units

Authorities with provision 17

Number of children supported 292

Of those supported:

Number of children with diagnosis 155 53%

Number of children without diagnosis 104 37%

Number of children where EAs were 33 10%unclear if they had a diagnosis or not

Provision in primary specialist units

Around 80% of EAs made provision in primaryspecialist units for children with ASD. Some unitscontained ‘communication’ bases which had beenaccredited by the National Autistic Society. Primaryunits in some authorities operated inclusively, withthe children being on the school roll. Around 29%of pupils with ASD in primary schools were inspecialist units, with 67% of these children havingbeen medically diagnosed with ASD. Twoauthorities were unclear about whether or not theremainder had been diagnosed. HMIE’s surveyresults are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2: Provision in primary specialist units



Of those supported:





5. PROVISION FOR PUPILS WITHAUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS

8

This section of the report provides information on different types of provision and the numbers of pupilsserved by these provisions in each EA. The figures reflect the information given to HMIE by each EA.

PROVISION FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS

Provision in secondary specialist units

Just fewer than 60% of EAs made provision inspecialist units for children with ASD in secondaryschools. Some of these units had been accreditedby the National Autistic Society. In most cases, staffaimed to ensure that pupils were included to someextent in mainstream classes, where appropriate.Many pupils with ASD spent more than half of theirtime in mainstream classes and the rest in aspecialist base where they followed a curriculum tomeet their specific needs. For example, in someauthorities, rooms in the units were designed tolimit visual distractions, to eliminate superfluousnoise and to cater for pupils’ various sensitivities.Some secondary schools with specialist units werean integral part of local school cluster arrangementsin which the various agencies worked together toease pupils’ transition from pre-school to primary,and from primary to secondary school. Some 28%of pupils with ASD in secondary schools were inspecialist units. Within these units almost 80% ofthe children had a medical diagnosis. Someauthorities were unclear whether or not theremainder had been diagnosed. Survey results aresummarised in Table 3.

Table 3: Provision in secondary specialist units



Of those supported:




Provision in schools for children with moderatelearning difficulties

Over 40% of authorities made provision forchildren with ASD in schools for children withmoderate learning difficulties. These schoolstypically had ‘autism-friendly’ groups and gaveconsideration to ensuring an appropriateenvironment which included specifically-designedwork areas and distraction-free spaces. Around 80%of children with ASD in these schools had beenmedically diagnosed. One authority was unable toquantify how many children with ASD it had inthese schools. Survey results are summarised inTable 4.

Table 4: Provision in schools for children withmoderate learning difficulties



Of those supported:



9

Provision in schools for children withsevere/complex learning difficulties

Around 75% of authorities made provision forchildren with ASD in schools for children withsevere/complex learning difficulties. Over 25% ofchildren in these schools had not been medicallydiagnosed. One authority was unable to quantifyhow many children with ASD it had in theseschools. Survey results are summarised in Table 5.

Table 5: Provision in schools for children withsevere/complex learning difficulties



Of those supported:



Provision in schools for children withemotional and behavioural difficulties

Over 30% of authorities made provision forchildren with ASD in schools for children withemotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD). Almost50% of children in these schools had not beenmedically diagnosed. Several authorities wereunable to quantify how many children with ASDthey had in these schools. Survey results aresummarised in Table 6. It is likely therefore that thevery small numbers in this table reveal under-reporting and under-diagnosis of pupils with ASDwho attend EBD provision.

Table 6: Provision in schools for children withemotional and behavioural difficulties



Of those supported:




10

PROVISION FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS

Provision in mainstream primary andsecondary schools

All authorities indicated that they made provisionfor children with ASD in mainstream primary andsecondary schools. In some authorities, teachers inthese schools were supported by authority stafffrom a range of agencies and also shared supportas part of a school cluster. In other cases, teams ofteachers with appropriate15 qualifications andexperience supported staff who worked withchildren with ASD in the mainstream sectors. Sucharrangements were typically focused on specificstaff who would support children as they wereidentified or transferred to individual schools. Some71% of pupils with ASD in primary schools were inmainstream classes. Around 20% of primarychildren supported in this way had not beenformally diagnosed and a number of authoritieswere uncertain about whether a diagnosis hadbeen made in 14% of pupils with ASD inmainstream primary schools. Some 72% of pupilswith ASD in secondary schools were in mainstreamclasses. Some 25% of secondary pupils supportedin this way had not been formally diagnosed and anumber of authorities were uncertain aboutwhether a formal medical diagnosis had been madein the case of 12% of pupils with ASD inmainstream secondary schools. Survey results forprovision in mainstream schools are summarised inTable 7.

Table 7: Provision in mainstream primary andsecondary schools

Mainstream sector Primary Secondary

Authorities with provision 32 32

Number of children supported 1836 706

Of those supported:

Number of children with diagnosis 1055 458

Number of children without diagnosis 454 170

Number of children unspecified 327 78

Total children in mainstream 406015 318427

Outreach provision

Almost 60% of authorities indicated that they madeoutreach provision for children with ASD. Someauthorities were uncertain about the numbers ofchildren supported through outreach since thisoften overlapped with other forms of support. Inmany cases, outreach support was provided by aninter-disciplinary team of professionals whosemembers were allocated to individual schools onthe basis of need. These teams were organised in anumber of ways. For example, they could becentralised in an authority or contain members ofstaff from special schools or units. Members of theteam provided support, advice and training to staffin mainstream schools, and also to parents. In somecases, support and development groups were runby psychological services. In one authority, forexample, the outreach team worked initially inconjunction with the Scottish Society for Autism tosupport teachers who worked with specific pupilswith ASD. The team was augmented through theappointment of a development officer. Some 13%of children supported by outreach teams had notbeen formally diagnosed and a number ofauthorities were uncertain about whether adiagnosis had been made in the case of 27% ofpupils. Some authorities were unable to identifywithin the pupils supported by generic teamswhich pupils had ASD and which did not. Surveyresults are summarised in Table 8.

Table 8: Outreach provision



Of those supported:



Number of children unspecified 232 27%

15 A range of certificated training programmes for teachers of pupils with ASD is provided in Scottish Universities and Teacher Education Institutions. TheNational Autistic Society and the Scottish Society for Autism provide a range of professional qualifications. In addition, a number of education authoritiesprovide entry-level training for teachers.

11

Other forms of provision

Most authorities made other types of provision tomeet the needs of children with ASD. Theseincluded, for example, the use of homeprogrammes, residential placements and supportfrom independent organisations such as theNational Autistic Society and the Scottish Societyfor Autism. The numbers of authorities using eachtype of provision and the numbers of childreninvolved are shown in Table 9.

Several authorities used a range of approaches tosupport home programmes. However, in mostcases these approaches supported only a very smallnumber of children and often as a ‘trial’. Theseapproaches included Son-Rise16 and Lovaas17

therapy. Support was generally provided by a homevisiting teacher, supported by multi-disciplinaryteams as appropriate, and focused on both childrenand their families.

Table 9: Other forms of provision

Provision Number Numberof of

authorities children

Home programmes 13 19

Residential 22 165

Independent 11 106

Other 13 160

Outwith authority 20 158

ASD specific 3 93


12

16 Son-Rise programme. See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature review.17 Lovaas method. See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature Review.

Analysis of data from the HMIE questionnaires toeach EA indicated that in a number of casesauthorities held incomplete data about pupils withASD. It is important that each EA holds full detailsof the total numbers of pupils with ASD, and theirplacements.

Recommendation 1:

Education authorities should ensure that theyhold complete information on the numbers ofpupils with autism spectrum disorders for whoseeducation they are responsible to ensure thatthey develop a coherent strategy for meeting arange of needs. This information should includedetails of provision for these pupils. Allocation ofsupport and resources should not be restricted tothose pupils with a medical diagnosis of autismspectrum disorders.

APPROACHES USED TO TEACH CHILDREN WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS

6. APPROACHES USED TO TEACH CHILDREN WITHAUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS

HMIE’s questionnaire asked all education authoritiesto provide information about the range ofapproaches they used to support pupils with autismspectrum disorders.

All EAs reported that they used a wide range oftools, strategies and resources when makingprovision for pupils with ASD, and when providingsupport for their families. Treatment and Educationof Autistic and related CommunicationHandicapped Children (TEACCH)18 and ASD-specific Speech and Language Therapy werethe most common approaches, used by over 60%of authorities. The Hanen19 parent programme wasused by around 50% of authorities. The Lovaasmethod and Son-Rise programme were used by afew authorities. Other approaches used included:

• visual communications systems

• cognitive behavioural therapy20

• social skills training

• play therapy

• video interaction guidance

• psycho-educational profiling

• social stories21.

In delivering these approaches, education staff oftenworked closely with educational psychologists andspeech and language therapists, although someauthorities reported that a shortage of these therapistslimited the support they could provide. Mostauthorities were unable to quantify the numbers ofchildren with whom the various approaches were used.

The literature review associated with this reportdescribes a number of the approaches which arecommonly used. The volume of writing aboutinterventions and approaches refers frequently totheir widespread use, but the published literaturecontains little information about actual practice. A

full evaluation of evidence about the effectivenessof individual approaches is provided in the literaturereview.

The literature review supports the view that nospecific approach to intervention brings greaterbenefit across the spectrum, or that any sub-groupof children benefits from any one particularintervention. The following key points are takenfrom the literature review.

• Methodological difficulties within studies meanthat definitive evidence of the effectiveness ofany one approach, and the contrastingeffectiveness of one approach compared toanother, is not available.

• Most approaches offer some evidence of positiveand useful intervention results, and an eclecticmodel to supporting people with ASD hasemerged.

• A “playful context” has emerged as a widelyused setting for supportive intervention.

• The use of peer-mediated support and socialgroup contexts is increasing.

• Environmental structure and socio-constructive22

teaching techniques tailored to the individual areimportant components of any support.

• Intervention approaches which involve the childin prolonged periods of training, or long periodsof interaction with only a trained adult, maypreclude involvement of the child in othereffective forms of support.

• The need for early intervention to meet theneeds of a child when these needs are initiallyrecognised is apparent.

• The involvement of parents has emerged as acrucial element in intervention approaches andthe need for support for parents and family isemphasised.23

18 TEACCH: Treatment and Education of Autistic and related Communication Handicapped Children. See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature Review.19 Hanen programme. See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature Review.20 Cognitive behaviour therapy: See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature Review.21 Social stories. See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature review22 Socio-constructive techniques include approaches such as cognitive behavioural therapy and social stories. See Appendix 3: Literature review.23 Appendix 3: Literature review, page 78.

13

Programmes

Learning and teaching programmes for autismspectrum disorders should address the needs thatarise from ongoing assessment of the pupil in his orher learning environments. Programmes should alsotake account of the pupil’s broader learning needsand the associated difficulties which can co-existwith autism spectrum disorders. No one ‘recipe’will provide the correct approach for all pupils in allsituations. It is important for schools and educationauthorities to have a clear understanding of autismspectrum disorders and of the importance ofmeeting all the learning needs of an individualpupil.


14

Recommendation 2

Education authorities should ensure that theyhave a suitably varied range of provision to meetthe wide and varying needs of pupils with autismspectrum disorders. They should publish details oftheir provision for autism spectrum disorders,including planned future developments.

WHAT OUTCOMES HAVE SCHOOLS ACHIEVED FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

7. WHAT OUTCOMES HAVE SCHOOLS ACHIEVEDFOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

Inspectors evaluated how well pupils made progressin their learning and achieved to their fullestpotential within the various forms of provision.They evaluated pupils’ attainment and achievementin all schools and the progress which pupils weremaking in the targets set out in their individualisededucational programmes (IEPs). They alsoconsidered pupils’ achievements in relation tonational levels of attainment and nationalqualifications, where these were appropriate.

An IEP describes in detail the nature of a child’s oryoung person’s additional support needs, the waysin which these are to be met and the learningoutcomes to be achieved. It also specifies whatadditional support is required, including thatrequired from agencies outwith education. Almostall pupils with ASD, in all schools visited as part ofthe sample, had an IEP. In most cases IEPscontained targets in language and communication,mathematics and personal and social development.In a few cases pupils had attainment targets inadditional areas of the curriculum. Increasingly,schools will wish to ensure that IEPs are used toplan for pupils with ASD so that they becomesuccessful learners, confident individuals,responsible citizens and effective contributors24.Where appropriate, a school should work withappropriate agencies, including health, social workor voluntary agencies to draw up IEPs so thatobjectives and services can be coordinated.25 Aneffective IEP for pupils with ASD helps to plan forthe pupil’s learning targets where additionalsupport is needed, or where support is needed tocompensate for an ASD, and to ensure access tothe broader curriculum.

The quality of IEPs in the schools visited wasvariable. Although most pupils were makingprogress through the targets as stated in their IEPs,in some cases targets were insufficiently matched to

pupils’ needs and their prior attainment. In anumber of schools, generally in mainstreamsettings, targets within IEPs were insufficientlyfocused and did not always fully address pupils’specific needs in relation to ASD. In contrast, sometargets set for pupils attending specialised provisionfocused solely on pupils’ needs in relation to ASD,for example, their communication and social needs,and did not identify targets for them to achievemore widely. IEPs were not always used effectivelyas tools to plan for pupils’ progress.

Education authorities and schools generally did notpay sufficient attention to tracking pupils’ individualprogress or to analysing attainment information forpupils with ASD separately from the informationwhich they held for all pupils. For this reason, it wasdifficult for education authorities or schools tocompare the attainment of pupils with ASD withthat of pupils who did not have ASD, or tobenchmark the progress of groups of pupils withASD.

Pre-school

In most pre-school provision, children with ASDwere making good progress and achieving well.They were developing skills in communication andin social interaction. In most centres, staff used arange of formal and informal assessments toidentify children’s progress. Children’s achievementswere monitored on an individual basis and theirsuccesses were identified and celebrated by staff. Arange of health education professionals, includingspeech and language therapists, were involved insetting appropriate targets for a majority ofchildren. Parents were not always involved in thetarget setting process. However, most parentsreceived copies of individual targets which hadbeen set for their child. In a few centres, staff wereunaware of the school’s longer term targets forchildren.

15

24 A Curriculum for Excellence, www.acurriculumforexcellencescotland.gov.uk, Scottish Executive (2004)25 Supporting children’s learning: code of practice, Scottish Executive, 2005


16

Primary schools

Overall, pupils in primary schools were makinggood progress towards the learning targets setwithin their IEPs, in particular, in targets which hadbeen set for personal and social development. Afew pupils were making good progress within 5-14levels of attainment in line with their peers. In a fewcases learning targets were not sufficiently clear.Some were insufficiently focused on addressing theneeds of pupils with ASD while others did not focusenough on improving pupils’ attainment across thecurriculum. Teachers held regular reviews of pupils’progress and had good expectations of pupils’achievement and attainment.

In the best practice, the speech and languagetherapy targets were well-integrated into thecurriculum for each pupil. Teaching staffcollaborated with speech and languagetherapists to help learners reach their targetsand achieve the specified outcomes.

In one mainstream primary school, all targetsfor IEPs for pupils with ASD were colour codedto tie in with the triad of impairment26. Thiscareful attention to planning ensured that thespecific, individual needs within the triad foreach pupil were being addressed within thenational 5-14 framework.

Secondary schools

Overall, pupils made good progress towards targetsin their IEPs. Higher attaining pupils generallyachieved in line with their peers. In a number ofschools, pupils achieved well in ScottishQualification Authority examinations. In a fewschools, staff felt that pupils’ abilities were not fullydemonstrated in examination conditions and that

26 Difficulties with social interaction, language and communication, and thought and behaviour.27 Award Scheme Development and Accreditation Network

pupils did not see the value of examinations. Pupilsgenerally had appropriate opportunities to achieveacross a range of different experiences. Forexample, schools made use of alternative ways oforganising the curriculum and certificated pupils’wider achievements through, for example ASDANawards27. Pupils’ achievements in Outward Boundcourses and within the local community wererecognised and suitably accredited.

Pupils with ASD, in a mainstream secondaryschool, who were sitting Standard Gradeexaminations, were able to choose their seats inthe examination room and practise mockexaminations in these seats. This approachallowed them to familiarise themselves with theunfamiliar examination conditions.

Specialist provision and independent special schools

Overall, pupils’ IEP targets were more focused onaddressing ASD than in mainstream schools. Pupilsmade good progress towards achieving individualtargets. Most were making particularly goodprogress in developing communication skills. A fewpupils in specialist units attached to primary schoolsmade good progress within appropriate 5-14 levelsof attainment. However, a few pupils could haveachieved more through the identification of morechallenging targets. The independent specialschools in the sample were very focused onindividual needs, particularly in targets related toASD.

In a unit for pupils with ASD based in a specialschool, pupils had personal records ofachievement. Individual booklets followedpupils through their school careers, and weremonitored by the senior management team.

WHAT OUTCOMES HAVE SCHOOLS ACHIEVED FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

17

Recommendation 3

Education authorities should ensure that schools prepare clear and effective individualised educationalprogrammes for all pupils with autism spectrum disorders and use them as planning tools to meet thespecific and broader learning needs of individual pupils. They should ensure that schools also useindividualised educational programmes to track pupils’ progress towards meeting their potential. TheScottish Executive, education authorities and other agencies should work together to coordinate support forpupils with autism spectrum disorders, where there is a need. Education authorities should work with healthboards to develop clear procedures for early identification of children with autism spectrum disorders.

Impact on pupils

Schools should ensure that their pupils areenthusiastic and motivated to learn; have a sense ofself-respect, well-being and ambition; respectothers and participate in things going on aroundthem; and have a sense of resilience. Inspectorsevaluated the extent to which pupils displayed suchattributes and also what pupils felt about theireducational experiences. Topics for discussion withpupils were selected appropriately to meet theneeds of individual learners, for example, how wellthey were progressing in their learning, the extentto which they felt included in the life of the school,had friends and enjoyed school.

All education authorities and independent schoolshad recognised the need to develop the range ofservices they provided for pupils with ASD. Overall,schools had a positive impact on children andyoung people. In almost all schools visited, pupilswith ASD had good access to a safe and secureenvironment. Most settings provided opportunitiesfor pupils to develop their social skills and theirabilities to interact through meaningful access toreal life situations.

A number of schools provided good opportunitiesfor pupils with ASD to engage with mainstreampeers in out-of-school activities and clubs.However, such opportunities were not yet fullydeveloped within all authorities and schools.Residential pupils in the independent schools in thesample had very good opportunities to take part ina wide range of community activities during andafter the school day. In all settings, most pupils hadaccess to residential educational experiences.However, schools did not usually maintainsufficiently clear records of the uptake of theseexperiences to allow them to plan for anyimprovements or gaps in the experiences ofindividuals. A small number of education authoritieshad good links with social work departments todevelop out-of-school provision.


8. HOW WELL DO SCHOOLS MEET THE NEEDS OFLEARNERS AND THEIR FAMILIES?

18

28 Across Scotland, a variety of titles are used to describe the roles of non-teaching support staff.

An educational psychologist and a parent of aboy with ASD put in a successful bid for a‘friendship’ project to the Changing ChildrenServices’ Fund and were awarded £5,000. Theyused the funding to organise social outings forpupils with ASD and their peers. For example,one group of boys went to an executive box towatch a premier league football match. Pupilswith ASD could choose a mainstream pupil togo with them on the outing.

Pre-school

In most pre-school centres, children’scommunication and social interaction needs werewell supported through a range of approachesincluding the use of signs, symbols andphotographs. Social skills and interaction werebeing well targeted within activities and routines.In all pre-school centres, children had goodopportunities to interact with their peers.

Primary schools

Within mainstream primary schools, pupilsgenerally had good opportunities to transfer theskills they had learned within the school, forexample, in the lunch hall and at playtime. In a fewschools staff needed to consider how pupils couldtransfer skills between school and home. Mostschools provided pupils with access to lunch andafter school clubs. However, schools did notroutinely collect information about the uptake ofthese facilities among pupils with ASD.

Secondary schools

Secondary schools had the potential to make apositive impact on the lives of pupils by providinggood access to a mainstream peer group, to broadcurriculum experiences and to the nationalqualifications framework. In a number of secondaryschools pupils were observed to be ‘oversupported’ by non-teaching staff. Pupils reportedthat they viewed auxiliaries and classroomassistants28 as being ‘their’ teacher and wouldgenerally expect their day to be organised, guided

HOW WELL DO SCHOOLS MEET THE NEEDS OF LEARNERS AND THEIR FAMILIES?

19

and directed by this member of staff. In one EA itwas common practice for the pupil supportassistant to transfer with pupils as they moved fromprimary to secondary school. This provided pupilswith a good level of continuity. However, it resultedin pupils developing an over-dependency on aknown adult. Although there were some goodexamples of information being given to help allstaff and pupils develop a general understanding ofASD throughout mainstream secondary schools, onthe whole there was a lack of awareness of pupils’additional support needs.

In a mainstream secondary school, the principalteacher of learning support acted as coordinatorof a flexible curriculum programme whichallowed pupils to have access to mainstreamsubject areas but also ensured that they hadappropriate ‘time out’ periods. In this way,pupils were enabled to sustain a full day atschool.

In one pair of schools, arrangements for thetransfer of information from the primary to thesecondary school were effective. Staff held aplanning meeting prior to transfer. At thismeeting information about the best strategiesto encourage learning was identified andshared. Parents and pupil were fully included inthe planning meeting.

Specialist provision and independent schools

Overall, special schools had a very good impact onpupils. Pupils had very good opportunities to transferskills across different settings in the school. Pupils inspecial schools and units had very good opportunitiesto transfer the skills they learned in school tocommunity settings and, in the case of bothindependent schools visited, between school settingsand care settings. Staff used a good range ofcommunication approaches which supported pupils’learning and encouraged the development of theiremotional well-being. One area in which it wasdifficult for special schools to have a strong impact onpupils’ lives was the provision of good role models forbehaviour. For example, a strong emphasis on routineduring group activities can result in a number ofpupils spending too long waiting to take their turn.

Recommendation 4

Schools should ensure that pupils with autismspectrum disorders are given appropriateopportunities to gain an understanding of thesocial world they live in and to develop life skillswhich they can use outside school. Pupils shouldbe given full opportunities to identify and developtheir personal strengths.

Delivery of the curriculum

In most education authorities and independentschools the curriculum provided a positive focus onaddressing pupils’ ASD-specific needs. Priority wasgiven to addressing pupils’ social communicationand interactions. A feature of the curriculumthroughout the schools visited was the high degreeof personalisation of pupils’ programmes of work.In a number of cases, approaches to enable pupilsto gain access to the wider curriculum were verygood. While break times provided opportunities forpupils to practise social skills in real situations, staffdid not provide sufficiently high levels of support toenable this to happen effectively. In some schools,teachers had no written guidance to help themplan effectively for pupils’ learning in the widercurriculum. In these schools, some curricular areaswere not adequately covered, curriculum choicewas limited and opportunities for pupils to progressin their learning and achieve accreditation werelimited.

In most schools, and particularly in special andindependent schools, speech and languagetherapists gave very good support to aidcommunication and social interactions. Forexample, they led social language and social skillsgroups as well as supporting the development ofsocial stories and the effective use of symbols to aidpupils’ learning.

Pre-school

Children in pre-school centres had appropriateaccess to the early years curriculum, which wassuitably adapted and individualised to meet theirneeds. The curriculum paid very good attention todeveloping children’s communication skills andsocial interaction. In most centres, staff chose from


20

a range of approaches to use with children withASD to meet individual needs. They establishedappropriate routines for each day and expectedchildren to respond to their names and to eachother. In a few centres there were insufficientsensory approaches to the curriculum.

Primary schools

Most pupils in primary schools followed a broadand relevant curriculum which had been suitablyindividualised to meet their ASD needs. Schools hada wide range of approaches to meet pupils’ ASDneeds. Most schools made good use of strategieslike visual and individual timetables to structurepupils’ days. In a few schools, staff did not paysufficient attention to developing flexibility inpupils’ thinking. Pupils were often removed fromstressful situations rather than challenged todevelop coping skills. A few pupils needed to begiven better access to a broad curriculum.

Secondary schools

In mainstream secondary schools most pupils hadappropriate access to a broad and relevantcurriculum suitably individualised through pupils’IEPs. In a number of schools, increasingly flexibleapproaches were used to meet individual needs. Forexample, a number of schools made use of ASDANawards and courses at Access level. Approaches todeveloping pupils’ organisational skills andindependence were variable. In a few schools, gooduse was made of individual timetabling to supportthe development of such skills. In others, classroomassistants supported pupils too closely. Pupils inunits attached to secondary schools were notalways able to achieve in the wider schoolcurriculum, for example, missing out on a modernforeign language.


Most pupils in special schools and units followed arelevant curriculum suitably individualised to meettheir ASD needs. A high priority was given todeveloping pupils’ skills in communication andsocial interaction. Most schools made good use ofsensory approaches to learning and to structuringpupils’ days through various forms of individualised

timetables. In a few special schools, a concentrationon communication and social skills was at theexpense of broader curricular experiences.

In both independent schools visited, the curriculumoffered a very positive focus on addressing pupils’ASD needs. A range of approaches were used tomeet pupils’ individual needs in relation to ASD andpriority was given to addressing pupils’ social andcommunication needs and the ability to transferthese skills within everyday situations. Positive andchild-centred approaches were evident.

Approaches to inclusion

Most schools provided a very positive focus onsocial inclusion and promoted an ethos of equalityand fairness. In a few EAs the provision and supportfor pupils was proactive and allowed for goodplanning for transitions. Early decisions made inthese authorities regarding provision andplacement alleviated parental, pupil and staff stress.However, in a few EAs action plans for pupils withASD were often developed reactively in response tosudden demands. Some pupils had beeninappropriately placed within mainstream classeswithout appropriate support, and a few had beenplaced in specialist provision who would have hadbenefited from more mainstream contact.

In all education authorities there were generallygood opportunities for pupils to have access totheir mainstream peers. In a few educationauthorities and in both independent schools, accessto lunchtime and after-school activities was good.In one authority, a well-planned project for pupilswith ASD enabled them to meet their mainstreampeers outwith the school. In almost all educationauthorities, respite and community and leisureresources for pupils with ASD were limited.

In a mainstream secondary school, a pupil withASD was supported by a specific individualisedprogramme in the community. This programmewas managed by a principal teacher in theschool and offered a very high level of supportwhich successfully met the pupil’s needs andhelped to develop his communication skills.


21


Pupils in specialist provision and independentschools benefited from being in a safe and secureenvironment where they were very well supported.Staff in most special schools and units made verygood use of the local community to develop ameasure of social inclusion for pupils. Staff in mostspecialist provision for pupils at the secondarystages were developing opportunities for pupils tobe included in broad curricular experiences. A fewschools needed to put greater efforts into ensuringthat pupils were included in the nationalqualifications framework and had opportunities fortheir learning to be fully accredited. Pupils inspecial and independent schools had too littleaccess to a mainstream peer group or opportunitiesfor senior pupils to undertake appropriate workexperiences.

Recommendation 5

Schools should ensure that they maximiseopportunities for pupils with autism spectrumdisorders to be included socially andeducationally with mainstream peers.

Impact on parents and families

Education authorities selected the parents who metinspectors. Parents were interviewed either as partof focus groups or individually or in groups withinthe school their children attended. Most parentswho met with inspectors expressed good levels ofsatisfaction with the schools their childrenattended. A number of EAs had invitedrepresentatives of parents to participate in strategygroups to help develop policy. In a small number ofauthorities, individual parents contacted inspectorsto indicate that they were very unhappy aboutprovision for their children and particularly theways in which the EA had dealt with decisionsaffecting their child. These parents felt excludedand marginalised. Even parents who expressedsatisfaction with their child’s current provisionreported the occasional lack of planning and clarityabout future provision for their child. They felt thatsupport during the time of diagnosis needed to bebetter and the time taken by the EA to makedecisions, especially about transitions from one

Pre-schools

Children in pre-school centres had good access to amainstream peer group. Examples of sharedplacements worked well. In a few centres, childrenwere supported to spend part of the week in amainstream nursery and part in a specialist pre-school centre. In this way children had goodaccess to mainstream settings and role models, butalso had specific support for ASD.

Primary schools

Pupils in primary schools benefited from very goodaccess to peers and to a broad curriculum. Pupils inunits attached to primary schools were wellsupported in transitions from lessons in mainstreamclasses to lessons in the unit. Transitionarrangements from primary to secondary schoolwere good, but initial planning for transitions couldhave taken place at an earlier stage.

Secondary schools

Pupils with ASD in secondary schools had goodaccess to peers and positive role models. In the bestexamples, pupils with ASD were well involved withmainstream peers in classes and in supervisedlunchtime activities. However, inclusion was notwithout problems in secondary schools. Examplesincluded:

• difficult social interactions between pupils withASD and other pupils and reported bullying ofpupils with ASD; and

• inadequate preparation of pupils with ASD forwhole-school ‘activity days’.

In a number of units attached to mainstream schools,specialist teachers and support staff provided subjectteachers with useful information about the needs ofindividual pupils. This approach enabled pupils to befully included in lessons. Schools did not regularlyreview the amount of support given to individualpupils to ensure a balanced approach to allowingpupils to develop independence.

In a mainstream secondary school, pupils whohad peers with ASD in their class undertook a‘peer awareness’ programme. This programmewas delivered by professionals and parents whohad children with ASD. It successfully raisedawareness of the needs of pupils with ASD.


22

when they started school. Parents expressedconcern that they had insufficient knowledge ofschool provision and felt that planning for transferfrom pre-school to school did not start earlyenough. A few parents would have liked morespecialised nursery placements.

Primary schools

Parents felt well involved in the annual reviewprocess. They felt that the range of formal andinformal communication between themselves andtheir children’s schools was good. They felt wellsupported by school staff. However, most reportedthat they did not always have a clear understandingof their children’s general progress and were moreaware of progress in relation to targets for ASD.Parents were pleased that their child was includedin mainstream settings, but were concerned aboutthe lack of knowledge they had about provision atsecondary stages.

Secondary schools

Parents of children in secondary schools reportedthat on the whole they were well involved withtheir children’s schools and the annual process.They reported very good contact with schools.However, some parents described a number ofissues which had caused them to become lessconfident in the school’s ability to meet theirchildren’s needs. One example was when the onuswas on the parent to contact the school and pointout potential areas of difficulty for their child.

Parents generally were pleased with their children’sprogress. A few felt that they could be makingbetter academic progress. In a small number ofschools, parents met regularly as a group andprovided a network of support for each other. Afew parents felt that support from other agencieswas disjointed due to staffing problems. Althoughparents were satisfied with the work of theteaching and non-teaching staff who had regularcontact with their child, a few felt that staff insome mainstream subject areas were not fullyaware of their children’s difficulties and needs inrelation to ASD. Parents would have liked moreinformation about training opportunitiesconcerning ASD.

setting to another, should be shortened. Parentsdid not present a unified view of the type ofprovision which they felt was ‘right’ for theirchildren. The most important issue for parents wasfor the school to meet their children’s needs andfully involve parents in decision making. Anotherissue was the amount and quality of informationabout its range of provision that EAs providedparents.

Parents reported that they had had easy access tomembers of staff at school level for support andinformation. Most parents, irrespective of the typeof provision their child attended, reported thatthere were good levels of communication betweenthe school and home. Inspectors found numerousexamples of very positive uses of home-schooldiaries and parental leaflets focused on ASD. A fewEAs provided very helpful information for parentson authority procedures and useful contact namesand organisations. Although parents were keen thattheir child received the correct support many wereconcerned about their child being ‘labelled’ by staffand pupils. This was a particular issue inmainstream schools.

A few education authorities invited parents tocontribute to training conferences and courseprogrammes. This gave staff very effectiveinsights into family life and was a very powerfulapproach to staff development across allsectors.

Pre-school

Most parents of children in pre-school centres weresatisfied with their children’s placements and theirown involvement with the centres they attended.They felt well informed about individual targetswhich centre staff had set for their children’sdevelopment. They felt that on day-to-day mattersthey received good quality and regular information.In a small number of individual cases, parentsexpressed satisfaction that the EA had worked withthem to provide an individual package of care andeducation that met the needs of their child andthemselves. The main area of concern for parents ofpre-school children in all EAs visited was thequestion of where their children would be placed



Parents felt fully involved in the annual reviewprocess. They were aware of their children’spersonal targets and felt involved in decisionmaking regarding their children. Parents werepleased with the regular formal and informalcommunication between themselves and schools.They reported that staff were very supportive ofthem and their children. They felt that theirchildren were well placed and were making goodprogress. Most parents whose children attended aspecialist unit attached to a mainstream schoolwere pleased that this afforded their children goodopportunities to be included with their mainstreampeers. An area of concern for a number of parentswas the lack of input from therapy staff within thespecialist setting. Parental expectations of what thetwo independent schools visited could achieve fortheir children were very high. They felt positivelyabout the regular contact they had with theschools, although by geographical necessity thiswas more often by letter or telephone rather thanface to face. They appreciated the well-organisedreview meetings which involved both care andeducation staff and felt that these gave them arounded view of their children’s progress. Parentsfelt that the schools were addressing ASD needsvery well, but that they were less sure about theirchildren’s progress academically. Parents expressedconcerns at high levels of staff turnover and,because of this, the ability of the school to provideconsistency of approaches.

23

Recommendation 6

Education authorities should ensure that parentsreceive full information about the provision theymake for autism spectrum disorders. They shouldalso ensure that parents are informed of theoptions available to them when their childtransfers from stage to stage or school to school.Education authorities and schools should workclosely with parents of children with autismspectrum disorders to plan for progression,particularly at times of transition. They shouldinvolve parents in relevant training events aboutautism spectrum disorders. Where appropriate,people with autism spectrum disorders could beinvited to contribute to training programmes forparents and staff.


24

9. HOW GOOD IS THE MANAGEMENT OFPROVISION FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUMDISORDERS?

Policy and planning

Analysis of the HMIE questionnaires sent to all EAsshowed that just over 70% of authorities hadcarried out an audit of the numbers of pupils withASD or maintained annually-updated figures.Several authorities were unable to quantify thenumbers of pupils with ASD or the number whohad been formally diagnosed. In some cases thiswas due to a lack of communication betweeneducation and health professionals. Otherauthorities considered it more important to identifyeach pupil’s individual needs rather than arrive at aspecific diagnosis of ASD. Responses from EAsrevealed a gradual move away from diagnosingautism towards identifying a cluster of needs on theautism spectrum. Several authorities linked theirpolicies for ASD to wider policies for addressingadditional support needs, in line with the Education(Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act. Inthese authorities, support and provision wasinformed by diagnosis but not dependent on it.Most provided a continuum of support to meet awide range of needs. In five authorities, supportwas allocated on the basis of formal diagnosis only.Only around 50% of authorities had recentlyaudited the numbers of children with ASD withineach form of provision. Several authorities were inthe process of doing so.

Policy development and planning were effective inonly two out of the six education authoritiesinspected, and in one of the independent schools.The EA action plan for pupils with ASD was oftenonly developed reactively in response to a suddendemand. Although appropriate multi-agencyapproaches to developing guidance and advicewere in place at strategic levels, these were notalways evident at operational levels. In a few EAs,collaborative practice was not yet well developed.Better joint working was needed when developingpolicies and planning for improvement for ASD.Most EAs needed to develop better planning withsocial work services.

Within one health authority, which serviced twoeducation authorities, speech and languagetherapy services had set up an Autistic Forumchaired by a child health commissioner. Thisgroup influenced strategic planning across thehealth authority by feeding into children’sservices planning and looking at issues such asdiagnostic teams and care pathways.Thisapproach encouraged equity.

In one education authority, teachers in specialschools worked with partners from healthservices to develop criteria for ASD-specific self-evaluation, which they intended to use toidentify areas for improvement. By workingtogether to identify key aspects for evaluation,they developed a shared understanding of thekey issues in ASD.

A few EAs had developed very good specificguidance on ASD. However, the majority ofeducation authorities did not give sufficientattention to specific guidance on ASD within theirgeneral policy on additional support needs. In afew education authorities, procedures to deal withchallenging behaviours, including the reporting ofincidents, were inconsistent. ASD was not reflectedin service and school development planning. A feweducation authorities had made appropriate use ofASD-specific self-evaluation frameworks to evaluateprovision within schools, but the use of this type offramework was not yet widespread.

Staff confidence in working with pupils withASD

Most teachers working directly with pupils withASD felt they had a good or very goodunderstanding of autism spectrum disorders.Specialist staff felt they were well trained and hadrelevant knowledge of ASD. They were aware ofrelevant strategies and approaches used to supportindividual pupils. However, some educationauthorities did not use the expertise of such staff

HOW GOOD IS THE MANAGEMENT OF PROVISION FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

25

effectively to benefit and train others. The majorityof teachers and non-teaching staff in mainstreamschools did not have a sufficiently good workingknowledge of ASD. In a few cases, some staff inmainstream schools demonstrated their lack ofunderstanding of ASD by identifying pupils’difficulties as “bad behaviour” rather than a form ofcommunication disorder. In almost all authorities,staff found the behaviour of pupils with ASDchallenging.

Most support staff who worked directly withindividual pupils felt that they had sufficienttraining and support to carry out their jobseffectively. However, in a few cases, support stafffelt they were given too much overall responsibilityfor specific pupils, sometimes resulting in a pupil’sover-reliance on one support assistant.

Pre-school

Staff in pre-school centres were well motivated andvery positive about their work. They felt that theyhad good knowledge of ASD in relation to thechildren in their centres. They felt well supportedby their colleagues and reported strong teamwork.A few would have liked more opportunities to learnabout different approaches which could be usedwith pupils who have ASD.

Primary schools

Staff were highly motivated. Most staff within unitsattached to primary schools were very well qualifiedand had a good knowledge of ASD and individualpupils’ needs. Teachers and support staff inmainstream primary classes had good knowledge ofindividual pupils in their classes, but felt that theyrequired more training in ASD in general. In anumber of centres staff had access to only a limitedrange of strategies to help pupils to developappropriate behaviours. Staff felt that they neededto be better aware of behaviour support strategies.

Secondary schools

Staff working in units attached to mainstreamsecondary schools were very well qualified andknowledgeable. They felt well supported to carryout their work and believed that their trainingneeds were well met by the EA and through the

well-developed teamwork in their establishments.Good practice in one EA involved all probationerteachers being provided with general training onASD. However, some staff in secondary schools,more than in other settings, expressed concern thatthey were often left to develop their own strategiesfor individual pupils without having a strongenough knowledge of ASD. In none of the EAsvisited, did staff in mainstream schools haveappropriate levels of expertise in ASD. A fewteachers reported that it was difficult to cope withthe pressures of pupils’ unpredictable behaviour.Support staff felt that too often subject teachersabdicated too much responsibility to them forsupporting, and often teaching, individual pupilswith ASD in mainstream classes.


Almost all teaching and non-teaching staff inspecialist and independent provision were welltrained and well qualified. Staff reported that theyhad a good range of opportunities for staffdevelopment and felt committed to their work.They had a good understanding of ASD and couldchoose from a range of strategies and approachesto meet individual pupils’ needs. Most felt they hadbeen given sufficient training to deal with pupils’behavioural needs, although in a few casesindividual staff in specialist provision felt that the EAcould do more to develop their skills in this area.Staff working in the two independent schools feltthat teamwork was strong and that all members ofthe school community, including therapists andpsychologists, shared information and supportedeach other. Overall, staff indicated that they neededmore support in developing aspects of thecurriculum.

Training opportunities for staff and parents

All but five of the authorities which completed theHMIE questionnaire provided some ASD-specifictraining for teaching and other staff who specialisedin supporting pupils with ASD. All of the EAs visitedfor the purposes of this investigation provided goodaccess to staff development for teachers. In thebest, staff development in ASD was given a high


26

priority within the specialist sector and high levelsof expertise were evident. Supporting pupils’challenging behaviour was a key focus. In a feweducation authorities, and within the independentschools, this expertise was used well to create ateam of specialists who ably supported other staff,particularly in mainstream schools. Both theindependent special schools visited hadcomprehensive approaches to training and staffdevelopment.

Most authorities provided training for non-teachingstaff. The opportunities, however, varied across EAs.In most EAs, speech and language therapists andeducational psychologists provided effectivesupport and good staff development for staffworking in specialist provision. Such support wasnot provided consistently for staff in mainstreamschools. Support staff would have benefited fromregular updates to their initial training.

In most education authorities and bothindependent schools, staff had access to specificASD accredited courses. In many cases these wereover-subscribed. Teachers from mainstream schoolsand support staff were generally under-representedon ASD training courses.

Several authorities offered inter-agency training. Insome EAs teaching and support staff were trainedtogether. Aspects of training in ASD were open toall staff in some authorities. Uptake of this trainingwas increasing, much of it delivered throughtwilight and evening sessions. The numbers of staffreceiving training, some of which had led to anaccredited qualification in autism, had increasedsteadily over the last three sessions (see Table 10).

Table 10: Numbers of staff trained to supportchildren with ASD

Year 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05

Accredited training 81 68 88

Authority training 1866 2687 3752(teachers)

Authority training 670 855 1022(support staff)

Staff training took a number of forms including:

• sponsoring teachers to pursue post-graduatecertificate or diploma qualifications in inclusivepractice containing an option module on ASD;

• sponsoring teachers to pursue post-graduatecertificate or diploma qualifications in ASD;

• offering training courses which were specificallyfocused on ASD; and

• running modular Masters courses in additionalsupport needs.

Staff training was delivered in a variety of ways by:

• authority ASD outreach teams;

• authority staff teams with expertise in ASD;

• professionals from other authorities; and

• independent organisations.

In one education authority, support staff hadgood opportunities for training throughProfessional Development Awards in supportingpupils’ learning which were delivered inpartnership with a local further educationcollege.

In the majority of education authorities effectivesupport networks were in place and were well usedby specialist staff to meet collectively to exchangeideas and discuss issues. They valued thisopportunity to provide a more consistent approachin schools and expressed the need for morefrequent opportunities to network in this way.

Around 80% of EAs provided ASD-related trainingfor parents. Many used the Early Bird29 and Hanenmaterials with the latter being delivered by speechand language therapists. Local parent supportgroups were sometimes used to deliver this trainingand they also contributed to professional stafftraining. Some authorities also provided awarenessraising sessions for parents in the PECS30 andTEACCH systems, and on behaviour management.Training sessions were generally delivered byauthority staff but external organisations wereoccasionally invited to contribute. In most cases,

29 Early Bird materials: See Appendix 1: Glossary and Appendix 3: Literature Review.30 PECS: Picture Exchange Communication System. See Appendix 1 Glossary

HOW GOOD IS THE MANAGEMENT OF PROVISION FOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

27

uptake of ASD-related training by parents andsometimes extended family members, had beenhigh. Parental workshops had been popular andwere often over-subscribed. One authority wassupporting parental study for the certificate inautism.

Recommendation 7

Education authorities should ensure that teachingand support staff have access to a programme ofstaff development relating to autism spectrumdisorders. Continuing professional developmentat an appropriate level should be available to allstaff in schools where there are pupils withautism spectrum disorders. Specialised trainingshould be provided for teachers and non-teaching staff working directly with pupils withautism spectrum disorders. The Scottish Executiveshould work with training providers to ensurethat a comprehensive and progressiveprogramme is available.

Management of staff resources

All education authorities had structures whichprovided varying levels of support to staff inschools. Analysis of the HMIE questionnaire sent toall EAs revealed that around 40% of authorities hada key person within their centrally deployed staffwho provided support to staff who taught pupilswith ASD. In most other authorities, support forstaff was provided by a range of personnelincluding educational psychologists, speech andlanguage therapists, authority continuingprofessional development teams, outreach staff,quality improvement officers for additional supportneeds and other specialist teams. One authorityhad established a team to provide supportspecifically for those working with pupils with ASDneeds. In addition to providing advice andsupport to schools and parents, the teamcontributed to strategic development and trainingin the authority. In other authorities, support wasprovided on a school cluster basis. In one case,each cluster had a teacher who provided enhancedsupport for pupils with additional support needs

including ASD. Support and development groupswere occasionally led by educational psychologists.

Most schools visited managed resources for pupilswith ASD effectively. In all secondary schools, aprincipal teacher of support for learningcoordinated support for pupils with ASD. Highlevels of teamwork were evident across all sectors.

One authority had a range of provision whicheffectively supported the individual learningneeds of pupils with autism spectrum disorders.The provision in the authority ranged fromplacement in mainstream schools with supportfrom outreach teachers to split placementsbetween a mainstream and a specialist unit andfull time placement within a specialist unit.

In almost all education authorities, additional staffwere deployed effectively to support individualpupils within a mainstream setting and, if necessary,in specialist settings, particularly in crisis situations.However, in most education authorities, the supportfor pupils with ASD in a mainstream setting wasdependent on classroom assistants. In many cases,the assistant had the main responsibility for thepupil rather than the class teacher.

Approaches to inter-agency working

There was a clear commitment to inter-agencyworking. It was recognised that where inter-agencypartnerships were strong they brought benefits forpupils and staff. A range of education and healthprofessionals including speech and languagetherapists were well placed to provide importantsupport to schools, parents and pupils. Theirexperience and knowledge regarding ASD wasreflected in the practice within a number ofschools. However, in a few cases, particularly withinmainstream secondary schools, the input fromspeech and language therapists was variable and attimes had been reduced, due to staffing levels.Almost all authorities had shortages of speech andlanguage therapists. Inter-agency working wasmore of an intention rather than a reality in anumber of schools. In a few, the only inter-agencyworking took place at annual reviews.


28

In one authority, mainstream staff who hadpupils with ASD in their classes, attended aseries of workshops on ASD run by thepsychological service. These workshopsimproved the staff’s knowledge of ASD andcreated a support network for them. As a resultthey were better equipped to meet the needs ofpupils with ASD.

In almost all education authorities, the social workdepartment was not involved early enough withfamilies affected by ASD and was often onlyinvolved at a crisis stage. This was frequently putdown to shortages of social workers.

Overall, schools ensured that pupils with ASD hadaccess to a range of therapy staff, including verygood input by music and art therapists in mostspecialist provisions and in a few mainstreamschools.

Pre-school

In pre-school centres, children’s annual reviewswere generally well attended by the variousagencies. In addition, in a few centres staffcollaborated effectively with EA teams and madegood use of identified key workers. Most centreshad an appropriate level of input frompsychological services. The involvement of speechand language therapists was, at best, sporadic in anumber of centres. A few centres had no therapistinput.

Primary schools

In primary schools, annual reviews were generallywell attended by the various agencies. ASD supportteams provided additional support and valuableoutreach to a number of primary schools. Input frompsychological services was strong in most schools. Ina few cases effective collaboration between agenciesprovided good support to individual families. Someschools did not receive a direct allocation of timefrom speech and language therapists.

Secondary schools

In secondary schools, annual reviews were generallywell attended by the various agencies. In a smallnumber of schools, therapy staff were involvedeffectively with parents. ASD support teamsprovided additional support and valuable outreachto a number of secondary schools. Input frompsychological services was strong in most schools.In a few schools, inter-agency planning was inresponse to crisis situations rather than proactive.Input from speech and language therapists wasextremely limited in a number of schools and somehad no direct input from social work services.


Special schools and units had generally good multi-agency attendance at annual reviews. ASD supportteams provided additional support and valuableoutreach to a number of special schools. In most,the input from psychological services was strong.While most special schools had an appropriateallocation of speech and language therapy servicesa few had no ongoing regular input from therapystaff.

The independent schools in the sample had goodmulti-agency attendance at annual reviews. Theyhad strong and regular input from speech andlanguage therapists and psychological services.Input from the careers service was variable.

Recommendation 8

Education authorities and agencies should worktogether to develop plans, share strategies andcommit resources to ensure that pupils withautism spectrum disorders receive appropriatesupport in line with their needs. Plans should beregularly evaluated and reviewed and openlyshared with parents.

29

10. HOW GOOD IS THE LEADERSHIP OF PROVISIONFOR PUPILS WITH AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS?

Leadership

Most education authorities were able to articulate aclear vision for the development of provision andservices for pupils with ASD in line with theprinciples and duties outlined in the Education(Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act. Allauthorities had a strong desire to continue toimprove services and to ensure that any gaps inprovision were filled. A number of EAs wereworking successfully with partner agencies todevelop provision in ‘localities’ or‘neighbourhoods’.

Not all EAs had successfully managed to ensure thattheir vision for the future was understood, orindeed known by, parents and school staff.Strategic plans for ASD were often stated generallywithin broader developments for additional supportneeds. While it is important to anchor ASD policyand strategy to the legislation, EAs should alsoensure that strategies for ASD are made clear to allrelevant stakeholders.

Most education authorities provided goodleadership and direction for staff. Most had a clearvision to improve services and provide effectivesupport for pupils with ASD. They demonstratedpositive commitment to provide high qualityeducation within a mainstream setting for pupilswith ASD. A few EAs provided appropriatedocumentation which clearly set out the strategyfor ASD.

Most senior managers in education authoritiesworked well with a range of agencies to provide acoordinated approach to ASD. However, almost alleducation authorities and independent schools,were insufficiently proactive in developing qualityassurance procedures to evaluate practice for pupilswith ASD.

One authority showed proactive leadership inmeeting the needs of pupils with ASD by usingthe information derived from authority-wideevaluations and advice from an Autism StrategyGroup in planning for future provision.

In the best practice in schools, headteachers had aclear knowledge and understanding of ASD andhad taken opportunities to ensure their ownknowledge remained up-to-date. Thoseheadteachers who actively fulfilled theirresponsibility for ASD across the school weresuccessful in ensuring that all staff had anappropriate understanding of ASD and were able tomeet pupils’ needs effectively. In most schools,integrated provision offered good opportunities forpupils to be taught in class groups or individually asrequired and provided them with access tomainstream peer and social opportunities.

In one primary school, which had a unit forpupils with ASD, the headteacher providedsupport, direction and guidelines throughmonitoring procedures and open flexibleleadership.


30

11. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendation 1:

Education authorities should ensure that theyhold complete information on the numbers ofpupils with autism spectrum disorders for whoseeducation they are responsible to ensure thatthey develop a coherent strategy for meeting arange of needs. This information should includedetails of provision for these pupils. Allocation ofsupport and resources should not be restricted tothose pupils with a medical diagnosis of autismspectrum disorders.

Recommendation 2:

Education authorities should ensure that theyhave a suitably varied range of provision to meetthe wide and varying needs of pupils with autismspectrum disorders. They should publish details oftheir provision for autism spectrum disorders,including planned future developments.

Recommendation 3:

Education authorities should ensure that schoolsprepare clear and effective individualisededucational programmes for all pupils withautism spectrum disorders and use them asplanning tools to meet the specific and broaderlearning needs of individual pupils. They shouldensure that schools also use individualisededucational programmes to track pupils’ progresstowards meeting their potential. The ScottishExecutive, education authorities and otheragencies should work together to coordinatesupport for pupils with autism spectrum disorder,where there is a need. Education authoritiesshould work with health boards to develop clearprocedures for early identification of children withautism spectrum disorders.

Recommendation 4:

Schools should ensure that pupils with autismspectrum disorders are given appropriateopportunities to gain an understanding of thesocial world they live in and to develop life skillswhich they can use outside school. Pupils shouldbe given full opportunities to identify and developtheir personal strengths.

Recommendation 5:

Schools should ensure that they maximiseopportunities for pupils with autism spectrumdisorders to be included socially andeducationally with mainstream peers.

Recommendation 6:

Education authorities should ensure that parentsreceive full information about the provision theymake for autism spectrum disorders. They shouldalso ensure that parents are informed of theoptions available to them when their child transfersfrom stage to stage or school to school. Educationauthorities and schools should work closely withparents of children with autism spectrum disordersto plan for progression, particularly at times oftransition. They should involve parents in relevanttraining events about autism spectrum disorders.Where appropriate, people with autism spectrumdisorders could be invited to contribute to trainingprogrammes for parents and staff.

Recommendation 7:

Education authorities should ensure that teachingand support staff have access to a programme ofstaff development relating to autism spectrumdisorders. Continuing professional developmentat an appropriate level should be available to allstaff in schools where there are pupils with autismspectrum disorders. Specialised training should beprovided for teachers and non-teaching staffworking directly with pupils with autism spectrumdisorders. The Scottish Executive should work withtraining providers to ensure that a comprehensiveand progressive programme is available.

Recommendation 8:

Education authorities and agencies should worktogether to develop plans, share strategies andcommit resources to ensure that pupils withautism spectrum disorders receive appropriatesupport in line with their needs. Plans should beregularly evaluated and reviewed and openlyshared with parents.

31

1. Additional support

Provision which is additional to, or otherwisedifferent from, the education made generallyavailable by an education authority for children andyoung people of the same age in schools (otherthan special schools) under the management of theeducation authority.

2. Applied behaviour analysis

An approach for changing behaviour that involvesthe systematic application of a set of principlesderived from psychological theories of learning.

3. Asperger syndrome

A disorder that affects the way a personcommunicates and relates to others. A number oftraits of ASD are common to Asperger syndromeincluding:

• difficulty in communicating

• difficulty in social relationships

• a lack of imagination and creative play.

However, children, young people and adults withAsperger syndrome usually have fewer problemswith language than those with ASD, often speakingfluently though their words can sometimes soundformal or stilted. Children, young people and adultswith Asperger syndrome also do not have theaccompanying learning disabilities often associatedwith ASD; in fact, children, young people andadults with Asperger syndrome are often of averageor above average intelligence.

4. Attention deficit disorder

Deficit in the ability to sustain attention.

5. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

A developmental disorder of early childhoodcausing problems with attention, activity levels andimpulsivity.

6. Autism

A lifelong developmental disability that affects theway a person communicates and relates to peoplearound them. The ability to develop friendships isimpaired, as is their capacity to understand otherpeople's feelings. All people with autism haveimpairments in social interactions, socialcommunication and imagination. This is referred toas the ‘triad of impairments’. “Autism is a severedisorder of communication, socialisation andflexibility in thinking and behaviour, which involvesa different way of processing information and ofseeing the world.” Jordan, 1999)

7. Autism spectrum disorders

Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are typicallycharacterised by a ‘triad of impairments’. Thefollowing description of the triad has been adaptedfrom Jordan R.(1997):

• Social-Impaired: deviant and delayed or atypicalsocial development, especially interpersonaldevelopment. The variation may be from‘autistic aloofness’ to ‘active but odd’characteristics.

• Language and communication-Impaired:deviant language and communication, verbaland non-verbal. Deviant semantic and pragmaticaspects of language.

• Thought and behaviour-Rigidity: Rigidity ofthought and behaviour and impoverished socialimagination. Ritualistic behaviour, reliance onroutines, extreme delay or absence of ‘pretendplay’.

All of the above behaviours should be out ofkeeping with the individual’s chronological age.Individual manifestations vary with the individual’sdegree of intelligence, individual personality andpresence of additional disorders. In addition,changes in the way the disorder presents itselfoccur with age, especially in the more ableindividuals. Many children, young people andadults with ASD also have an over-sensitivity tosound, smells, touch, taste and visual stimulation.

APPENDIX 1: GLOSSARY


32

8. Behaviour disorders

Disorders characterised by persistent and repetitivepatterns of behaviour that violate societal norms orrules or that seriously impair a person's function.

9. Behaviour therapy

Scientifically-based approach to modifying andshaping behaviour by identifying the triggers andreinforcements of specific behaviours.

10. Behavioural techniques

Psychotherapeutic approaches which use classicalconditioning and operant learning techniques in anattempt to eliminate or modify problem behaviour,addressing the person’s overt behaviour rather thantheir thoughts, feelings, or other cognitiveprocesses.

11. Challenging behaviour

Behaviour of such intensity, frequency or durationthat the physical safety of the person or others islikely to be placed in serious jeopardy. Behaviourwhich is likely to seriously limit or deny access to, oruse of, ordinary community facilities, or impair achild's personal growth, development and family life.

12. Coordinator

Person responsible for ensuring, so far as is possible,that the services required to deliver the additionalsupport identified in the coordinated support planare in place for the child or young person and fortaking action to secure services when necessary.

13. Coordinated support plan

A statutory strategic planning document to coordinatethe provision of services for those children and youngpeople who meet the criteria, to help them worktowards their long-term educational objectives.

14. Cognitive behavioural therapy

A technique for the treatment of mental disorderthat is based on the concept that how peopleperceive the world and themselves influences theirbehaviour and emotions.

15. Communication disorders

Impaired ability to communicate usually due tospeech, language or hearing disorders.

16. Compulsions

Stereotyped behaviours that are repeated again andagain. They are not inherently enjoyable, nor dothey result in the completion of inherently usefultasks.

17. Developmental delay

An abnormal, slower rate of development in whicha child demonstrates a functioning level below thatobserved in most children of the same age.

18. Developmental disabilities

Generic term relating to all children and adults witha substantial continuing disability originating inchildhood.

19. Diagnosis

The skill of distinguishing one disorder fromanother. The opinion arrived at as to the nature of adisease.

20. Dysphasia

Difficulty in understanding language and in self-expression.

21. Dyspraxia

Impairment or immaturity of the organisation ofmovement with associated problems of language,perception and thought.

22. Early Bird

A three month parental programme, which involvesweekly group training sessions and home visits tohelp parents understand about ASD and supportparents in developing communication andmanaging behaviour.

23. Echolalia

The repetition or echoing of verbal utterancesmade by another person.

GLOSSARY

33

24. Elective mutism

Condition in which children talk in one situation,for example, at home, but remain silent elsewhere,for example, at school.

25. Facilitated communication

Approach to assist people with no speech or withdysfunctional speech to find alternative means ofcommunication. The facilitator normally supports aclient's hand, wrist or arm while that person uses acommunicator to spell out words, phrases orsentences.

26. Functional analysis

Careful observation of a previously definedbehaviour in a previously defined environment tounderstand the relationship between the behaviourand the environment.

Dictionary of mental handicap, M Lindsey

27. Gaze

A gaze is a fixed look. It is used in social behaviouras part of the visual checking occurring duringinterpersonal interactions and usually involveslooking at another person's face. Gaze aversion orabnormal eye contact have been reported inindividuals with ASD since Kanner's original paperin 1943.

28. Hanen parent programme

A training programme for caregivers of childrenwho have early language delay. The Hanen Centrein Toronto, Canada, first developed these family-focused, early language interventions to empowerdirect caregivers with the knowledge andexperience they need to help children developlanguage use. They include interactive, experientialgroup sessions for caregivers (there are separateprogrammes for parents and early childhoodteachers) using videotape analysis, groupdiscussions, and simulated practice activities, incombination with individual consultation throughvideotaping and feedback sessions.

29. Hyperactivity

A pattern of behaviour in children who haveproblems concentrating and who are alwaysoveractive.

30. Imitation

Mimicking to learn a model's behaviour orresponses

31. Individualised educational programme

Written document which outlines the steps to betaken to help children and young people who haveadditional support needs to achieve specifiedlearning outcomes.

32. Language disorders

Disorders, usually due to cognitive or neurologicaldysfunction, resulting in problems in symbolisationor in delays in language and speech development.

33. Language skills

The use of language for communicativecompetence. The ability to use language as a toolto aid interaction within society, via communicationwith individuals and groups.

34. Lovaas method

Intensive, behaviourally-based or training approachto working with young children with ASD, basedon the theories of Ivar Lovaas at the University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles.

35. Nonverbal communication

Communication through use of facial expression,posture, gesture and body movement.

36. Obsessions

Ideas, images or impulses which enter a person'smind again and again in stereotyped form. Theyare almost invariably distressing.


34

37. PECS

The Picture Exchange Communication System(PECS) is an augmented alternative communicationsystem designed to teach functionalcommunication to children with limited speech,using a system of cards that illustrate objects,concepts, and activities.

38. Personal Learning Planning

Process by which children, young people andparents are involved in discussions with the schoolabout the goals of learning, including those forpersonal development. Its focus is on supportingdialogue and ultimately about engaging childrenand young people in their own learning.

39. Repetitive behaviour

Abnormally intense preoccupation with one subjector activity; distress over change; insistence onroutines or rituals with no purpose; repetitivemovements, such as hand flapping.

40. Social stories

Use of a short story form to inform a child about asocial skill or social meaning.

41. Stereotypy

A behavioural condition characterised by a lack ofvariation in patterns of thought, motion andspeech; by repetition of said patterns; or both.

42. Son-Rise

A treatment program for autism, autism spectrumdisorders and other disabilities related tocommunication and interaction. The program wasdeveloped by Barry Neil Kaufman and his wifeSamahria Lyte Kaufman in the late 1960s and early1970s, while working with their own son who wasdiagnosed with autism as a toddler.

43. TEACCH

Treatment and Education of Autistic and relatedCommunication Handicapped Children is a whole-life approach to helping children and adults withASD, developed by Eric Schopler in North Carolina.The principles and concepts of the TEACCH systemare improved adaptation; parent collaboration;assessment for individualised treatment; structuredteaching; skill enhancement; cognitive andbehaviour therapy and generalist training.

44. Theory of mind

A philosophical concept of the understanding onehas that another person has an individualperspective on states of affairs, that thisconsciousness depends in part on informationwhich they may have which is not available tooneself and vice versa.

45. Triad of impairments

Impairments affecting social interaction, socialcommunication and imagination which areessential features of an autism spectrum disorder.

35

Rita Jordan, Birmingham University (Chair)

Jim Taylor, Director of Education and SupportServices, Struan House School

Janet Stirling, Struan House School, Scottish Societyfor Autism

Stella MacDonald, Consultant and Service User

Martin Vallely, Association of Directors of EducationScotland (ADES)

Moira Park, Depute headteacher, Carlibar PrimarySchool, East Renfrewshire Council

Greig McNeish, Accreditation Director, NationalAutistic Society

Carolyn Brown, Association of Principal EducationalPsychologists (ASPEP)

Shona Pinkerton, Principal, Daldorch School

APPENDIX 2: MEMBERSHIP OF ADVISORY GROUP


36

The literature review commissioned for this reportby HMIE is available on the HMIE website:www.hmie.gov.uk

APPENDIX 3: LITERATURE REVIEW

www.hmie.gov.uk

Further copies are available fromBlackwell’s Bookshop53 South BridgeEdinburgh EH1 1YS

Telephone 0131 622 8283

Fax 0131 557 8149

Email [email protected]

Astron B48923 10/06

9 780705 311052

ISBN 0-7053-1105-8

£10

Communications UnitHM Inspectorate of EducationDenholm HouseAlmondvale Business ParkAlmondvale WayLivingston EH54 6GA

Documents

Education for Pupils with Autism Spectrum DisordersEducation for Pupils with Autism Spectrum Disorders highlights the variety of provision and arrangements for meeting the needs of