The impact of loose-parts-play on schoolyard social participation of children with and without disabilities: A case study

BACKGROUND

Outdoor social participation in the school playground is crucial for children's socio-emotional and cognitive development. Yet, many children with disabilities in mainstream educational settings are not socially included within their peer group. We examined whether loose-parts-play (LPP), a common and cost-effective intervention that changes the playground play environment to enhance child-led free play, can promote social participation for children with and without disabilities.

METHOD

Forty-two primary school children, out of whom three had hearing loss or autism, were assessed for two baseline and four intervention sessions. We applied a mixed-method design, combining advanced sensors methodology, observations, peer nominations, self-reports, qualitative field notes and an interview with the playground teachers.

RESULTS

Findings indicated for all children a decrease during the intervention in social interactions and social play and no change in network centrality. Children without disabilities displayed also an increase in solitude play and in the diversity of interacting partners. Enjoyment of LPP was high for all children, yet children with disabilities did not benefit socially from the intervention and became even more isolated compared with baseline level.

CONCLUSIONS

Social participation in the schoolyard of children with and without disabilities did not improve during LPP in a mainstream setting. Findings emphasize the need to consider the social needs of children with disabilities when designing playground interventions and to re-think about LPP philosophy and practices to adapt them to inclusive settings and goals.

Children with autism exhibit similar longitudinal changes in core symptoms when placed in special or mainstream education settings

LAY ABSTRACT

Today, children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are placed in mainstream or special education settings somewhat arbitrarily with no clear clinical recommendations. Here, we compared changes in core ASD symptoms, as measured by the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, 2nd edition (ADOS-2) clinical assessment, across ASD preschool children placed in special or mainstream education. Longitudinal changes in ADOS-2 scores did not differ significantly across settings over a 1- to 2-year period. While some children improved in core ASD symptoms, others deteriorated in both settings. This highlights the need to identify specific criteria for establishing meaningful placement recommendations.

'Someone like-minded in a big place': Autistic young adults' attitudes towards autistic peer support in mainstream education

LAY ABSTRACT

Autistic young people may struggle in mainstream schools and feel disconnected from their peers and their school. We know that autistic adults can benefit from spending time with other autistic people, but we don't know if this is the case for younger autistic people. We conducted interviews with 13 autistic young adults in the United Kingdom who recently left mainstream schooling. We asked them if they would have been interested in being involved in autistic peer support when they were at school, and if so, what that peer support should look like. Results indicated that autistic young people were enthusiastic about the idea of peer support. They thought it was important that peer support was flexible to suit their needs at different times, as well as inclusive, positive, and embracing neurodiversity. They also discussed the potential benefits and difficulties of having a peer support system within a school setting. This adds to the growing body of research on the potential benefits of autistic-autistic interactions on autistic people's well-being and sense of belonging. Findings can be used to help design pilot peer support projects in schools that can be tested to see how effective they are.

Characteristics of children on the autism spectrum who benefit the most from receiving intervention in inclusive versus specialised early childhood education settings

This study examined the factors associated with social-communicative outcomes for children on the autism spectrum receiving early intervention in inclusive versus specialised early childhood education programmes. Fifty-eight preschool-aged children randomly assigned to receive the Group-Early Start Denver Model (G-ESDM) in either inclusive or specialised (i.e., autism-specific) classrooms across one calendar year showed similar outcomes at group mean-level across measures of communication and social behaviour. We examined factors moderating outcomes across settings. Novel moderation analyses revealed that higher baseline social interest and nonverbal cognitive skills were associated with increased social communication gains for children in the inclusive classrooms, but not for those in specialised settings. Children who spend more time paying attention to people and have higher cognitive skills might benefit from receiving early intervention in inclusive settings, whilst these factors might be less relevant for children educated in specialised settings.

Young Autism Spectrum Disorder Children in Special and Mainstream Education Settings Have Similar Behavioral Characteristics

In many countries, parents can place autism spectrum disorder (ASD) children in either mainstream or special education settings, which differ in their ability to provide structured early intervention programs. There are no clear guidelines for how to make initial placement decisions and ongoing debate about the benefits and drawbacks of each educational setting. Previous studies have mostly examined placement of school-age children and reported that those with poorer cognitive abilities and more severe ASD symptoms tend to be placed in special education. The placement of younger children has rarely been studied. Here, we utilized the database at the National Autism Research Center of Israel to examine whether ASD severity, cognitive abilities, and parent education influenced the placement of 242 children. We performed the analyses separately for 1-3-year-old children who were placed in daycare centers and 3-5-year-old children who were placed in pre-school kindergartens. Our analyses revealed surprisingly small differences across special and mainstream education settings, particularly in daycare centers. Cognitive scores and parent education were significantly higher in ASD children placed in mainstream education, but these differences were of moderate effect size and explained a relatively small percentage of the variability in placement choices (<15%). Indeed, we found considerable overlap in the characteristics of ASD children across educational settings, which suggests that initial placement decisions are performed with little regard to the children's abilities. Given the importance of optimal early intervention, further studies are warranted to determine whether children with specific abilities and needs benefit more from placement in either educational setting. LAY SUMMARY: Currently, there are no clear recommendations for placing young children with ASD in special versus mainstream education settings. We examined the influence of ASD severity, cognitive abilities, and parent education on the initial placement of 242 children. While we found significantly higher cognitive scores and parental education in children placed in mainstream education, there was a remarkable overlap in the characteristics of children across both settings, suggesting that initial placement is performed with limited regard to the children's abilities. Autism Res 2021, 14: 699-708. © 2020 International Society for Autism Research and Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Classroom Interpreting and Visual Information Processing in Mainstream Education for Deaf Students: Live or Memorex?

This study examined visual information processing and learning in classrooms including both deaf and hearing students. Of particular interest were the effects on deaf students' learning of live (three-dimensional) versus video-recorded (two-dimensional) sign language interpreting and the visual attention strategies of more and less experienced deaf signers exposed to simultaneous, multiple sources of visual information. Results from three experiments consistently indicated no differences in learning between three-dimensional and two-dimensional presentations among hearing or deaf students. Analyses of students' allocation of visual attention and the influence of various demographic and experimental variables suggested considerable flexibility in deaf students' receptive communication skills. Nevertheless, the findings also revealed a robust advantage in learning in favor of hearing students.