Moondog and ABA people...

[StarlightMcKenzie]

Do any of you know anything about SCERTS?

We used VB too. I just think tutors need to REALLY know what they are doing when it is NET because they'll have to make decisions in response to the NE and there is more scope for getting it wrong than table-top imitation iyswim.

I think that the name means very little tbh. It's just words in a sales pitch. If it is individual to the child then the earlier programme will be more like lovaas and focus on imitation and pre-learning/early learning skills and once a child has moved to the stages were interactions need to be taught it HAS to move towards VB.

Surely VB is just the verbal aspect of ABA?

DH said it was nice to meet you btw!

Thanks, likewise. It was nice to meet him as well.
we got to have a get together at some point, maybe after xmas.

Well that's what I always thought and what CH tells me Gloria.
VB is looking at language as another behaviour.
My ABA side concurs with this sometimes but my s/lt side pulls me back. It's a constant tussle but I think a good one as it makes me a little wary of both forms of intervention.
I am highly critical of both s/lt and some frankly weird ABA stuff.
As Dev so eloquently describes, you have to go throguh what is right for you and your family.
I seem manyy families on this journey (excuse the 'right on' therapy speak) and it is hard to know how much one should intervene and/or voice a strong opinion about what would be best for them and thier child. I have ot bite my tongue a lot but am mindful that what is right in my view may not be right for them.

Full on ABA intervention for small kids with ASD is not for the faint hearted.

As a self-certified expert practitioner of a made-it-up-myself mixture of attachment parenting and ABA who has recently bought the Denver book, I am a bit of over-close adherence to the different varieties of intervention.

The basic principle of looking at behaviour (defined very broadly) and choosing to carefully and actively reinforce the behaviours which will be of long-term usefulness to a child ought to be standard practice. Studying and understanding how this reinforcement can be applied very effectively should not be controversial. Using some sort of curriculum tool which breaks skills down into various measurable components is usual educational practice. As is tracking a child's progress, and trouble-shooting when there is a setback.

The splintering into various factions, the whole 'we practice Lovaas/VB/ABA/SCERTS/whatever' thing, the badmouthing of similar-but-different strategies, the need for massive financial outlay, an encouragement to discard existing provision for reliance on expert consultants/ supervisors/ tutors... it all reminds me slightly of a somewhat dodgy religious set-up.

Of course, as a Catholic, I would think that the ideal solution to the Reformation would have been Martin Luther working from within the medieval church... so it's no surprise I think the best outcome would be ensuring all parents and teachers/carers can apply simple evidence-based interventions well.

Yy Maria but as a parent, just how do you get that for your kid?

Very good post Maria but sadly this part is not the case

'Using some sort of curriculum tool which breaks skills down into various measurable components is usual educational practice. As is tracking a child's progress, and trouble-shooting when there is a setback'

Peopel will swear blind this is what they do but they don't.
God knows why.It makes the whole process so much easier for everyone.
Now that behavioural practices are so widespread where I work time and again you hear people making variations on the same vobservation, namely that for the first time in thier professional lives, they know exactly what they are supposed to be doing, how to do it, how to measure it and what to do if it isn't working.

What's not to like frankly?

[now wondering whether some sort of Anglican compromise solution might be found to apply modern ABA practices within traditional models of ASD provision....]

Moondog, it is sort-of-standard, just it's usually not very detailed and it's often woefully misused. Perhaps because staff generally have no clear idea how to plan and measure the interim steps. And because its considered a bolt-on to their job, rather than a tool to help with it. Think of the early years foundation stage stuff that childminders have to fill out, the various national curriculum descriptors, even a GCSE syllabus: all quite broken down compared to the overall aim of eg 'speak and write good English by age 16y'.

Star, I don't know, perhaps move to Belfast?

maria well put. The basic principle of behavioural analysis is so far from controversial it's laughable.

Although it's not just about measuring progress, is iof course - I mean, you could use any old rubbish and still measure progress (or lack of). The actual method of ABA is, imo, what makes it so successful. I so vividly remember when ds learned the meaning and application of the word when - I had no idea up till that point that such a thing could be explicitly and so expertly taught, using NET methods, yet before my eyes I saw him learning it without him even realising he was being taught.

Btw star I now have We Three Kings pf Orient Are going round and round in my head, thanks very much not

Full on ABA intervention for small kids with ASD is not for the faint hearted.
yup, totally agree. we have this coming up and we are not looking forward to it at all, but it needs to be done.

Yes evidence gathering is treated as a secondary chore and an admin/paperwork exercise getting in the way of doing the primary/real job. It is also assumed to be for making the file look pretty for the HT/inspector rather than to have much to do with the teaching.

In my experience many teachers produce paperwork to show how data informs planning almost like a record-producing exercise, often done in retrospect, rather than understood and used as a tool.

This is the evidence base for SCERTS, according to the founders.

So true Star, the issue of it being a secondary chore rather than the key element.
It is all Emporer's New Clothes.
When I see small children with ASD being herded into lessons on Judaism and/or being introduced to the principles of electricity when they can't even answer to their own names or ask for help, it breaks my heart.

Dev, you are tough enough.
Your ds is so lucky to have such an amazing father fighting for him who has been so quick off the mark.

Thanks for the link Lougle.
That wasn't working before.
I'll garner the opinion of my uni colleagues on SCERTS when I see them later this week.

I didn't get to it through the SCERTS site, I used google, so that's probably why the link is ok. It seems, from my reading, that rather than being evidence based in itself the founders rely on the evidence base of therapies it has drawn its methods from, for each component of the 'method'. It then combines those to assert that the 'method' in its entirety is 'evidence based'. That seems a bit of a leap to me.

I suppose I liken it to a new car. You might have evidence that all the components used to build it are safe, but that doesn't mean the resultant car is safe.

Dev yes will contact you

AP could well be pushing it as VB, NET etc at weekend - these terms mean nothing to me. They have never said 'Lovaas' past day 1 when they were explaining the background. To me its just AP's own version of ABA and they keep adding to it and evolving it based on their own research. For someone doing VB they may well not see anything different it may well be VB

DS ABA programme does teach language, it does teach social - a hugh chunk of his programme is social - but its still using the same DTT principles which come from Lovaas - to my untrained mind anyway.

I tend to think AP as having just developed its own curriculum and as its American based, i think the rest is just marketing, as over there it is a market as insurers pay for it, so every company has to stand out, especially in California where the State pays for a lot of ABA.

Thanks Agnes

and Thanks moondog. you are very kind.

sorry star, just realised I have completely hijacked your thread.

God yes Agnes.
When you go to the States to attend these big ABA conferences, it is incredible how slick and PR and media savvy these providers are.

A world away from the average public sector worker, schlepping about in mismatched clothes and a shabby old briefcase.

'A world away from the average public sector worker, schlepping about in mismatched clothes and a shabby old briefcase.'

Lol - that is probably exactly how I would describe myself although more papers shoved in rucksack or pocket than briefcase. Oh well, we've all got things to learn.

But then, I am at heart a public sector worker I guess.

Haha, as soon as I posed I knew it would be taken the worng way.
Really though, an ABA American conference is terrifyingly glossy.
However they are overwhelmingly charming people.

Nowt wrong with dressing however you want of course.
My own personal issue thoguh is that SEN (adults and kids) has traditionally been seen as low status and is overwhelmingly populated by shabbily dressed workers.

It's nice to raise expectations and standards a bit.
If you go into a classroom looking smart I think it conveys a message about the care and status you give your work to others.