Individual and organizational characteristics predicting intervention use for children with autism in schools.
Jill Locke, Christina Kang-Yi, Lindsay Frederick and 1 others
PMID 31867987WHAT IT FOUND
School staff used a recess social engagement intervention for children with autism rarely and with low quality.
Staff who liked the intervention were observed delivering it less well, while feeling respected and having enough staff related to more use.
Key findings
01Observer-rated and self-rated use of Remaking Recess was low, and quality was poor.
02Staff who found the intervention more appealing had lower observer-rated quality, and staff who saw it as required had lower self-rated use.
03Staff who felt respected had more observer-rated steps, while staffing, professional growth, and adaptability were linked to higher self-rated fidelity.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample was small: 11 teachers and 17 other staff. Staff reported many of the predictor and outcome measures, so same-rater bias is possible. Fidelity was measured only once at baseline and once at exit. Observers were blind to school condition but not to whether ratings were pre- or post-intervention, and they may have been seen. The organizational readiness measure was adapted for schools and organizational climate items were excluded because there were not enough raters per school. The training-alone and training-with-support groups were combined, so the analysis cannot show whether extra implementation support changed fidelity.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that Remaking Recess improves outcomes for children with autism. It reports staff implementation, not child outcomes, and the associations are based on a small sample.