Autism in UK Education: A Growing Need
Chapter 1: Introduction
Background of the Study
Children on the autism spectrum represent the fastest growing group of children with special educational needs in the United Kingdom (Parsons et al. 2011) and across the world (Guldberg et al. 2017). By the end of 2017, there were approximately 700,000 people with autism in the United Kingdom which is more than 1 person in 100 people (Loomes et al. 2017). Currently, 3.3% of school age children in UK are autistic (Department of Health 2019). A report by Department of Health (2019) indicates that the prevalence of autism among the school aged children has increased by 2.1% between 2008/09 and 2018/19. The same report reveals that prevalence varied across gender: males are 3 times more likely to be autistic than females (Department of Health 2019). The report projects that the prevalence of autism among school aged children will continue to rise.
The prevalence of autism among school aged children has been challenging when it comes to education: autistic children are the largest group of children in England with higher levels of support needs as indicated in the special educational needs or education guidelines on Health and Care plan (Department for Education 2015). Most of children with autism (approximately 72%) attend mainstream schools (Guldberg et al. 2011) and this has been challenges to teachers as they feel they are not fully qualified to effectively meet the needs of children with autism (Parsons et al. 2011). Teachers in mainstream schools do not receive special training to prepare them support children with autism which has been a challenge relating to education of these children (Wass and Porayska-Pomsta 2014). To effectively meet the needs of the growing population of autistic children, technology-enhanced learning has been identified as one of the ways through which educational provision to children with autism could be developed and improved (Fletcher-Watson 2014). Technology has been seen to aid development of innovative clinical tools that meaningfully measure and decide interventions to social communicative impairments in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) which has significantly improved their language and communication development (Wong et al. 2015). The role of technology in language and communication development in people with autism spectrum disorder has been widely researched. This paper reviews such studies in order to map how technology can be effectively used to support language development and communication in children within the autistic spectrum.
The concept of autism spectrum disorders
Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) can be viewed as an umbrella term for various developmental disorders which affect a person’s communicative, social, and language skills (Ploog et al. 2013). According to Wojciechowski and Al-Musawi (2017), a person with ASD is not able to develop peer relationships, is not able to recognise emotion, is not able to engage in play with peers, has difficulties in communicative interactions and has overall poor social skills. On the other hand, Randall et al. (2018) write that ASD is characterised by abnormalities in communication, social interaction, communication, and repetitive and restrictive behaviours. According to Carvalho et al. (2015), there are three major types of ASD namely autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, and atypical autism. Atypical autism and Asperger’s disorder are less severe but they also produce similar features in patients (Centre for Developmental Disability Health Victoria 2010). The symptoms of autism were first described by Leo Kanner (Kanner 1943) after noticing common lack of interest in other people in children who had previously been diagnosed with various forms of mental retardation. After that, the understanding of autism and its symptoms has widely grown.
Noor et al. (2012) define the term spectrum (as it appears in ASD) as the wide range of severity and symptoms of autism. Autism affects different functionalities including behaviour, social skills, and communication skills and others. Children with ASD have different interests from those of their peers and unusual way of learning, reacting to different sensations, and paying attention (Zakari et al. 2014). In addition, thinking and learning abilities in children with ASD vary from gifted to severely challenged (Christensen et al. 2018). ASD also affects a person’s ability to communicate non-verbally. According to Eigsti et al. (2011), children with ASD have impaired non-verbal communication skills such as poor eye contact, poor interpersonal synchrony, inappropriate body language, empty gaze or avoidance of actual gaze, inappropriate use of personal space (they sit or stand too close which hinders conversational comfort), and inappropriately use facial expression and gestures (they often smile when current experience does not require smiling). At the early years, children with autism are not able to point to desired objects thus use familiar adults as their tools to grasp the desired object. When children with ASD use gestures, it is meant to achieve material goals instead of expressing feelings (Lord et al. 2012). Therefore, the understanding of non-verbal communication among children with ASD is impaired. An autistic spectrum disorder starts from the age of 3 and lasts throughout the person’s life (National Autistic Society 2019).
There remains no cure for ASD but early intervention and treatment services can significantly improve the development of a child with ASD (Warren et al. 2011). Among such interventions are increased use of words to improve communication and social competences (Schreibman et al. 2015). Children with autism have no problem in pronunciation of words but they are unable to effectively use language and interpret body language and vocal tones (Peters-Scheffer et al. 2011). Children with ASD are challenged in relation to pragmatics and mostly misinterpret speech in that they rely on the literal instead of the contextual meaning of words (Tachibana et al. 2017). In addition, children with ASD can posit inappropriate behaviours such as self-injurious behaviours and tantrums which are associated with the child’s lack of social-communicative understanding (Cummings et al. 2016). People with ASD normally have deficits in language and social skills but the severity/manifestation differs across persons; for example, one child may completely lack functional speech while another may have excellent language abilities (Benevides et al. 2016). Despite the difference in manifestation of the core deficits in people with ASD, all cases are diagnosed with ASD following lack of social and communication skills (Benevides et al. 2017).
Assistive technology for children with autism spectrum disorders
Assistive technology can be defined as any piece of equipment, item, or product system, whether commercially acquired, customised, or modified, that is used to maintain, increase, or improve functional capabilities of children with disabilities (Wojciechowski aand Al-Musawi 2017). The assistive technology commonly used to develop communication and language development in children with ASD include both low and high technology items such as printed response options (Stanger et al. 2016), Voice Output Communication Aid (Browder et al. 2011), graphic organisers (Mims et al. 2012), adapted text (Mucchetti 2013), and iPads (Spooner et al. 2015). Systematic instruction (Knight et al. 2013) and shared stories (Millen et al. 2011) have also been paired with assistive technology to promote language and communication development in children with ASD. Voice Output Communication Aid (VOCA) offers children without vocal-verbal ability a chance to respond during literacy lessons (Torii et al. 2012). Use of VOCAs has been associated with an increase in participation and helps children with ASD comprehend the targeted content (Ganz et al. 2012). VOCA helps develop the communication skills of a child with ASD in that he/she is able to read a repeated storyline at the appropriate time and accurately answer prediction. Another form of assistive technology used in ASD literacy research is providing response options where children can point to an answer. This type of assistive technology ensures that even if a child with ASD is not able to generate verbal response, he/she can non-verbally respond which builds on nom-verbal communication skills (Duffy and Healy 2011). Hobson (2019) writes that language has both spoken and non-verbal components thus engaging children with disabilities in non-verbal communication would potentially develop their language skills. Adapted text assistive technology provides extra means to children with ASD to gain access to grade appropriate text (Cafiero 2012). This technology reduces barriers to accessing text in that the text is simplified to match the ability of the child. This is commonly achieved through reducing the Lexile level or adding object or picture supports to improve comprehension and keep children with ASD engaged with the text. Graphic organisers on the other hand are essential in promoting access to literacy among children with ASD. Graphic organisers have for long been used to help children with autism develop sequence of story events which aids comprehension (Meeks and Geither 2014).
The most recent assistive technology is the use of tablets to provide instructional support to children with ASD. Tablets have increasingly being use to target stimuli. In addition, Sankardas and Rajanahally (2017) state that tablets provide electronic text which helps children with ASD access academic content as their peers. On the other hand, Boyd et al. (2015) write that the features of supported electronic text (e-text) such as visual supports, text-to-text speech capabilities, graphic organisers, and auditory products among others promote communication language development for children with Autism.
Problem statement
The problem that prompts this study is that most children with ASD attend mainstream schools yet teachers in these schools are not trained to deliver in a way that effectively meet the needs of these children. In addition, children on the autism spectrum receive general communication as their peers in the general population yet do not have the skills to comprehend this information. Children with ASD have impaired communication and social skills thus cannot comprehend instructions the peers can easily understand (Samson et al. 2014). In addition, children with ASD have impaired non-verbal communication (Foss-Feig et al. 2012) thus are unable to decode the message that a teacher encodes for comprehension of the whole class. The required level of differentiation and individualisation in delivery is missing, which hinders language and communication development of children with ASD. To better understand the challenges of children with ASD in mainstream classes, it is necessary to consider their difficulties in communication as well as the impairments they have.
Communication difficulties in children with autism spectrum disorder
Children with ASD often have difficulties in understanding and communicating effectively with other people. Worse enough, Wing et al. (2011) state that children within the autistic spectrum may not at times see any motivation to communicate with others. Children on the autism spectrum may also be delayed in ability to acquire language skills and as a result are disappointed for they cannot communicate their needs (Wong et al. 2015). Lack of language skills hinders children on the autism spectrum from joining social situation and as a result do not want to attend school. This separation from others in turn lowers their opportunities to acquire language skills. On the other hand, Zakari et al. (2014) write that children with ASD are not able to interpret social behaviour, which is always apparent from the way they avoid eye contact. In many cases, children on the autism spectrum have limited or no speech and their understanding of other people’s speech is impaired (Schreibman et al. 2015). This clearly reveals that for a child with ASD to learn in mainstream school, a lot of support is required where assistive technology plays a vital role. The consequence of the core deficits in children with ASD is that they need more effort and time form teachers/therapists in order to develop and improve attention, listening skill, and social skills (Duffy and Healy 2011). It is questionable whether this required effort and time is offered to children with ASD in mainstream schools. Nonetheless, technology is said to provide the required level of support to children on the autistic spectrum so they are able to effectively develop language and communication skills (Carvalho et al. 2015). This paper will establish how accurate this statement is.
Impairments in autistic children
Children on the autism spectrum have problems with any or all the characteristics that count in acquiring an understanding of speech and language (Wojciechowski and Al-Musawi 2017). For example, children with ASD might believe it is not necessary to communicate because they are unable to understand social situations or how others respond to a communicated message. On the other hand, Eigsti et al. (2011) write that children on the autism spectrum will not always respond to auditory information or pay attention to it. As a result, teachers should spend a lot of time and effort to train these children to pay attention to sounds, which may not always be the case in mainstream schools and care settings. Even when children with ASD seem to be paying attention, they might have problems decoding the meaning of words since they literally interpret words rather than match the words usage to the communication context (Benevides et al. 2017). Thus, children with ASD will not always be able to understand what is delivered because they cannot match the words with objects and thoughts.
Rationale
It has always been challenging for people in the general population to communicate with children with autism due to the impairments in these children. In addition, children with ASD require a lot of support, which takes people in the general population mush effort and time to offer and in some cases training to better understand the needs of these children. Conducting this study is worthwhile in that it provides insight to people in the general population on how they can use technology to effectively communicate with children on the autism spectrum. The paper explores various forms of technology used to support communication and language development of children with ASD thus provides various options to people seeking to effectively communicate with children on the autism children. The study will provide worthwhile knowledge to everyone involved in the care and development of children with ASD including parents, friends and family, healthcare providers, and teachers among others. If the insights provided by the end of this paper will be effectively implemented, children on the autism spectrum will receive the required support to develop their language and communication skills and as such overcoming their limitations for social interaction. Technology continues to develop and as a result more technology-based support for children with ASD are developed: this paper contributes to literature by considering how these technologies contribute to the development of children on the autism spectrum.
Aims and objectives
The ultimate aim of this study is to explore the use of technology to support language development and communication in children on the autistic spectrum. To achieve this aim, the following objectives guide the study:
To identify the challenges experienced by children with autism while communicating and socialising with others
To identify various technologies used to support language development and communication among children on the autism spectrum
To explore the effectiveness of different technologies used to support language development and communication of children on the autistic spectrum
To explore how the supportive technologies are made more attractive to children with autism
The find out the importance of using technology to develop communication and language skills of children on the autism spectrum
To recommend the most effective technologies to be used in the support of children with autism
Chapter 2: Literature Review
The experience of autistic children in communicating and socialising
Plethora of literature agree that living with autism is a daily life of behavioural differences. According to DeThorne et al. (2015), ASD is characterised by difficulties in social communication and repetitive, restricted behaviours and routines. However, Brignell et al. (2018) state that language difficulties are no longer core feature of ASD since most children on the autistic spectrum acquire language during school age such that by the age of 5 they can communicate using spoken language. This statement is widely criticised by researchers and scholars. According to Faras et al. (2010), most of autistic children experience difficulties in acquiring spoken language and therefore it should remain a core feature of ASD. In agreement, Shane et al. (2012) state that a significant number of children with autism have limited or no skills in spoken language and severity varies from person to person. Still, Aresti-Bartolome and Garcia-Zapirain (2014) state that between 20% and 30% of children in the autism spectrum fail to develop skills of spoken language and therefore remain verbally challenged. Language difficulties in autistic children have several negative effects including behavioural difficulties (Plesa Skwerer et al. 2016), poor social skills (Ayres et al. 2013), and poor adaptive functioning skills (Rossi et al. 2013). In the same vein, Zhang et al. (2018) state that the adverse effects of lack of spoken language in autistic children result to reduced quality of life and minimal opportunities to participate in the community. A study conducted by Hourcade et al. (2013) reveals that people with ASD that are minimally verbal are more aggressive and therefore the study concludes there is a relationship between communication impairment and higher levels of aggression. Another study conducted by Xin and Leonard (2015) reveals that 25% of children on the autism spectrum that are minimally verbal show deviant behaviours such as social withdrawal. Further, a study conducted by Radwan and Cataltepe (2016) establishes that self-injurious behaviour is common in children with ASD in that they are not able to express themselves. Minimally verbal is seen as a common characteristic of children on the autism spectrum. However, there is lack of consensus on what minimally verbal means. According to Plesa Skwerer et al. (2016), minimally verbal children lack pragmatic abilities and only start speaking their first words when they are more than 15 months old. On the other hand, Brignell et al. (2018) state that minimally verbal children are those with very limited repertoire of spoken words or fixed phrases that they use while communicating. According to DeThorne et al. (2015) minimally verbal children are those who use no words or use single few words. Zhang et al. (2018) define minimally verbal children as those who have no phrase speech (phrase of three or more words); thus, minimally verbal children are those that use single words on daily basis. From a different view, Vlachou and Drigas (2017) define minimally verbal children as those who have less that 30 functional words and are not able to use speech alone while communicating despite being at the age where one would expect them to use language. Living with autism has been widely researched and different authors have different accounts of what it feel for a child to live with autism. According to Shane et al. (2012), children with ASD are impaired in communication which is seen through absent or delayed speech and lack of non-verbal communication. In agreement, Mintz et al. (2012) write that children with autism cannot communicate non-verbally or decode non-verbal messages; for example, lack of pointing and difficulty following a point. Radwan and Cataltepe (2016) state that children with ASD are socially impaired and as such are not able to respond to others, have no interest in playing with others, and are unable to share pleasure. In the same vein, Rossi et al. (2013) write that autistic children are not able to initiate activities that others can join, which hinders their ability to socialise. Still, Xin and Leonard (2015) state that children with ASD have no or little imagination thus are not attract other to pretend play and neither do they participate in pretend play which isolates them from peers. From a different perspective, Doenyas et al. (2014) state that autistic children have impairments of interest, behaviours, and activities which further draw them away from the society.
According to DeThorne et al. (2015), ASD manifests differently in school aged children; for example, communication impairment entails muteness, unusual vocabulary that does not match the age of the child, and persistent echolalia. Socially, the study reveals that school aged children with ASD make inappropriate attempts to join play such as aggressiveness or disruptive behaviour. In addition, such children are not aware of the classroom norms and therefore keep criticizing teachers and disrupting others (Aresti-Bartolome and Garcia-Zapirain (2014. Therefore, children on the autism spectrum live in a different world from others which implies they should be supported to develop language skills and be able to socialise with others. Brignell et al. (2018) write that it is only a person that understands what it means to live with autism that would be able to support autistic children to develop language and communication skills.
Technologies used to support language development and communication in children with ASD
Both low and high technology items/systems have been used to support children with ASD to develop language and communication skills. Low technologies include printed response options, VOCA, adapted text, and graphic organisers while high technologies include computers, tablets, and iPads (Allen et al. 2016). A study conducted by DeThorne et al. (2015) reveals that alternate and augmented communication (AAC) is a technology that have helped children with ASD overcome their inability to communicate and meets their expression needs. AAC is broken down into unaided devices and aided devices. Unaided devices are manual signs and gestures while aided devices are low technology tools used in written and pictorial schedules to help autistic children follow through a particular activity. A study conducted by Vlachou and Drigas (2017) explores the usage of Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) in supporting children with ASD to meet their communication and language needs. The advent of 21st century has influenced development of more IT tools to assist children on the autism spectrum with their education (Shane et al. 2012). The use tablets and computers to assist children with autism has been widely researched. According to DeThorne et al. (2015), there are various iPad applications that can be used by both children with and without autism including flashcards and images that to be used in Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) therapy. In agreement, Mintz et al. (2012) state that iPads have become popular in supporting children with autism because there are several applications specifically designed to assist ASD children gain language and social skills. With an iPad, it is possible to add computerised games to regular therapy sessions, which helps autistic children concentrate and develop more communicative initiatives such as eye contact. In the same vein, Hourcade et al. (2013) write that the use of iPads to support children with ASD helps these children become more interactive and more verbalisation. Still, Clark et al. (2015) state that iPads are effective for supporting children with ASD in that these children respond favourably to visual images including pictures and video and less favourably to human beings. In agreement, Brignell et al. (2018) state that it is the effective response to visual images that informed to the development of video modelling for children with autism; in this case, children watch pictures and videos of desired skills or behaviour. Technology has also led to the development of video self-modelling techniques in which a child with autism watches an edited video of him/her successfully completing a desired skill and this has been effective in improving behaviour problems in children with ASD ().DeThorne et al. (2015) state that because iPad technology lays clear emphasis on visuals, it can perfectly blend with video self-modelling. Literature provides a significant amount of evidence in the use of iPod/iPad technology in supporting language and communication development in children with autism. According to Allen et al. (2016), the video loaded onto an iPod Touch can be carried by children with ASD: the video should combine video modelling techniques to effectively challenge the behaviour of children with ASD. On the other hand, Shane et al. (2012) write that iPods/iPads can be used as communication devices for children with autism. In the same vein, Zhang et al. (2018) state that iPads are e-readers that significantly improve literacy skills of students on the autism spectrum. In comparing the use of iPods to traditional interventions for children with ASD, Shane et al. (2012) state that iPods are superior to traditional communication devices. On the contrary, Vlachou and Drigas (2017) state that iPod technology could be superior to traditional interventions to support autistic children but more research is required to helps teachers and parents understand what technology is worth investing. In agreement, DeThorne et al. (2015) state that the use of iPads in supporting language and social development of children on autism spectrum is overrated since visuals do not appeal to all children with ASD. As such the author recommends that more research needs to be done on iPad technology and its effectiveness in supporting language and communication development in children on autism spectrum. Further, Mintz et al. (2012) state that some children on autism spectrum may not even learn how to turn on the device if there are multiple steps to be followed to make the turn on request. In a study to explore the use of iPads in supporting language and communication development in children with autism, Aresti-Bartolome and Garcia-Zapirain (2014) establish that some children learn how to unlock the device and access different pages to make requests. However, the study just like other related studies does not have a detailed discussion on extensive use of iPads beyond the training sessions for making requests.
One recent study by Hourcade et al. (2013) has compared speech generating devices (iPads and iPods) with picture exchange and signing. The study results reveal that children on the autism spectrum prefer different modes and this preference is related to how quickly they learn to use these speech generating devices. For most autistic children in this study, iPod was the most preferred and most easily learned device but the authors conclude there was no single suitable device for all students. Therefore, people supporting children with ASD to develop language and communication skills should assess what is preferred by individual learners and what they can easily learn to use (DeThorne et al. 2015).
The effectiveness of different technologies in supporting language development and communication in children with ASD
There is limited literature on the impact of tablets and other technological devices on the core features of ASD. However, Mintz et al. (2012) state that tablets among other devices used in supporting language and social development of autistic children are intended to serve several purposes including communication, social interaction, behaviour support, and sensory processing support. A study conducted by Brignell et al. (2018) reveal that tablets among other apps have promoted communication in autistic children as they create visual support, create timetables and schedules, facilitate sharing of information between home and school, and serve as speech generating devices. In the same vein, Ayres et al. (2013) write that tablets and apps for autistic children provide a platform for social stories and video modelling, which has effectively promoted social interaction. In agreement, DeThorne et al. (2015) write that tablets help children with ASD develop facial recognition and emotions, which is an integral part of social interaction. Still, Shane et al. (2012) establish that tablets have programmes that purport to teach eye contact, which promotes both communication (non-verbal) and social interaction. A study conducted by Faras et al. (2010) reveals that tablets play a significant role in behaviour support for children on the autism spectrum. In agreement, Brignell et al. (2018) write that tablets facilitate tracking and monitoring patterns of behaviour displayed by children with ASD which effectively informs the required behaviour support for individuals. According to Clark et al. (2015), tablets are intended to support behaviour in children with autism through reward charts, diaries, and journal. However, the study reveals there is no evidence that these features have been effective at promoting behaviour change in children with autism. Tablets are also established to support sensory processing in children with ASD. According to Xin and Leonard (2015), tablets use visually stimulating apps to capture and engage the mind of children with autism, which significantly promotes sensory development. A study conducted in US on the use of tablet to support the needs of children with ASD reveal that iPads are an effective instructional tool and important in enhancing learning and independence (Aresti-Bartolome and Garcia-Zapirain 2014). Another study by Doenyas et al. (2014) surveyed teachers and assistant teacher’s views of the effectiveness of tablets in teaching children with autism and the results establish that teachers are positive on the role of tablets in developing language and social skills in children with autism. A study conducted by Mintz et al. (2012) have similar findings and state that tablets have the capacity to include array of activities thus teaching can be individualised to meet the support needs of children with autism. In agreement, Zhang et al. (2018) write that tablets offer a variety of accessible features such as Zoom and Large Font, VoiceOver, Closed Captioning, White on Black Display, and Voice Control among others which effectively support children with ASD acquire the deficient core skills in language and communication. Hourcade et al. (2013) studied the effectiveness of tablets in supporting language and social needs of children on the autistic spectrum; the results reveal that tablets offer these children versatility in programming, centre of attention, and relative ease of use which attract learners with autism. Another study conducted by Brignell et al. (2018), reveal that tablets are effective at helping children on the autistic spectrum learn socialisation, communicate, and structure their daily environments irrespective of their fitting on the wide autism spectrum. DeThorne et al. (2015) give an example of how tablets have been effectively used to develop language and communication in children on the autistic spectrum; changes in screen colour have been used to show elapsed time thus helping these children effectively structure their daily routines which would otherwise would not have been attained.
Alternate and augmented communication (AAC) apps have become of particular interest to parents and teachers as they significantly enhance communication with children on the autistic spectrum (Ganz 2015). In the same vein, Ayres et al. (2013) state that AAC apps offer alternate ways to communication other than spoken language, which simplifies interaction with children on the autistic spectrum. A study by Vlachou and Drigas (2017) identifies the most effective AAC apps to include Avaz, Voice4u, and Avaz FreeSpeech. However, Shane et al. (2012) state that AAC apps are not suitable for use by older students and learners higher on the autistic spectrum. As such, the authors state that AAC apps about social situations and language usage in everyday life of an older student or one higher on the autistic spectrum should be developed. On the other hand, a study conducted by Allene et al. (2016) showed that AAC apps are not effective in supporting children with ASD but this was attributed to the way in which the intervention was administered: autistic children were given devices of any sort without completing a comprehensive assessment to determine the devices that would best match the need of individual children. In the same vein, DeThorne et al. (2015) state that tablets are cost effective as socially acceptable thus parents and teachers just move directly to these devices without assessing individual learner’s needs or engaging the right professionals, which has lowered the effectiveness of tablets in the support of children with ASD. The effectiveness of tablets usage to support children with ASD has been challenged by lack of training on how these devices should be used (Shane et al. 2012) as well as lack of pedagogical framework on how to include tablets to meet the needs of different learners with autism. In addition, Mintz et al. (2012) state that iPads should not be seen as tools that will drastically improve education for children with autism but should be seen as tools to support what teachers are doing in class to help autistic children acquire language and communication skills. In agreement, Doenyas et al. (2014) write that after children with autisms are provided with tablets, they should be trained on how to use the devices while teachers and parents should be trained on how to assess these children for gains to be realised. In the same vein, DeThorne et al. (2015) write that tablets should not replace direct instruction from teachers and are only good as the teachers are; therefore, if teachers are not trained on how to give instructions using tablets, then the devices will not be effective at developing language ad communication skills in children with autism.
How the supportive technologies are made more attractive to children with autism
Often, children on the autistic spectrum do not have interest in socialising and communicating, which further hinders language and communication development (Diener et al. 2016). To overcome this challenge, Bystrova-Yurievna et al. (2019) state that the technological interventions intended to support language and social development in children with ASD should be appealing to capture their attention. In the same vein, Chen et al. (2019) write that children with ASD have attention deficits and thus might show much more scattered attention as compared to their peers thus need appealing interventions. In addition, children with autism tend to show processing deficit towards real human faces thus would require support interventions that replace human faces as these would be appealing (Wolk et al. 2016). A study conducted by Knight et al. (2013) sought to establish whether visual speech cues are attractive to children on the autistic spectrum disorder. The results reveal that children on the autistic spectrum disorder have very minimal interest in human faces but much more interest in visual speech cues. Therefore, the study concludes that 3D virtual tutors with visual speech cues are more appealing to children with ASD. The findings of this study conquer to those of a study conducted by Chen et al. (2016) which reveals that children with ASD pay some degree of visual attention to uncommon visual contents such as animations and internalised articulations such as those found in 3D tutoring. Another similar study conducted by Lee (2019) establishes that 3D virtual tutors are more attractive to children with autism in that they pay a significant degree of attention to the additional visual speech cues in airflow and articulatory models fund in 3D virtual tutors. The study concludes that learners’ visual attention to visual speech cues in imperative in teaching language to children on the autistic spectrum disorder. The attractiveness of virtual reality support interventions to children on the autistic spectrum disorder has also been investigated. According to Escobedo et al. (2014), augmented reality is a crucial tool to support children with ASD as it is possible to create more attractive and interactive interfaces that can easily be manipulated by hand without using mouse and keyboard among other peripherals. The study concludes that this characteristic of augmented reality promoted interaction between the child and the device thus raising interest and curiosity in the task. This characteristic of augmented reality also helps engage the interest of children with ASD to acquire language and social skills thus fit for the purpose it is intended (Chen et al. 2015). In another study, Boucenna et al. (2014) state that interactive technologies intended to support children with ASD provide visual support to these learners thus making their utilisation more enjoyable. On the other hand, Kientz et al. (2013) write that technologies supporting children with ASD incorporate three features that make them more appealing to these children; these features are large displays, mobile and personalised, and personal recording feature. All these features are seen to engage the interest of children on the autistic spectrum disorder thus making them effective at helping them develop communication and social skills (Spiel et al. 2017).
A study conducted by Wang et al. (2018) sought to examine the effectiveness of visuals in attracting the interest of children with ASD. In the study, an attention-getter (a cartoon character from a popular animated series) was presented to children on the autism spectrum in order to monitor their attention. The cartoon ran for 93 seconds for 8 times. The results reveal that visual are effective at capturing the attention of children with ASD: at first, the children concentrated but over short durations but over time, the concentration duration was significantly longer. The study recommends that use of visuals coined with repetition can be very effective at supporting language development in children with ASD. According to Hume et al. (2014), iPads have several features that make them more attractive to children with ASD including wide, colourful, and bright screens. In agreement, Özen (2015) writes that iPads provide attractive usage which grabs the attention of children on the autistic spectrum. The attractive usage incorporates the ability to use the device with just a finger or hand as well as providing convenience in relation to usage, that is, it instantly opens with a single press on the button. On the other hand, Flores et al. (2012) state that iPads are portable which makes the more appealing to children on the autistic spectrum thus the children are able to remember cues on their own without the help of adults. Still, Jowett et al. (2012) write that iPad games are attractive to children with ASD, which promotes language development. However, the authors note that these games are so attractive to children with ASD to the extent that they do not wish to share the games with their peers which might hinder development of social skills. Further, Murdock et al. (2013) write that iPads with voice activation are attractive to children with ASD and effective at helping them develop language and skills. In addition to the attractive features of the technological devices used in supporting children with ASD, Wainer and Ingersoll (2011) write that children with disabilities sometimes require assistance operating or working with the devices, which encourages them to seek assistance from teachers or peers. For them to acquire the help, the will have to communicate which not only develops their communication skills but also social skills. With the technological devices, children with ASD have also become increasingly active in fun games, which have helped develop their language, communication, and social skills (Fergus et al. 2014). Therefore, we can conclude that the technological devices used in support of children with disabilities are attractive which promotes development of communication, language, and social skills. This conquers to the statement made by Odom et al. (2015) that technology is intrinsically appealing to children on the autistic spectrum disorder.
The importance of using technology to develop communication and language skills of children on the autism spectrum
Studies on interventions to support language and communication development in autistic children agree that technology has the potential to offer individually tailored interventions that are suitable to provide exactly what a child needs. According to Achmadi et al. (2012), computer technology has been important in giving instruction and intervention to children on the autistic spectrum disorder. In the same vein, Ramdoss et al. (2011) state that through computer technology, specific communication skills can be imparted and positive outcome such as increased vocal imitation, learning and increasing new vocabulary, and increasing spoken utterances have been realised (Grynszpan et al. 2014). In agreement, Knight et al. (2013) write that computer technology has been essential in that it has led to the realisation of functional language in children with ASD. On the other hand, Mintz et al. (2012) write that technological interventions are very integral towards helping children with ASD develop emotions and facial expressions, which helps them encode and decode messages sent non-verbally. In agreement, Miltenberger and Charlop (2015) write that computer-based interventions have helped children with ASD acquired social skills, which in turn promote development of language and communication skills. Huskens et al. (2013) conducted a study on the role of iPads in supporting children with ASD develop communication, language, and social skills. A compelling case is given whereby a mother shares her experience of how an iPad changed the life of her son. In the study, the boy was 9 years old and had autism. The typical issues in the boy that were associated with autism are aggressive and violent behaviour and verbal communication. After the boy spent a significant amount of time using an iPad, the mother states that she noticed signs of independence in the son; he was able to draw in ways he previously could not and the mother is in praise of the new technology having helped the son acquire independence. In a similar study, Allen et al. (2015) presents the case of a 2 years old girl who the iPad technology has given a voice. The case states that the girls has attended behaviour and occupational therapies but still was not able to speak but after her father acquired her an iPad, she was able to speak in broken sentences and was getting aware of the world around her. The study concludes that iPads have revolutionised communication among children on the autistic spectrum disorder. Finally, technology has proven attractive and appealing to children on the autistic spectrum as compared to real human faces Knight et al. (2013), which increases the concentration of these children; therefore, we can conclude that technology-based interventions are more effective at supporting language development and communication in children with ASD as compared to traditional interventions.
Chapter 3: Methodology
This study was carried out using secondary data only. Secondary analysis is the use of existing data to find answers to a research question that is different from the original work (Tripathy 2013). The secondary data was collected from books, articles, journals, and research papers among other sources.
Literature search procedure
First, the author developed a list of search terms to seek studies that included technology-based interventions to support children on the autistic spectrum disorder develop language and communication skills. The list of search terms included 15 total terms from which combinations were made and used while searching for relevant studies. These terms were autism, autistic children, autism spectrum disorder, children with autism, technology, information technology, assistive technology, computer-based interventions, computer-assisted instruction, computer, tablets, iPads, communication skills, language development, social skills, and social communication. The databases searched are Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane, ProQuest and Ebsco. To ensure the search yielded recent information, a date limiter was applied: studies published between 2013 and 2019. The target population was children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder. The initial search yielded more than 400 potential studies. Only studies published in English were considered. The first step was removing duplicates. The next step was comparing the search results with recent review of literature that relates to using technology to support children with ASD acquire language and communication skills. This second steps according to Aromataris and Riitano (2014) helps ensure that the found studies represent the comprehensive range of all published research on the topic. Once this step was complete, the author read titles of the results to determine whether each article was effective in answering the research question. On studies that incorporated technology in teaching communication and language skills to children with ASD were considered for the next step. The next step was reading through the abstracts of these studies to establish how effective they were at answering the research question. After this screening, about 56 empirical studies remained and the author determined whether or not to include them in the analysis based on the inclusion criteria below.
Inclusion criteria
The inclusion criteria was (a) published in a peer reviewed with the years of 2013 and 2019 and having participants diagnosed with ASD, (b) supporting language and communications development, (c) including technology as the intervention or part of the intervention, and (d) the population been children. In addition, studies that are part of a book but meet the above criteria were considered. Based on the inclusion criteria, a comprehensive list of 17 research studies qualified for analysis; individual articles were evaluated against this inclusion criteria to determine how effective they were at answering the research question. Studies were excluded if the technological intervention pertained to (a) unspecified assistive technology, (b) alternative assistive communication instruction, (c) task completion interventions, (d) video teleconferencing interventions, and (e) video-modelling interventions. Though potentially relevant to answering the research question, past research reveals that these technological interventions are effective at supporting language development and communication in children with ASD thus no need for further research; as such, the studies were excluded for this study. For example, video-modelling is affective in developing language and communication skills to children with autism (Jowett et al. 2012). Studies were also excluded if the population was not children with ASD. Literature reviews and studies that did not include original data/ideas were also excluded. Finally, studies that describe autism without the scope of technology and computer-based software used by autistic children were excluded. Even though the 17 articles qualified for the extended literature review, only four sources were required. Therefore the author read through the content of each of the 17 articles evaluating against the instructions for the extended literature reviews and the wider objectives of the study as states in chapter two. After this step, four sources that were deemed the most appropriate were selected which are:
Using an iPad2® with systematic instruction to teach shared stories for elementary-aged students with autism by Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Kemp-Inman and Wood
“It’s a blessing and a curse”: Perspectives on tablet use in children with autism spectrum disorder by King, Brady, and Verois
Use of computer-assisted technologies (CAT) to enhance social, communicative, and language development in children with autism spectrum disorders by Ploog, Scharf, Nelson, and Brooks
Opening new worlds for those with autism: technology is creating great new possibilities for those on every part of the spectrum by IEEE
Rationale for the secondary research approach
Cognisant of the many data collection challenges inherent in developmental research, analysis of secondary data was opted for this study. According to Greenhoot and Dowsett (2012), it is difficult to recruit and retain large number of participants in developmental studies a challenge that can be avoided by analysing existing data sets. In this study, the most appropriate population is children diagnosed with ASD and given their deficiencies, it would have been challenging to recruit and retain them in the study. Therefore, analysing existing data has helped overcome the challenge. On the other hand, Johnston (2017) writes that tracking participants’ development in longitudinal studies is time consuming and very expensive and the same results can be attained by analysing existing data published over a specified duration, which is attained in this study. For example, to establish how effective technology assisted interventions have been in supporting language development and communications in children with ASD, the researcher would have required to conduct the study over a long duration but given the time constraints, analysing secondary data has helped overcome the challenge. Cheng and Phillips (2014) state that shared data sets have vast samples, measures of many constructs, and longitudinal designs that allow a researcher address questions that otherwise would require too much time and resources to answer. In this study, the primary objective is to explore the use of technology in supporting children with ASD develop language and communication skills. To attain this aim, it is imperative to establish if technologically-based interventions have been effective which if was to be established using primary data would require so much time. Therefore, the secondary approach adopted for the study saves the author time and resources. Despite the ease of analysing existing data to answer research questions, this data is not always suitable for all research questions and to all researchers. According to Clark (2013), secondary data is already collected which denies a researcher control over who was sampled, what constructs were measured, and how the constructs were measured. To overcome this limitation of secondary data, the author first evaluated the appropriateness of sources in answering the research question. A search strategy was defined and screening was done to ensure only children with ASD were sampled, the role of technology is supporting language development and communication in these children assessed. Any existing source that did not meet the inclusion criteria was not selected for the analysis. On the other hand, Whiteside et al. (2012) state that another pitfall in using secondary data is underestimating the amount of time it takes to understand the new data set. To overcome this limitation, enough time was allocated for evaluating every single source against the inclusion criteria and ensuring the four selected for the extended review were the most appropriate.
Chapter 4: Ethics
The use of existing data to find answers to a research question does not eliminate the need for a researcher to make ethical considerations. According to Jol and Stommel (2016), most of the ethical concerns in secondary research revolve around return for consent and potential harm to individual subjects. In the same vein, Long-Sutehall et al. (2011) write that secondary data vary in the amount of identifying information in it. To avoid harming individual subjects and the need for re-seeking consent, the author ensured that any data used had no identifying information through the use of appropriate codes. In addition, data that was entirely anonymous and devoid of identifying information was used. Throughout this study, the author refers to the population as children with ASD, children on the autistic spectrum, or children with autism. This generalisation ensures that the subjects in the original studies cannot be traced thus protecting identify and promoting their privacy. In secondary studies, a researcher should always ensure permission to use existing information is granted. Irwin (2013) write that if data is freely available on books, the internet, or other public forums, permission for further use is already granted. The sources analysed in this study are all freely available on the internet thus the author did not have to seek permission to use these sources. Nonetheless, ownership of original data throughout the work is acknowledge through the use of citations and providing a list of references towards the end of the paper. Hewson and Stewart (2014) write that if a researcher needs to analyse data that is part of another research project which is not freely available, then explicit request to use the data must be sought. At no point in this study did the author use data within other projects: only information freely available of the internet were used. Jol and Stommel (2016) write that in secondary research, a researcher should ensure the information obtained is relevant, adequate, and not excessive. In this study, the researcher understood that the original data was not meant to answer the research question to this paper thus had to be evaluated to establish how appropriate it was in answering the current research question. The criteria used for this evaluation was purpose for which the data was collected, accuracy, the period in which it was collected, and the content of the data in relation to the content of the current research paper. Throughout the secondary analysis, only softcopies were used and these were stored in a password-protected computer to prevent access by unauthorised persons, destruction, and accidental loss.
In this secondary analysis, some of the considered sources used qualitative data which presents the issue of data archiving. According to Quinlan et al. (2019), data archiving exposes a participant’s personal views, which underscores the need for anonymisation, which can only be attained when analysing the initial transcriptions. When conducting the secondary analysis, the author noticed the qualitative studies used pseudonyms to protect the identity of the original sources. Therefore, the author was justified to use this information without the risk of potentially exposing the views of original respondents. Yardley et al. (2014) write that even though existing data sets are typically devoid of identifying information, secondary researchers are at the risk of unwitting violations of confidentiality that primary researchers would be more cognisant. Primary researchers better immerse in the phenomenon thus are more aware of the issues within a community which informs what date they should publish. As a result, primary researchers are better positioned to mask subjects’ responses to the awareness of these issues but secondary researchers unaware of these issues are likely to unmask those responses. This is particularly the case in studies involving vulnerable populations (Coltart et al. 2013). This study involved a vulnerable population but the researcher cognisant of the ethics in special education did not unmask the responses presented in the data analysed. The author also omits some information presented in the reviewed sourced that seems to unmask the personal struggles of children with autism. With a passion of safeguarding the children with ASD while promoting their development, the author was able to calculate any risks inherent in divulging sensitive information.
Chapter 5: Extended Literature Review Analysis
Introduction
This critical review will be inspired by Wallace and Wray (2016) guide to writing a critical review and analysis. This chapter has three subsections including this introduction, a body that critically reviews and analyses each of the four selected sources, and a conclusion that compares the different contributions to knowledge in the use of technology in supporting language development and communication for children with ASD. For each of the four sources, the text will be introduced, the content reported, the methodology evaluated, the findings evaluated, and a conclusion drawn from the findings. The author’s position in relation to the topic is that technology-based interventions are effective at supporting children with ASD acquire language and communication skills. The author’s position in relation to the topic influenced the sources to be reviewed in this chapter: the sources must have technology as an intervention to support children with ASD acquire communication and language skills. By the end of the chapter, the author aspires to establish how the four sources perceive technology in relation to supporting language development and communication in children with autism. According to Knight et al. (2013), technology-based interventions must be appealing and attractive in order to capture the interest of children with ASD for them to be considered effective at promoting language development and acquisition of communication skills. Therefore, the author in analysing the four sources aspires to establish how each of the considered device is made attractive to children with ASD.
Critical Review and Analysis of Source
Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Kemp-Inman, A. and Wood, L.A., 2014. Using an iPad2® with systematic instruction to teach shared stories for elementary-aged students with autism. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(1), pp.30-46.
Introduce the text
My purpose in reading this text by Spooner et al. is to establish what the text suggests may be the essence of using iPad2 with systematic instruction to teach shared stories to children with ASD. In addition, I am reading the text to establish how effective iPad2 are at developing communication and language skills in children with autism. The text is aligned to the position of the author in that it aspires to find out how iPad2® affects the listening comprehension of children with ASD which is closely linking with language and communication skills of children with learning disabilities (Allen et al. 2015).
Report the content
Spooner et al. are trying to establish the effect of systematic instruction paired with an iPad2® in teaching shared stories to children with ASD. The main kind of claim is to research knowledge. Spooner et al. claim to research knowledge about how shared stories can increase student demonstration of early literacy skills and comprehension of text is derived from the theoretical knowledge he develops in order to frame his research knowledge. The claim that literacy skills are relevant for all students is relevant to this work in that the author aspires to establish how technology can be used to support children with ASD so they can acquire literacy skills as their peers. According to Wolk et al. (2016), iPads are effective at supporting learners with autism develop communication and language skills; this promotes the literacy level of these learners. The authors also claim that children with ASD are more familiar with iPads thus more interested in iPads than human teachers. The claim conquers with empirical findings that iPads are more attractive to children with ASD thus a more reliable intervention in supporting language development and communication skills (Flores et al. 2012; Hume et al. 2014; Özen 2015). Spooner et al. claim that iPads create responding opportunities when paired with shared stories thus should be increasingly used in mainstream schools to support language and communication skills development in children with ASD. The claim is supported by empirical findings that iPads are effective at promoting language development in children on the autistic spectrum (Jowett et al. 2012).
Evaluate the methodology
The study adopts experimentation is very relevant in answering the research question. The study is also innovative in data collection methods: it measures the effects of independent variables on the dependent variables thus develops a suitable sheet for the data to be recorded. The research design is not very effective at maintaining the confidentiality of the study participants. They are identified by name and other personal information such as origin and gender are revealed. The study does not also indicate whether the consent was sought before selecting the four in the study. Additionally, data is analysed per person without the use of coding or pseudonyms which is a breach of privacy.
Evaluate the findings
The claims in the findings section are convincing because first they are visually inspected by the researchers and second, they show how each participant progressed thus a trend can be established by comparing the results of the four participants. According to Grynszpan et al. (2014), progress in language development in children with ASD can be effectively measured either through baseline, intervention or maintenance which were all applied in this study. Inter-observer reliability was established during data collection with a score of 95.56% across all participants which makes the data very reliable. Additionally, data was collected on procedural fidelity for all the sessions which ensures the same steps were followed for all participants; this further promotes the reliability of the study results. Finally, claims in this source are backed up with evidence which further promotes their reliability.
Drawing conclusion
This study addresses my research questions by identifying iPads as technological intervention used to support children with ASD as well as establishing that iPads paired with shared stories are effective at promoting communication skills in children with ASD. Even though past studies have established that shared stories are effective at teaching early literacy and literacy skills in children with ASD, this source provides further evidence that children with ASD can learn in a shared story format on an iPad. The innovation provided in this source is pairing iPads with shared stories to further develop literacy and communication skills in children with ASD.
King, A.M., Brady, K.W. and Voreis, G., 2017. “It’s a blessing and a curse”: Perspectives on tablet use in children with autism spectrum disorder. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 2, p.2396941516683183.
Introduce the text
I am reading this text to understand the views of educational professionals on the use of tablet technology in supporting children with ASD. I am also reading the text with a purpose of establishing how the insights gained from this source can be applied in supporting language development and communication in children on the autistic spectrum. The first purpose reflects the need to understand the orientations of professionals in education which I am part of. The second purpose reflects the personal position in which I closely work with children with ASD. The empirical findings presented contrasting information on the effectiveness of tablet technology in supporting language development in children with ASD (Sankardas and Rajanahally 2017). As such, I am reading this source as a determining factor on the effectiveness of using tablet technology in supporting autistic children.
Report the content
The authors’ primary objective is to delve deeper into the use of tablets with children with ASD in the classroom solely based on the opinions and insights of educational professionals who directly work with these children and support their needs using this technology. The main kind of claim is to research knowledge. King et al. claims to knowledge about how the tablet technology has effected teaching and learning for children with ASD are derived from investigating educational professionals. The claim that the tablet is both a blessing and a curse relates to this work in that empirical findings reveal that tablets promote language and communication skills (which is a blessing) but hinder socials skills since learners could get so interested in the device that they do not want to share with their peers (). The authors also claim that teachers should be trained on how to operate the device and how to transmit information using the tablet. This claim is relevant in that is addresses a concern raised in literature (Shane et al. 2012) that lack of training hinders the effectiveness of suing tablets to support language development and communication in children with ASD.
Evaluate the methodology
The methodology is very relevant to the research question: the source aimed at understanding the use of tablets with autistic children and then uses focus groups to collect data from educational professionals who are with these children and deliver using tablets. The focus groups provided in-depth questioning that is necessary in gaining the required level of understanding. The source is innovative in data collection because the focus group research assumes that individuals have personal opinions, ideas, and understanding and it is the role of the researcher to access these ideas, opinions, and thoughts. This innovate nature of collecting data helped the researcher acquire a deeper understanding of the use of tablets in teaching children with ASD. Therefore, the methodology perfectly aligns with the purpose of the research. The source mentions the names of those that data was collected from thus fails to meet ethical considerations in primary research. It is also not indicated whether consent was sought or even whether participation was voluntary.
Evaluate the findings
The source concludes that tablets are being used for various purposes in supporting children with ASD but there are a variety of challenges associated with their use. These findings are fairly convincing given the sources are professionals in education. The authors also back up claims with coherent piece of research which further makes the findings convincing. This source and this study shares the overall positive and negative stance towards technology in supporting children with ASD. Nonetheless, the positive outweighs the negative leaving technology an effective intervention in supporting language development and communication in children with ASD (Doenyas et al. 2014; Kientz et al. 2013; Wang et al. 2018). King et al. could have made the findings more convincing if they had examined the effectiveness of tablet technology using children with ASD rather than relying on educational professionals who might not be empathetic enough to share in the experience of children with ASD. Additionally, King et al. generalises the findings of their study and concludes that tablets are a curse and blessing even though they collected data from 17 participants. 17 persons are not representative of the education professionals across the world thus King et al. are claiming too much. To overcome this, the authors would not have generalised the findings beyond the school in which the study was conducted.
Drawing conclusion
This source addressing my research question by first identifying tablets as among the technologies used to support children with ASD in schooling. Second, the source supports my research by acknowledging tablets as a blessing in developing children with ASD which implies the device is effective at developing language and communication skills of children with ASD. The source recognises training as a basic element in the adoption of tablets in supporting children with ASD which is also highlighted in the empirical findings (Wass and Porayska-Pomsta 2014). The source further knowledge in the field of special education by specifying the developments that needs to be made to the app to make it more suitable to helping children with autism acquire language and communication skills. The source also identifies ways through which tablets could be made more attractive to children with ASD. The source provides innovation in methodology b highlighting that exploratory studies should use a methodology that allows the participants share their ideas, views, and opinions.
Ploog, B.O., Scharf, A., Nelson, D. and Brooks, P.J., 2013. Use of computer-assisted technologies (CAT) to enhance social, communicative, and language development in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 43(2), pp.301-322.
Introduce the text
My central question when reading this text is what does the text suggest is the effectiveness of computer-assisted technologies (CAT) in supporting children with ASD to develop communication, language and social skills. Therefore, as I read this source, I am seeking to understand the role of CAT in development of language and communication skills in children on the autistic spectrum. Drawing from theoretical findings, my position is that CAT are effective at promoting development of communication and language skills in children with ASD. Therefore, this source links to my work in that it provides adept exploration of the effectiveness of CAT in supporting children with ASD.
Report the content
The authors are trying to explore and establish how effective computer assisted technologies have been in promoting social, language, and communication skills in children on the autistic spectrum. The authored are informed by theory when making their claims. The content is clearly knowledge-for-understanding, but the authors informed by theory emphasis on knowledge-for-action. The knowledge-for-action is demonstrated through the way the authors extensively use research findings to support their claims. A positive value stance is adopted towards the use of CAT to enhance social, communication, and language skills in people with autism. This claim is relevant to this work in that it provides insights to the first, third, and fifth objectives of the review. The source identifies various computer-assisted technologies used by children with ASD and compares what different studies say about these technologies which is partially part of the objectives in this study.
Evaluate the methodology
The source analyses secondary data to answer the research questions while testing the study hypothesis. This approach to the study is fairly relevant to the topic in that it helps the author analyse large data sets specific to the objectives (Cheng and Phillips 2014) which helps in providing insights to the research issues. In addition, the approach helps the authors identify contrasting information on the use of technology in supporting language and communication development in children with autism and address these gaps. The study does not use any information that could lead to identification of the participants in the primary sources which helps promote confidentiality of the sources. The methodology is not innovative as it follows the general guidelines for conducting a secondary study. The source adopts thematic analysis which ensures all the study objectives and addressed in good depth thus appropriate in answering the research questions.
Evaluate the findings
The source establishes that properly-designed computer assisted technologies are essential in enhancing language, communication and social skills in children on the autistic spectrum. However, the source states that most of the available computer assisted technologies are not developed specifically for use by children with ASD thus may not always be effective at meeting the intended purpose. These claims are considerably convincing in that the authors analyse several sources before making the claim. In addition, the authors back their claims with adequate evidence which makes the claims more reliable. Further, the authors remain subjective on the role of computer assisted technologies in enhancing social, language, and communication skills in children with autism; their conclusions are based on the findings of the empirical studies they analyse. This adds to the validity and reliability of the results of this source. Most of the analysed sources support the argument that properly-designed CAT are effective at enhancing language, social, and communication skills in children on the autistic spectrum. This conquers to the empirical findings (Hourcade et al. 2013; DeThorne et al. 2015).
Drawing conclusion
The source concludes that the effectiveness of a computer assisted technology in supporting children with ASD is dependent on how properly the technology in designed and aligned to the needs of this population. This conclusion is relevant to this study because it directly relates to the objective seeking to establish the effectiveness of technologies in supporting development of communication and language skills in autistic children. An outright answer is provided: the effectiveness of the technology is dependent on how well the technology is personalised. This source furthers knowledge in special education by emphasising the need for personalisation which has been scarcely mentioned in past studies. The authors could have made their methodology more innovative by incorporating a systematic analysis tool rather than generally reviewing what was found out in themes.
IEEE 2016. Opening new worlds for those with autism: technology is creating great new possibilities for those on every part of the spectrum. [Online] Available at https://pulse.embs.org/july-2016/opening-new-worlds-autism/ [Accessed 27 August 2019]
Introduce the text
I am reading this text in order to understand how technology has opened new worlds for people with autism. I have selected this text in this analysis because it practically details how iPads among other computer devices have helped people with ASD communicate and interact with others. Some part of the text particularly focuses on how iPads have promoted language development and communication in a child with autism which directly links to the primary objective of this study. Theory reviewed in this analysis establishes that iPads are effective at supporting development of language and communication skills in children with autism (Vlachou and Drigas 2017) which conquers with the positionality of this source. The text also reveals that visuals are what makes technological devices such as iPads attractive to children with ASD, which aligns to the fourth objective of this analysis.
Report the content
The author’s primary objective when writing this source is to present evidence that technology has been effective at supporting the development of people with autism in terms of developing language, social, and communication skills. To achieve this aim, the author gives different cases of people who have developed communication and social skills with the help of technology. The content is clearly knowledge-for-action as it details the practical usage of technological devices to support language development in people with autism. The author’s arguments are informed by experience of people with ASD using the devices as well as the professionalism of people that develop these devices thus appears to have a strong knowledge-for-understanding. Several claims are made in the source that are relevant to this analysis. The major claim is that electronic devices have profound and transformative effects on the lives of people on the autistic spectrum. This is singled out as the major claim relevant to this work using the research questions. The claim not only provides answer to the first objective of this study but also to the fourth and fifth.
Evaluate the methodology
Chandler does not clearly mention the methodology adopted for this source. However, traces of case analysis are evident which are very relevant to achieving the primary aim of the source. I find the way in which the author collects data to be very innovative; he relies of related studies, cases from autistic children that have significantly benefited from technology and insights from professionals whose technical competencies have informed the development of devices intended to promote communication and language skills of people with ASD. The source is not a research paper thus does not details the ethical considerations upheld. Nonetheless, the author includes accounts of persons that have benefited from technology as well as those behind the development of these devices thus could have been more sensitive to promoting their confidentiality.
Evaluate the findings
The claims made in the source are fairly convincing for the context of using iPads to support language and communication development in children with ASD. The claims are informed by testimonials backed up with evidence, which makes them fairly convincing. Additionally, the claims on the use of conversation simulators to help people on higher-functioning autistic spectrum are fairly convincing with a steep-to-step demonstration on how the devices work. This works shares Chandry’s stance towards iPads in supporting children with ASD. In the source, the author does not specify the population to which the devices are effective but generalises to people with ASD. This study is more interested in the use of these devices in supporting children with ASD thus can borrow from the findings of the source since children are part of the general population.
Drawing conclusion
The source concludes that technology has profoundly promoted language and communication development in people with autism. This statement directly addresses the third objective of this study which seeks to establish whether technological devices are effective in developing communication and language skills in children with ASD. The source particularly explores the effectiveness of the iPad technology which is at the core of this study. Therefore, the results of this source significantly informs the results of this study. The source furthers knowledge in the field by explaining how technology has been beneficial to people with autism using cases. The study also details the works of professionals behind the devices used in support of people with ASD which has not been attained using past literature. This sheds more light on how the devices should be operated for successful engagement.
Conclusion
The four sources make significant contribution to the topic. While all the sources agree that technology has significantly enhanced social, communication, and language skills of children on the autistic spectrum, Ploog et al. (2013) state that the significance varies based on how well the technology is tailored to the needs of individual children with ASD. This relative effectiveness of technologies in enhancing communication and language skills in children with ASD is what King et al. (2017) describe as the blessing and curse of computer assisted technologies particularly iPads. On the other hand, Spooner et al. (2014) establish that iPads paired with shared stories positively affect student’s ability to analyse tasks but insignificantly affects their listening comprehension. The authors therefore infer the technologies are not effective at enhancing all the core skills that are wanting in children with autism: each technology has a role (considerate or inconsiderate) in building a specific skill. From this information, we can infer that different computer assisted technologies are effective at enhancing specific skills thus their adoption should be based on what skills need to be developed. According to King et al. (2017), the tablet serves six purposes including alternate and augmented communication, video-based modelling, as a support for academic work, as a teaching tool for professionals in education, as a way to teach turn-taking skills, and as a reward. This complexity of using tablets to develop communication and language skills in children with ASD is what King et al. (2017) associate with the reduced effectiveness in enhancing social, communication and language skills in people with ASD. The other sources consider the characteristics on children with autism as the factors influencing language and communication development. For example, Ploog et al. (2013) write that people with ASD have varying degrees of difficulty with social, language, and communication skills thus the same tablet cannot effectively support the needs of all these learners. In agreement, IEEE (2016) write that technological tools that effective support the needs of those on the higher-functioning end of the autistic spectrum cannot effectively support the needs of those on the lower-functioning end of the spectrum. Nonetheless, Ploog et al. (2013) highlights the effect of the high level of sophistication required to manage audio-visual information in virtual reality technologies on their effectiveness in enhancing language and communication development in children with ASD. This conquers to empirical findings; computer assisted technologies are sophisticated thus requires training to teacher for them to serve the purpose they are intended Aresti-Bartolome and Garcia-Zapirain (2014).
King et al. (2017) state that despite the popularity of iPad technologies in supporting language and communication skills in children with ASD, there are challenges which potentially lower effectiveness of this technology. Spooner et al. (2014) also states that some learners have no interest in iPads which lowers the effectiveness of the device in supporting learners with ASD. In the same vein, IEEE (2016) reveal that iPads are not always appropriate for all learners since some are just interested in the end surprise and thus does not understand or at least appreciate the academic part of having an iPad. Empirical findings also highlight the challenges and challenging behaviours in using iPads which makes them less effective at enhancing social, communication, and language skills in children on the autistic spectrum. For example, DeThorne et al. (2015) state that some learners with ASD manipulate iPads into doing something else other than what it was intended thus the projected outcome is not achieved. On the other hand, Zhang et al. (2018) write that some of the children with ASD have no much interest in iPads other that being able to play video games. Still, Hourcade et al. (2013) identify some challenging behaviours posed by tablets in children with ASD. These include fighting over the tablet, aggression towards teachers, app violation, aggression towards the tablet itself, and perseveration on learning to use the tablet. IEEE (2016) write that children with ASD withdraw from others when using tablet which questions how effective the device is in enhancing social skills. King et al. (2017) establish that tablets have multiple competing uses which hinders their effectiveness in challenging behaviour among children with ASD. This compares to the finding by Spooner et al. (2014) that if used independently, iPads have incompatible uses such as school versus home, reward versus academic work, and AAC versus daily other use. These competing uses makes it challenges for children with ASD to differentiate the intended purpose once they are given an iPad and might end up doing what was not expected. For example, at home they do not share the iPads but at school they are expected to share. The four sources agree that computer assisted technologies are inadequately designed which potentially lowers their effectiveness in enhancing language and communication skills in children on the autistic spectrum. IEEE (2016) state that what works for children on the higher-functioning end is not what learners on the lower-functioning need thus the apps need to be differentiated and assigned based on the needs of individual persons. Spooner et al. (2014) describe the apps as fail proof because they do not allow a student to touch the wrong answer but instead only allows them to touch the correct and get a reward. As such, children with ASD may keep touching the provided answers until the correct one ticks which does not enhance literacy. On the other hand, Ploog et al. (2013) state that computer assisted apps do not reinforce soon enough so the learners can lose interest really fast, which hinders development. Finally, King et al. (2017) write that some children with ASD are sensory sound sensitive and therefore loud buzz might cause aggressive behaviours in these children. Empirical findings also indicate that computer assisted technology are not always adequately designed. For example, Brignell et al. (2018) state that it is challenging to find apps that match the academic level of different children. On the other hand, Faras et al. (2010) write that iPads are giving children with ASD directions but they are not using visuals to guide them so the children do not understand what they are supposed to do.
From the four sources, we can conclude that computer assisted technologies are effective at enhancing social, language and communication skills in children with ASD but their effectiveness is based on how adequately developed. If tailored to meet the needs of individual learners, computer assisted technologies could be more effective at serving the purpose they are intended.
Chapter 6: General Conclusion
The aim of this study was to explore the use of technology in supporting language development and communication in children with ASD. The results reveal that properly-designed computer assisted technologies may be beneficial to children with ASD. However, the results reveal that most of the available apps are not tailored to specifically meet the needs of children with ASD. In addition, the results reveal that symptoms of ASD manifest differently and therefore it would be wrong to design standard programmes for all children with ASD. Most of the technologies developed to support children with ASD are flawed and limited. Some of the apps use sounds that unintentionally encourage some autistic children to undesirable behaviour or hinder the intended purpose from being accomplished. Some apps are seen to be complex requiring training for teachers and learners to be able to operate them which hinders effectiveness. Others are appropriate for children on the higher-functioning end of the spectrum while other are suitable for children on the lower-functioning end of the spectrum. The use of visuals is associated with effectiveness of the devices in attracting the interest of children with autism. In addition, these devices are seen to complement human faces which makes them more appealing to learners that avoid interaction with humans. Therefore, before adopting the use of these technological devices, it is wise that one assesses the needs of individual learners and gets the device that perfectly matches the need.
Limitations of the study
The study analysed the results of primary studies that sampled data collected from various sources including children with ASD, educational professionals, and family caregivers. These participants had contrasting views on the effectiveness of technologies in supporting children with ASD which makes it hard to draw a solid conclusion. Second, children with ASD have different interests and deficiencies but this study prominently focuses on children on the lower-functioning end of the spectrum. Therefore the study results cannot be generalised to all children on the autistic spectrum. Timing is another primary limitation to this study. It is possible that in the near future, thee use of technology in supporting children with ASD will dramatically increase. This will influence more researchers to focus on this topic and the result will be vast literature on this topic. Newer reviews will be required for readers to understand this topic in depth which implies that the findings of this review may not be relevant in the near future. Additionally, the findings of this review are informed by the completeness of the search technique. The inclusion criteria might have led to the exclusion of some sources that were very relevant to this study. Further, this study is inherent of the methodological limitations of the reviewed sources. Finally, all the studies included in this review indicate positive outcomes in the use to technology to enhance language and communication skills. However, the long-term effect of using this technologies and its effect of language and communication development in people with ASD has not been studied. As such, the study is not able to establish the long-term effect of technological devices in supporting children on the autistic spectrum.
Implications for practice and further research
To increase the effectiveness of technological devices in supporting language and communication development in children with ASD, the following should be considered. First, the devices should be administered based on the needs of individual learners. Teachers should first assess learners with ASD to establish the functioning end they are at and the type of supporting devices they would require. Second, teachers and learners should be trained of how to use this devices so they can use them for the right purpose. Third, tablets should be essentially used as sound generating devices and not used for other purposes. The limitations of this study informs the direction for future research. First, technology in education of children with ASD is dramatically changing thus researchers should keep studying developments in technology and how they affect social, communication, and language skills of children with ASD. Second, the review establishes there is no literature of long-term effects of technology on language development in children with ASD. Future researchers should conduct longitudinal studies to bridge this gap. Future researchers should also compare what works for children on the lower-functioning end of the spectrum with that of children on the higher-functioning end of the spectrum. Finally, future researchers should establish what alternatives are there for children with ASD that show no interest in computer assisted technologies.
References
Achmadi, D., Kagohara, D.M., Van Der Meer, L., O’Reilly, M.F., Lancioni, G.E., Sutherland, D., Lang, R., Marschik, P.B., Green, V.A. and Sigafoos, J., 2012. Teaching advanced operation of an iPod-based speech-generating device to two students with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(4), pp.1258-1264.
Allen, M.L., Hartley, C. and Cain, K., 2015. Do iPads promote symbolic understanding and word learning in children with autism?. Frontiers in psychology, 6, p.138.
Allen, M.L., Hartley, C. and Cain, K., 2016. iPads and the use of “apps” by children with autism spectrum disorder: do they promote learning?. Frontiers in psychology, 7, p.1305.
Aresti-Bartolome, N. and Garcia-Zapirain, B., 2014. Technologies as support tools for persons with autistic spectrum disorder: a systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public health, 11(8), pp.7767-7802.
Aromataris, E. and Riitano, D., 2014. Constructing a search strategy and searching for evidence. Am J Nurs, 114(5), pp.49-56.
Ayres, K.M., Mechling, L. and Sansosti, F.J., 2013. The use of mobile technologies to assist with life skills/independence of students with moderate/severe intellectual disability and/or autism spectrum disorders: Considerations for the future of school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 50(3), pp.259-271.
Benevides, T.W., Carretta, H.J. and Lane, S.J., 2016. Unmet need for therapy among children with autism spectrum disorder: Results from the 2005–2006 and 2009–2010 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs. Maternal and child health journal, 20(4), pp.878-888.
Boucenna, S., Narzisi, A., Tilmont, E., Muratori, F., Pioggia, G., Cohen, D. and Chetouani, M., 2014. Interactive technologies for autistic children: A review. Cognitive Computation, 6(4), pp.722-740.
Brignell, A., Chenausky, K.V., Song, H., Zhu, J., Suo, C. and Morgan, A.T., 2018. Communication interventions for autism spectrum disorder in minimally verbal children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (11).
Carvalho, V., Brandão, J., Cunha, P., Vasconcelos, J. & Soares, F. 2015, "Tobias in the Zoo – A Serious Game for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders", International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 23-29.
Chen, F., Wang, L., Peng, G., Yan, N. and Pan, X., 2019. Development and evaluation of a 3-D virtual pronunciation tutor for children with autism spectrum disorders. PloS one, 14(1), p.e0210858.
Christensen, D.L., Braun, K.V.N., Baio, J., Bilder, D., Charles, J., Constantino, J.N., Daniels, J., Durkin, M.S., Fitzgerald, R.T., Kurzius-Spencer, M. and Lee, L.C., 2018. Prevalence and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years—autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2012. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 65(13), p.1.
Coltart, C., Henwood, K. and Shirani, F., 2013. Qualitative secondary analysis in austere times: Ethical, professional and methodological considerations. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, pp.271-292.
DeThorne, L., Betancourt, M.A., Karahalios, K., Halle, J. and Bogue, E., 2015. Visualizing syllables: Real-time computerized feedback within a speech–language intervention. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 45(11), pp.3756-3763.
Duffy, C. and Healy, O., 2011. Spontaneous communication in autism spectrum disorder: A review of topographies and interventions. Research in autism spectrum disorders, 5(3), pp.977-983.
Escobedo, L., Tentori, M., Quintana, E., Favela, J. and Garcia-Rosas, D., 2014. Using augmented reality to help children with autism stay focused. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 13(1), pp.38-46.
Fletcher-Watson, S., 2014. A targeted review of computer-assisted learning for people with autism spectrum disorder: Towards a consistent methodology. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1(2), pp.87-100.
Ganz, J.B., Earles-Vollrath, T.L., Heath, A.K., Parker, R.I., Rispoli, M.J. and Duran, J.B., 2012. A meta-analysis of single case research studies on aided augmentative and alternative communication systems with individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 42(1), pp.60-74.
Guldberg, K., Parsons, S., MacLeod, A., Jones, G., Prunty, A. and Balfe, T., 2011. Implications for practice from ‘International review of the evidence on best practice in educational provision for children on the autism spectrum’. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 26(1), pp.65-70.
Hourcade, J.P., Williams, S.R., Miller, E.A., Huebner, K.E. and Liang, L.J., 2013, April. Evaluation of tablet apps to encourage social interaction in children with autism spectrum disorders. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3197-3206). ACM.
Irwin, S., 2013. Qualitative secondary data analysis: Ethics, epistemology and context. Progress in Development Studies, 13(4), pp.295-306.
Jol, G. and Stommel, W., 2016. Ethical considerations of secondary data use. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), pp.180-195.
Jowett, E.L., Moore, D.W. and Anderson, A., 2012. Using an iPad-based video modelling package to teach numeracy skills to a child with an autism spectrum disorder. Developmental neurorehabilitation, 15(4), pp.304-312.
Knight, V., McKissick, B.R. and Saunders, A., 2013. A review of technology-based interventions to teach academic skills to students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 43(11), pp.2628-2648.
Lee, S.A.S., 2019. Virtual Speech-Language Therapy for Individuals with Communication Disorders: Current Evidence, Limitations, and Benefits. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, pp.1-7.
Lord, C., Petkova, E., Hus, V., Gan, W., Lu, F., Martin, D.M., Ousley, O., Guy, L., Bernier, R., Gerdts, J. and Algermissen, M., 2012. A multisite study of the clinical diagnosis of different autism spectrum disorders. Archives of general psychiatry, 69(3), pp.306-313.
Mims, P.J., Lee, A., Browder, D.M., Zakas, T.L. and Flynn, S., 2012. Effects of a treatment package to facilitate English/language arts learning for middle school students with moderate to severe disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, pp.414-425.
Mucchetti, C.A., 2013. Adapted shared reading at school for minimally verbal students with autism. Autism, 17(3), pp.358-372.
Odom, S.L., Thompson, J.L., Hedges, S., Boyd, B.A., Dykstra, J.R., Duda, M.A., Szidon, K.L., Smith, L.E. and Bord, A., 2015. Technology-aided interventions and instruction for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 45(12), pp.3805-3819.
Peters-Scheffer, N., Didden, R., Korzilius, H. and Sturmey, P., 2011. A meta-analytic study on the effectiveness of comprehensive ABA-based early intervention programs for children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5(1), pp.60-69.
Ploog, B.O., Scharf, A., Nelson, D. and Brooks, P.J., 2013. Use of computer-assisted technologies (CAT) to enhance social, communicative, and language development in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 43(2), pp.301-322.
Radwan, A. and Cataltepe, Z., 2016. Using assistive technology to enhance teaching for students with autism spectrum disorders. International E-Journal of Advances in Education, 2(4), pp.112-121.
Samson, A.C., Phillips, J.M., Parker, K.J., Shah, S., Gross, J.J. and Hardan, A.Y., 2014. Emotion dysregulation and the core features of autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and developmental Disorders, 44(7), pp.1766-1772.
Schreibman, L., Dawson, G., Stahmer, A.C., Landa, R., Rogers, S.J., McGee, G.G., Kasari, C., Ingersoll, B., Kaiser, A.P., Bruinsma, Y. and McNerney, E., 2015. Naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions: Empirically validated treatments for autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 45(8), pp.2411-2428.
Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Kemp-Inman, A. and Wood, L.A., 2014. Using an iPad2® with systematic instruction to teach shared stories for elementary-aged students with autism. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(1), pp.30-46.
Tachibana, Y., Miyazaki, C., Ota, E., Mori, R., Hwang, Y., Kobayashi, E., Terasaka, A., Tang, J. and Kamio, Y., 2017. A systematic review and meta-analysis of comprehensive interventions for pre-school children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PloS one, 12(12), p.e0186502.
Vlachou, J.A. and Drigas, A.S., 2017. Mobile Technology for Students & Adults with Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD). International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 11(1).
Warren, Z., McPheeters, M.L., Sathe, N., Foss-Feig, J.H., Glasser, A. and Veenstra-VanderWeele, J., 2011. A systematic review of early intensive intervention for autism spectrum disorders. Pediatrics, 127(5), pp.e1303-e1311.
Wojciechowski, A. & Al-Musawi, R. 2017, "Assisstive technology application for enhancing social and language skills of young children with autism", Multimedia Tools and Applications, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 5419-5439.
Yardley, S.J., Watts, K.M., Pearson, J. and Richardson, J.C., 2014. Ethical issues in the reuse of qualitative data: Perspectives from literature, practice, and participants. Qualitative Health Research, 24(1), pp.102-113.
Zhang, L., Warren, Z., Swanson, A., Weitlauf, A. and Sarkar, N., 2018. Understanding performance and verbal-communication of children with ASD in a collaborative virtual environment. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 48(8), pp.2779-2789.
What Makes Us Unique
- 24/7 Customer Support
- 100% Customer Satisfaction
- No Privacy Violation
- Quick Services
- Subject Experts
