Autistic Spectrum Project in an urban school cluster

1. Autistic Spectrum Projectin an urban school cluster Presented by Raewyn Higginson ASD Advisory teacher (2009-2010)

2. Margaret Chatfield

3. Today • Project Outline • The beginning • Midway • Outcomes • Success, barriers and sustainability

4. The beginning • RTLB: • Identified a need in the cluster and initiated the project • Application for funding thru EPF (MoE) • Formation of the ASD cluster – Management committee • Appointment of consultant – Pro. Jeff Sigafoos (VU) • Employment of the ASD advisory teacher • Finalised outcomes and overall programme plan (in consultation with RTLB and management). • Instigated pre data collection • Developed and ran the professional development plan

5. Project Outline • Two year project funded through MoE. • Included nine schools – six primary, two intermediate and one college. • Eligibility of child: Years 1-10, formal assessment, not ORRS or SLS funded. • Outcomes were evidence-based (through initial and on-going data collection). • Multi-layered information sharing process • Whole cluster meetings • Individual school staff meetings • Mentoring of teachers

6. Projected Programme Outcomes • To improve educational outcomes for students with ASD by improving identification and using appropriate and adapted learning strategies. • To improve teacher practice and capabilities to adapt programmes to cater for the needs of all students with ASD. • School systems will be better able to cater for the needs of all students with ASD, potentially freeing up Special Education Grant and other resources for other children. • Transitions between classes and schools will be established for students with ASD. • Networks of support between schools are established.

7. Needs AnalysisPre Project Data Collection

8. Staff Meetings 2009 Compulsory • Introduction to the Project and ASD • Transition and Change 2010 Were voluntary : SMT chose from: • Classroom Management • Curriculum Adaptation • Challenging Behaviour • Socialisation and Bullying

9. Teacher Mentoring Was voluntary – approx. 50%+ asked for assistance. Could involve: • Observations in the classroom • Feedback / feed forward, scaffolding on what the teacher already knew. • Sourcing or making resources (e.g. visual schedules , social stories). • Liaison with parents. • Facilitation of /or contributions at IEP meetings. • Referrals to appropriate agencies (e.g. MoE SE, Tautoko Services, CAMHs) • Assistive Technologies applications (for laptops and software). • Mediator role – between home and school / student’s needs and teacher perception. • Up skilling individual students on specific negotiated skills.

10. Other Professional Development • One cluster meeting for all project schools and invited others from the area (n=162 attendees). An invited Paediatrician and Psychologist discussed their occupations and perspective on ASD. • SENCO meetings to address concerns and establish next steps. • Teacher Aide professional development / training • Parent meeting in Term 4 • Two ‘TIPS for Autism’ courses

11. Midway - Bouquets • Parents responses were positive • Teachers were • Increasingly including the students in the classrooms. • Able to monitor and reflect the academic progress of the students through IEPs. • Confidence growth in teaching children with ASD. • ASD project asked to provide professional development for the police around ASD. • Positive feedback from teacher aides at their professional development. • Less referrals to RTLB for assistance with ASD students from project schools.

12. Midway - Brickbats • Project involvement was not compulsory for teachers. • Teacher resistance to ? • Two schools had not informed the staff of the project and requirements. • Changes in Senior Management / SENCOs. • Introduction of National Standards’ focus. • Schools not scheduling all the staff meetings.

13. Programme Outcomes reminder • To improve educational outcomes for students with ASD by improving identification and using appropriate and adapted learning strategies. • To improved teacher practice and capabilities to adapt programmes to cater for the needs of all students with ASD. • School systems will be better able to cater for the needs of all students with ASD, potentially freeing up Special Education Grant and other resources for other children. • Transitions between classes and schools will be established for students with ASD. • Networks of support between schools are established.

14. Educational outcomes for students with ASD have improved with better identification, and use of appropriate and adapted learning strategies. Specifically: • Increased teacher awareness and understanding; • Children are generally happier to attend school; • Parents less anxious and more resilient; • Significant increase in the use of ASD inclusive strategies.

15. Most teachers recognised a need to change their practice and adapt programmes.

16. Most project schools have the ability to cater for the needs of students with ASD without using additional resources Specifically: • All project schools now have the ASD resource kit • SENCOs who took an active part in the project have the ASD knowledge to share or know where to find the information. • The non project schools RTLB referral of students with ASD remained constant, however the project schools RTLB referral rate decreased by 37%.

17. Timely transitions between classes and schools have been established. • SENCO are now more aware of the necessity to share information and give the child opportunities to visit their new school / class. • Teachers and SENCO were doing this under their own initiative by Terms 3, 2010 

18. Networks of support between schools are established. The ASD project built upon already existing networks however the schools will need external support (through RTLB? MoE SE? other?) for these to continue.

19. Successes • Many teachers engaged and were willing to try new things. • Students with ASD were more engaged in regular classrooms. • Parents less anxious and more able to advocate for their child. • IEPs were more solution focused on the child’s needs. • Improved transitions between schools and classrooms

20. Increased use of inclusive ASD strategies in classrooms. • Better understanding of ASD behaviours – children with ASD no longer labelled as ‘naughty’ • Reduced confusion of ASD with other conditions. • Establishment of a Parent ASD support group in this urban area • Spin off professional development for the area’s police in ASD characteristics and the Justice system.

21. Barriers Internal issues • Teacher resistance to guidance and advice • Non participation in staff meetings. • Lack of senior management engagement in a couple of schools External Issues • Difficulties getting diagnosis from the health system (now a 12 month wait) • Time – the ASD project needed another year to embed the new learning. • Implementation of National Standards

22. Finally … • Report with findings and recommendations was sent to project schools, MoE and Autism NZ. • Parents are more informed and have expectations of schools to provide inclusive programmes. • Individual teachers will pass on the strategies and knowledge to others – osmosis effect. • Less referrals to RTLBs and MoE SE from project schools.

23. Questions Comments Concerns