This study reports the findings of a pilot study designed to explore the attitudes of preschool teachers and instructional assistants toward the inclusion of students with autism into a community private preschool in Sacramento, California.  Specifically, this research was undertaken to investigate if significant relationships exist between the compliance to one-year teachers training on Group-based Early Start Denver Model (G-ESDM) and teachers’ attitudes toward autism. 

The G-ESDM is an evidence-based-practice, which uses principles and strategies of the Early Start Denver Model (ESDM) in group settings. The ESDM is a naturalistic developmental behavioral intervention (NDBI) for children with developmental age from 1 to 4 years old (Dawson & Rogers, 2010).

In the G-ESDM, children with autism learn in inclusive settings through daily routines, the participation in group activities, and their peers. In this pilot study, lead teachers and instructional assistantswere trained to build daily cooperative activities that bring children with or without ASD together, as well as peer-mediated strategies, that support models and reinforcements ofchildren’snatural learning among peers (Vivanti et al., 2017). Preliminary randomized control trials support implementation of the G-ESDM within specialized classrooms (Vivanti et al., 2014), and inclusive versus specialized classrooms (Vivanti et al. 2018).

The participants in the study were 14 teachers of one private preschool where 3 children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)were included. The data was collected using The Autism Attitude Scales for Teachers (Olley, DeVallis, 1981), and the fidelity tools of the ESDM and G-ESDM.

In the first year of this pilot study, the aim is to understand if individual factors, such as teacher attitudes towards students with ASD, influence the learning success of the G-ESDM in order to inform potential implementation targets,and tailor strategies to develop future teacher training. Implications of the research for policymakers, future researchers, and teacher educators are discussed.

Pre-training and post-training data was collected at the beginning and at end of the school year. The data was examined to make inferences about possible relationships among the following variables: attitudes toward autism, ESDM teaching practices, G-ESDM teaching practices and commitment to the G-ESDM training. Participants were 14 classroom teachers, in their roles of lead teachers (TE=6) and instructional assistants (IA=8) in a community private preschool in the Sacramento area, California. Three children with ASD diagnosis were included in a classroom with 15 children with typical development. All children were between 36 and 48 months old. The research team and training team supported TE and IAs in the academic year 2017-2018. Training included help with classroom setup, workshops, didactic sessions, teachers’ meetings, modeling, observation and coaching throughout the academic year. Teachers completed a brief survey in order to obtain general demographic information: age, educational background, teaching experience, knowledge on autism and type of training. Teachers’ attitude toward autism was measured using the Autism Attitude Scale for Teachers (AAST, Olley, 1981). Participants were asked to respond to two seven-item questionnaires using a 5-point Likert type scale with anchors Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5). Fidelity of implementation of ESDM and G-ESDM was assessed through videotaped sessions by ESDM certified therapists inter-reliable to each other. Implementation fidelity is the degree to which a treatment is implemented as described in the ESDM and G-ESDM manual. The level of adherence to the ESDM specific strategies and teaching techniques was assessed using the ESDM fidelity tool, a 5-point Likert type scale rated from a 1 (or no competent teaching) to a score of 5 (or extremely competent teaching). The ESDM fidelity tool comprises 13 items: (a) management of child attention; (b) quality of the teaching episode; (c) quality of instructional techniques; (d) modulation of child affect and arousal; (e) management of unwanted behavior; (f) dyadic engagement; (g) child motivation; (h) adult affect; (i) adult sensitivity and responsivity; (j) communicative opportunities and functions; (k) appropriateness of adult’s language; (l) elaboration of activities; and (m) transitions between activities. Threshold for fidelity was a mean score of 4 (or 80%) or more. The G-ESDM fidelity tools comprise three measures of implementation which assess the quality of the early childhood education environment: the classroom group implementation measure; management implementation measure; and small group activity fidelity.

Overall, the results suggest that one-year training was successful for the implementation of the ESDM and G-ESDM. In particular, ESDM fidelity among instructional assistants generally improved and only one aid didn’t reach fidelity. G-ESDM also reached fidelity by the end of the year. Statistical analysis is currently under review. Out of 14 participants, 4 withdrew, 2 requested to interrupt the training due to time constraints, and 8 completed the one-year training. Participants’ retention within the pilot study suggest that other variables need to be taken into consideration in order to understand if individual characteristics affect compliance to the G-ESDM teacher training. In literature, negative attitudes have shown to be the most considerable barrier to successful inclusion (Sharma, Chow, 2008). Specifically, educators with negative attitudes toward inclusion are less likely to implement strategies that promote inclusive education in their classroom (Sharma, Forlin, Loreman, Earle, 2006; Barned, Knapp, & Neuharth-Pritchett, 2011). One possibility is that teachers’ attitude toward autism at baseline can be the predictor of commitment to the training. Currently, the research group is investigating if significant relationships exist between teachers and instructional assistant attitudes toward autism and their ability to complete the training.

Barned, N. E., Knapp, N. F., & Neuharth-Pritchett, S. (2011). Knowledge and attitudes of early childhood preservice teachers regarding the inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 32(4), 302-321. Olley, J., Devellis, R., Devellis, B., Wall, A., & Long, C. (1981). The autism attitude scale for teachers. Exceptional Children, 47(5), 371-372. Rogers, S. J., & Dawson, G. (2010). Early Start Denver Model for young children with autism: Promoting language, learning, and engagement. Guilford Press. Sharma, U., & Chow, E. W. (2008). The attitudes of Hong Kong primary school principals toward integrated education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(3), 380-391. Sharma, U., Forlin, C., Loreman, T., & Earle, C. (2006). Pre-Service Teachers' Attitudes, Concerns and Sentiments about Inclusive Education: An International Comparison of Novice Pre-Service Teachers. International journal of special education, 21(2), 80-93. Vivanti, G., Dissanayake, C., Duncan, E., Feary, J., Capes, K., Upson, S., ... & Hudry, K. (2018). Outcomes of children receiving Group-Early Start Denver Model in an inclusive versus autism-specific setting: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Autism, 1362361318801341. Vivanti, G., Dissanayake, C., Zierhut, C., Rogers, S. J., & Victorian ASELCC Team. (2013). Brief report: Predictors of outcomes in the Early Start Denver Model delivered in a group setting. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(7), 1717-1724. Vivanti, G., Duncan, E., Dawson, G., & Rogers, S. J. (2017). Implementing the group-based Early Start Denver Model for preschoolers with autism. Springer International Publishing.