Social inclusion of young children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder in Australian early childhood programs

1
Social inclusion of young children with Autistic
Spectrum Disorder in Australian early childhood
programs
0
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen
Queensland University of Technology
Cricos No. 00213J
2

• Social acceptance is not always the outcome for
  children with disabilities in inclusive programs
  (Guralnick, Hammond, Connor Neville, 2006)
• There is evidence that children with disabilities
  may be socially excluded or isolated within early
  childhood settings
• Compared to typically developing children,
  preschool children with disabilities
• Exhibit lower levels of social interactive play
• Form very few reciprocal friendships and
• Are less accepted by their peers
• (Guralnick, Connor, Hammond, Gottman Kinnish,
  1996 Guralnick Groom, 1988 Hestenes
  Carroll, 2000 Walker Berthelsen, 2005)

Why be concerned about children's social
inclusion?
0

• Peer interactions form the context within which
  children learn other developmental skills
• Social competence difficulties and social
  isolation experienced by children with
  disabilities are critical issues to be addressed
• The level of social integration in inclusive
  programs of young children with disabilities is a
  function of their social competence (Guralnick,
  2002)
• Difficulties with peer interaction experienced by
  young children with disabilities inhibit
  opportunities to fully participate in early
  childhood programs

3
Why be concerned about children's social
inclusion?

• Peer interactions form the context within which
  children learn other developmental skills
• Social competence difficulties and social
  isolation experienced by children with
  disabilities are critical issues to be addressed
• The level of social integration in inclusive
  programs of young children with disabilities is a
  function of their social competence (Guralnick,
  2002)
• Difficulties with peer interaction experienced by
  young children with disabilities inhibit
  opportunities to fully participate in early
  childhood programs

0
4
Aims of the Research
0

• To explore the level of social inclusion of young
  children with ASD in early childhood education
  programs
• To examine the nature of the play and engagement
  in play activities of young children with ASD
  with their typically developing peers

5
Method
0

• Participants
• 12 focus children (male) with a diagnosis of ASD
  enrolled in regular preschool settings
• Mean age 62.25 months (SD 6.41)
• 30 typically developing comparison children
• Mean age 60.94 months (SD 8.16)

6
Method

• Theory of Mind (false belief tasks)
• Changed location and unexpected contents
• Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT)
• Receptive language
• Profile of Peer Relations
• Teacher rating of peer acceptance
• Prosocial behaviour
• Aggressive/disruptive behaviour
• Passive/alone behaviour
• Naturalistic Observations
• Time sample observations at five minute intervals
  across four free play periods of one hour each at
  each preschool (50 observations of each focus
  child)

0
7
Observationcategories

• Social categories
• Onlooker, alone or solitary play, parallel play,
  social play, teacher interaction
• Cognitive categories
• Functional play, constructive play, dramatic
  play, games with rules
• Additional codes
• Anxious behaviour, positive emotions, gross motor
  activity, aggression, ongoing connected
  conversation

0
8
Data analysis
0

• Non-parametric tests of significance
  (Mann-Whitney U, p lt .05, two tailed) were used
  to test for differences on mean scores between
  typically developing and focus children
• Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
• Focus children significantly lower on PPVT
  (Mann-Whitney U 51.50, p .001)
• Theory of Mind Tasks
• No significant difference between groups

9
0

• Comparison between focus children and typically
  developing children on profile of peer relations
• indicates p lt .05, indicates p lt .01,
  indicates p lt .001

10
0
Comparison between focus children and typically
developing children on observational
data indicates p lt .05, indicates p lt .01,
indicates p lt .001
11
0
Comparison between focus children and typically
developing children on observational data
12
0
Comparison between focus children and typically
developing children on observational data
No significant differences between groups
13
Summary of Results
0

• Teacher report indicated that focus children
• Were less well accepted by the peer group than
  typically developing children
• Displayed less prosocial/ cooperative behaviour
  and more passive/ withdrawn behaviour than
  typically developing children
• Observational data indicated that focus
  children
• Were more likely to be engaged in solitary play
  and functional play and less likely to be engaged
  in social play than typically developing children
• Were more likely than typically developing
  children to be engaged in interacting with the
  teacher
• Were engaged at comparable levels to typically
  developing children across most categories of
  play activity and social interaction

14
Discussion
0

• Overall, compared to typically developing
  children, children with disabilities
• Exhibited lower levels of socially interactive
  play
• Engaged in higher levels of isolate play
• Engaged in more frequent interactions with the
  teacher
• However, while teacher report indicated that the
  focus children had significant deficits in their
  social skills, observational analyses showed
  children were not significantly different in most
  social and play activities in which they
  participated compared to focus children

15
Discussion Cont.
0

• Significant differences between focus children
  and typically developing children in receptive
  language ability (PPVT)
• No significant differences between focus children
  and typically developing children on a range of
  tasks requiring an understanding of Theory of
  Mind
• However, both teacher report and observational
  data indicated that, although focus children
  participated socially in the preschool setting,
  they spent proportionally less time than their
  peers in activities requiring higher levels of
  social skill (e.g., social play)

16
Implications
0

• Due to the lack of significant differences in
  performance between focus children and the
  typically developing children on the ToM tasks, a
  focus on social-cognitive skills may not be as
  useful with this age group as direct teaching of
  play and social skills
• Active adult intervention in play and social
  activities is essential in inclusive early
  education programs
• Effective teaching should be focussed on
• Direct instruction of functional social skills
• Social relationships as the catalyst for learning
• Social communication as the basis for an
  integrated teaching-learning process.

17
References
0

• Guralnick, M.J. (2002). Involvement with peers
  Comparisons between young children with and
  without Downs Syndrome. Journal of Intellectual
  Disability Research, 46 (5), 379-393.
• Guralnick, M.J., Connor, R.T., Hammond, M.,
  Gottman, J.M. Kinnish, K. (1996). Immediate
  effects of mainstreamed settings on the social
  interactions and social integration of preschool
  children. American Journal on Mental
  Retardation, 100 (4), 359-377.
• Guralnick, M.J., Hammond, M., Connor, R.T.
  Neville, B. (2006). Stability, change and
  correlates of the peer relationships of young
  children with mild developmental delays. Child
  Development, 77 (2), 312-324.
• Guralnick, M.J. Groom, J.M. (1988). Friendships
  of preschool children in mainstreamed playgroups.
  Developmental Psychology, 24, 595-604.
• Hestenes, L.L. Carroll, D.E. (2000). The play
  interactions of young children with and without
  disabilities Individual and environmental
  influences. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,
  15 (2), 229-246.
• Walker, S. Berthelsen, D. (2005). Social
  interactions of young children with disabilities
  in Australian early childhood programs. Presented
  at the Biennial Conference of the Society for
  Research in Child Development, Atlanta, Georgia,
  April, 2005.