Fascinating piece of research

[inappropriatelyemployed]

"Comparison of the affects of mainstream and special school placements on National Curriculum outcomes in children with Autistic Spectrum Conditions: An archive-based analysis"

See here

Some fascinating conclusions.

very interesting, particularly on the subject of LSAs and SLT. Thanks!

Oooh, that's a useful one for my files, ta!

Oooh Divine Comedy - blast from the past there!

Loved this bit:

Those children who attended Social Skills Training in mainstream schools did worse across the National Curriculum subjects than those who did not attend Social Skills groups, even when ASC severity was controlled.

The hours of LSA vs performance is particularly interesting to me. DS1's LSA is great for him, socially, but she's admitted that she struggles with the level of maths that he's at - Ed Psych has also recommended extensive small group teaching with an actual teacher in her report. This backs that up very nicely.

DSs LSA was a teacher and she was no help at all.

I wonder if the SST in mainstream effect has anything to do with kids being withdrawn from lessons as and when sessions are held.

DS1 signed himself up for play therapy in year 2 specifically so he could get out of a stressful classroom environment. When that ended, he simply started to refuse to even walk through the door for registration.

Interesting reading but I suspect the study could be twisted anyway you wanted it.

The sample size is simply too small to make any valid conclusions especially seeing as they are doing multiple tests.

I would be worried that the sample did not have a normal distribution - often this means there are distinct groups within the population that behave differently from each other.

The academic levels of both groups were very low (average P levels at age 12) so how applicable their findings are to more academically able children is not clear.

Having said that it is great that some-one is trying to do a proper quantitative study on how interventions help or not in autism. Some proper controlled studies are really needed.

I think the limits of the study are actually very clear on the face of the research which means that you could only twist its conclusions if you seek to ignore those parameters.

This type of research doesn't purport to be definitive of any position rather it seeks to act as a pilot study, it is illustrative of a difficulty, which may then be able to be used to access greater research funding.

It is very rarely the case that researchers can access significant funding (and a project like this would require it if it was to be generalised and substantiated) without demonstrating the issue to be addressed

Have worked in research for years so know the difficulties of getting funding!!!

If you look on the NICE website they dismiss practically every intervention for autism on the grounds that there were too small numbers in the study to make the findings safe.

There is a desperate need for proper, controlled studies for interventions in autism.

I don't know why this research area is not being funded but then I don't know why there is such ignorance in the education system when it affects so many children. We are not talking about a rare condition here we are talking about a condition that affects 1% of children.

Hopefully, the researchers can use their findings to get more money for a larger scale study.