Chazin Kate T, Ledford Jennifer R, Wilson-Moses Jane M, Rajaraman Adithyan, Juárez A Pablo
Department of Special Education, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Vanderbilt Kennedy Center Treatment and Research Institute for Autism Spectrum Disorders, 1207 17th Ave S, Suite 212, Nashville, TN, 37212, USA.
J Autism Dev Disord. 2025 Mar;55(3):812-831. doi: 10.1007/s10803-024-06242-4. Epub 2024 Feb 17.
Despite the importance of centering autistic perspectives in educational decision-making for autistic children, few studies have directly assessed autistic perspectives on the social acceptability of early childhood practices. We conducted an online survey to recruit perspectives of autistic adults on a current, comprehensive range of educational practices typically employed with autistic children. We also extended the survey to caregivers and early childhood practitioners, to identify commonalities and discrepancies between shareholder groups. We conducted a descriptive survey study to assess social acceptability of goals, learning contexts, and procedures typically implemented with young autistic children. We received responses from 660 individuals, 226 of whom identified as autistic. For Likert scale and ranked items, we reported median rating and ranking for each item, by shareholder group. For open-ended questions, we conducted open and axial coding, to determine consistent themes within and across shareholder groups. Respondents reported (a) high acceptability for goals promoting self-determination and low social validity for goals promoting masking; (b) high acceptability for antecedent interventions and low social validity for some forms of extinction; (c) that appropriate learning environments are highly context dependent, varying with individual needs; and (d) that the child is the most important shareholder in educational decision-making. We make recommendations to practitioners in response to survey results, including (a) respecting autistic culture and characteristics in selecting goals; (b) considering social, emotional, and psychological needs in selecting procedures; and (c) individualizing goals, learning contexts, and procedures based on the child's perspectives and unique needs.
尽管将自闭症患者的观点纳入自闭症儿童教育决策中非常重要,但很少有研究直接评估自闭症患者对幼儿教育实践社会可接受性的看法。我们开展了一项在线调查,以征集成年自闭症患者对当前一系列普遍应用于自闭症儿童的教育实践的看法。我们还将调查扩展到照顾者和幼儿教育从业者,以确定不同利益相关群体之间的共性和差异。我们进行了一项描述性调查研究,以评估通常针对自闭症幼儿实施的目标、学习环境和程序的社会可接受性。我们收到了660人的回复,其中226人自称是自闭症患者。对于李克特量表和排序项目,我们按利益相关群体报告了每个项目的中位数评分和排名。对于开放式问题,我们进行了开放式编码和轴心编码,以确定不同利益相关群体内部和之间的一致主题。受访者报告称:(a) 促进自主的目标具有较高的可接受性,而促进伪装的目标社会效度较低;(b) 先行干预具有较高的可接受性,而某些形式的消退社会效度较低;(c) 合适的学习环境高度依赖具体情境,因个体需求而异;(d) 儿童是教育决策中最重要的利益相关者。我们根据调查结果向从业者提出了建议,包括:(a) 在选择目标时尊重自闭症文化和特征;(b) 在选择程序时考虑社会、情感和心理需求;(c) 根据儿童的观点和独特需求对目标、学习环境和程序进行个性化设置。