Reliability and Validity of a Teacher Impressions Scale to Assess Social Play of Swedish Children in Inclusive Preschools

Play and peer interactions are crucial for children?s socioemotional development and growth. However, children with special needs, disabilities, and developmental delays may not participate in play with peers as much as typically developing children. Reliable and valid assessment information of children?s social behavior is necessary to design programs that support the socioemotional development of young children with and without special needs. The Teacher Impression Scale (TIS) is a behavioral rating scale based on systematic observations of children?s social behaviors in play. The study aimed to examine the internal structure evidence and the reliability of the Swedish version of the TIS. A sample of 46 preschool teachers used the TIS to rate the social behavior of 92 children. Teachers observed children with special education needs (SEN) and typically developing children (TD) during a 2-week time to assess the children?s social interactions in different play situations. The results showed that the Swedish version of the TIS, the TIS-S, is reliable and can help teachers to identify the need of support for children in play and social interaction in inclusive preschool environments. Furthermore, the instrument could also be useful for identifying special educational strategies aimed at strengthening the social interaction between children

Parents’ Voices Regarding Using Interventions for Toddlers With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Parent-implemented interventions (PIIs) hold promise for young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and their families. Yet, reports of parent and family perceptions regarding PIIs are limited. The present study’s purpose was to gain parent perceptions regarding the helpful and challenging intervention components and contextual factors in the implementation of one PII in their daily lives. Six interviews were conducted and analyzed using an exploratory qualitative approach. Findings included considerable parent satisfaction with intervention experiences, particularly related to the use of videos taken of themselves and their children during intervention sessions. Some parents voiced discouragement after watching video examples, and parents reported challenges finding time to implement the intervention. Parents valued the supportive relationship formed with their interventionist. Additional findings and implications for research and practice are discussed

Patterns in reporting and participant inclusion related to race and ethnicity in autism intervention literature: Data from a large-scale systematic review of evidence-based practices

There are marked racial and ethnic disparities in diagnosis and services for individuals on the autism spectrum, yet race and ethnicity are underreported and underexamined in autism research. The current study examines the reporting of race and ethnicity and the inclusion of participants across racial and ethnic groups in studies included in a large-scale systematic review of autism intervention research (1990–2017). Trained research assistants reviewed 1013 articles and extracted data on the reporting of race and ethnicity data and the inclusion of participants from different racial and ethnic categories from each article. Only 25% of the articles reported any data on race and ethnicity and reporting over time has slowly increased across the 28 years of the review. Descriptive statistics suggest that race and ethnicity reporting varied by study design, intervention, and outcomes. In studies with reported data, White participants had the highest rate of participation (64.8%), with a large gap between the next highest rates of participation, which were among Hispanic/Latino (9.4%), Black (7.7%), and Asian (6.4%) participants. The lack of reporting and the limited inclusion of participants across minoritized racial and ethnic groups are concerning and suggest a need to examine practices in autism research from planning to dissemination. Lay Abstract: Researchers who study autism-related interventions do a poor job reporting data related to the race and ethnicity of autistic individuals who participate in their studies, and of those who do report these data, the participants are overwhelmingly White. This is problematic for many reasons, as we know little about how interventions are meeting the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse populations, and we assume that interventions are effective for all when they have been developed and validated primarily with and for White children. This study examined the reporting patterns of autism intervention researchers whose work was included in a large-scale systematic review of the intervention literature published between 1990 and 2017. We found that only 25% of studies (out of 1,013 included in the review) included data related to the race and ethnicity of their participants, with minimal change in reporting patterns across the years. In studies with reported data, White participants had the highest rate of participation, with a large gap between the next highest rates of participation among Hispanic/Latino, Black, and Asian participants. Other race and ethnicity groups had very low representation. This study includes additional analyses which examine how the reporting patterns and the inclusion of racially and ethnically diverse participants varies across study types, interventions, and outcome areas. Reporting this data is merely a starting point to begin to address the many disparities in autism-related healthcare, education, and research practices, and this article includes broader implications and next steps to ensure the field becomes more equitable and inclusive

Becoming a special educator – Finnish and Swedish students' views of their future profession

Peer reviewe

Labeling Preschoolers as Learning Disabled: A Cautionary Position

The purpose of this article is to explore the issues concerning the adaptation of school-based service delivery concepts for use in early childhood special education programs. The use of categorical labels for determining eligibility for preschool children is not required by law—and may be detrimental. The following concerns are discussed: (a) definitional issues in learning disabilities versus low achievement, (b) the dangers of labeling and low expectation sets, (c) repeated failure to demonstrate movement through a continuum of services (particularly to least restrictive environments), and (d) the efficacy of early intervention and school-based special services for those with mild or suspected developmental disabilities. Research is reviewed concerning definitional and assessment issues utilizing learning disabilities as a construct. Alternatives for describing the characteristics of young children who are significantly at risk or developmentally delayed are provided.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline