An Analysis of School Teams That Implement a Comprehensive Educational Intervention in High Schools for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Introduction: Schools are serving more students with autism than ever before. It is essential that high school teams feel prepared to meet the needs of these students. The Center on Secondary Education for Students with Autism spectrum disorders (CSESA) is conducting a multisite (NC, WI, CA) RCT of a comprehensive school-based program for students with autism in 60 high schools. Intervention schools create interdisciplinary teams of personnel (A teams) to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs). CSESA staff provide training and coaching throughout the two-year intervention period for the four manualized intervention components (social competence, academic, independence and behavior, and transition). This presentation will focus on data from the first of two cohorts of 30 schools (10 at each site).

Methods: The Autism Program Environment Rating Scale (APERS) is administered at the beginning and end of the two-year period and assesses school program quality through observations, interviews, and record review. It includes 11 subdomains: learning environment, school climate, assessment, instruction, independence, social, functional behavior, communication, family involvement, transition, and teaming. Teaming items focus on interdisciplinary school team functioning. Total scores for each program and subdomain are calculated. School teams organize how the four CSESA components are administered and which team member will take the lead. CSESA staff use a fidelity checklist to guide coaching and document implementation of each component. Changes to the A team composition are tracked during the two-year intervention period and for one year post intervention. A Follow-up Check-In interview and fidelity checklists are used to document sustained intervention use after coaching ends. A survey is administered in the follow up year to obtain the A team lead’s perspective on the ease of collaboration and cooperation with team members and the impact of CSESA on school personnel.

Results: T-tests of pre-post APERS scores comparing CSESA intervention schools (N=15) and services as usual schools (N=15) revealed a significant difference between groups (p=0.025) and a high effect size for the CSESA intervention on the teaming domain (d=.79). Further analysis of the influence of teaming for the intervention schools will determine the relationship between team attrition and change and (a) fidelity of intervention implementation and (b) sustained use of intervention in the follow-up year; and the relationship between ratings of team collaboration and support and fidelity of implementation and sustainability.

Conclusions: School team collaboration and stability may be important factors influencing the fidelity of implementing EBPs, and the sustained use of these practices.