University of Pennsylvania, USA.
Autism. 2013 May;17(3):281-95. doi: 10.1177/1362361312473666. Epub 2013 Apr 16.
This randomized field trial comparing Strategies for Teaching based on Autism Research and Structured Teaching enrolled educators in 33 kindergarten-through-second-grade autism support classrooms and 119 students, aged 5-8 years in the School District of Philadelphia. Students were assessed at the beginning and end of the academic year using the Differential Ability Scales. Program fidelity was measured through video coding and use of a checklist. Outcomes were assessed using linear regression with random effects for classroom and student. Average fidelity was 57% in Strategies for Teaching based on Autism Research classrooms and 48% in Structured Teaching classrooms. There was a 9.2-point (standard deviation = 9.6) increase in Differential Ability Scales score over the 8-month study period, but no main effect of program. There was a significant interaction between fidelity and group. In classrooms with either low or high program fidelity, students in Strategies for Teaching based on Autism Research experienced a greater gain in Differential Ability Scales score than students in Structured Teaching (11.2 vs. 5.5 points and 11.3 vs. 8.9 points, respectively). In classrooms with moderate fidelity, students in Structured Teaching experienced a greater gain than students in Strategies for Teaching based on Autism Research (10.1 vs. 4.4 points). The results suggest significant variability in implementation of evidence-based practices, even with supports, and also suggest the need to address challenging issues related to implementation measurement in community settings.
本随机现场试验比较了基于自闭症研究的教学策略和结构化教学,在费城学区的 33 个幼儿园至二年级自闭症支持教室和 119 名 5-8 岁的学生中招募了教育工作者。学生在学年开始和结束时使用差异能力量表进行评估。通过视频编码和检查表使用来衡量方案的保真度。使用线性回归进行评估,班级和学生均具有随机效应。基于自闭症研究的教学策略教室中的平均保真度为 57%,结构化教学教室中的平均保真度为 48%。在 8 个月的研究期间,差异能力量表的得分增加了 9.2 分(标准差=9.6),但方案没有主要影响。保真度和组之间存在显著的相互作用。在保真度低或高的教室中,与接受结构化教学的学生相比,接受基于自闭症研究的教学策略的学生在差异能力量表上的得分增加了更多(分别为 11.2 分对 5.5 分和 11.3 分对 8.9 分)。在保真度适中的教室中,接受结构化教学的学生比接受基于自闭症研究的教学策略的学生获得的分数增加更多(分别为 10.1 分对 4.4 分)。结果表明,即使有支持,实施循证实践也存在显著的差异,并且还需要解决与社区环境中实施测量相关的具有挑战性的问题。