# data[].attributes.headline
Reading Comprehension and Autism in the Primary General Education Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Reading Comprehension and Autism in the Primary General Education Classroom

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides educators with strategies they can incorporate into their daily lessons, so students can meet the literact needs. Many students with autism demonstrate difficulties in reading comprehension. This article introduces educators to a step-by-step guide for teaching reading comprehension, the characteristics of autism spectrum disorder that may impede students from gaining reading comprehension, and evidenced-based practices that can be used to improve their comprehension abilities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Autism In The Classroom: How To Handle Behavior Challenges

# data[].attributes.subject
Autism In The Classroom: How To Handle Behavior Challenges

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides some behaviors that children with autism typically use to communicate their wantsm needs, anxieties, and fustrations. Some of these behaviors can be disruptive in a classroom setting, therefore children with sutism are being taught new skills to help them develop acceptable ways to communicate, socialize, and function. The article mentions a few strategies for handling autism behavior problems in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Children with autism typically use behaviors to communicate their wants, needs, anxieties, and frustrations.

These behaviors can include:

Fidgeting

Stimming

Rocking

Tapping

Repeating words or phrases

Mimicking

Self-injurious actions

Aggression

Biting

Ignoring peers

Refusing to follow directives

Eloping

While behaviors are important communication tools, some behaviors can disrupt learning in a classroom setting. Various interventions teach children with autism new skills that help them develop acceptable ways to communicate, socialize, and function.

Strategies For Handling Autism Behavior Problems In The Classroom

The following strategies help school staff successfully handle the behavior challenges exhibited by children with autism in the classroom.

Follow A Behavior Plan

Because each child with autism is unique, they need a customized behavior plan. This document is part of the child's Individualized Education Plan (IEP) and outlines the child's needs and includes specific steps that improve maladaptive behaviors without punishing the child.

A behavior plan starts with a Functional Behavioral Analysis (FBA). This analysis identifies the root of behaviors, which can include the child's desire to obtain an object, activity, or sensation, escape a demand or undesirable situation, or gain attention. The FBA will describe the frequency and intensity of behaviors, identify the causes and consequences of behaviors, and suggest possible solutions.

With information from an FBA, a special education or behavior consultant writes a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP). This document lists the challenging behaviors, their causes, and effective solutions that are specific to the child's needs. The BIP includes measurable goals that the teacher and other staff can monitor. The BIP can be modified as the student achieves goals.

Incorporate Strengths & Interests

Every child has strengths and interests. These assets can become leverage to help children engage more in class, stay on task, and reduce behavior challenges.

Observe children with autism closely to discover their unique assets. School staff can then incorporate the children's strengths and interests into the curriculum, activities, and rewards system to prompt positive behavior.

Increase Structure

Changes in the daily routine can create stress for many children with autism. These students thrive on routine and consistency and may exhibit maladaptive behaviors when they face unpredictable situations at school.

An increase in classroom structure and daily organization may relieve stress and pressure. Modifications like an organized and minimalist classroom, predictable daily schedule, visual activity schedule, physical boundaries, and other routines may help children feel calm, relaxed, and less agitated throughout the school day.

Set & Explain Realistic Expectations

Most children function better when they know what's required of them and when they have the skills to meet those expectations. Children with autism are no different, especially since they can think in very literal and concrete terms.

Carefully set realistic expectations, and explain those expectations clearly to reduce autism behavior problems in the classroom.

For example, teachers may need to show students visually what they must do and use simple instructions. Have the child repeat the instructions back to the teacher, too, to ensure understanding and reduce outbursts.

Time Transitions

Switching between activities and moving between classes can frustrate children with autism. They typically thrive on routine and predictability and also appreciate the opportunity to finish one activity before moving on to something else.

To avoid behavior challenges, time transitions carefully and seek to avoid as many disruptions as possible. Written or visual schedules clarify expectations and verbal prompts may motivate students to transition calmly, too.

Address Sensory Sensitivities

Sensitivity to textures, aromas, bright lights, and noise are a few challenges that may affect children with autism. These sensory sensitivities can cause discomfort and pain, which may precede challenging behaviors.

Address a child's sensory sensitivities to improve comfort. Teachers can discover these sensitivities by observing the child and talking to parents or caregivers. It may be impossible to remove every child's sensory triggers, but simple changes like dimming the lights or avoiding crowded hallways can make a big difference.

Offer Quiet Space

It's common for students with autism to feel uncomfortable, overwhelmed, or anxious at school. These feelings build up until the child responds with challenging behaviors.

A quiet space in a corner of the classroom or another room can help students relax before they disrupt the classroom. Ideally, this space will include tools that help children feel safe, secure, and calm. A swing, rubber wall, art supplies, low lights, no noise, and other tools allow a child to relieve pressure and prepare to return successfully to the classroom.

Improve Communication Skills

Because children with autism often struggle to communicate, they may benefit from strategies that teach functional communication skills. Improved communication abilities can help children communicate better and may reduce autism behavior problems in the classroom.

Available communication tools include augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) tools, such as sign language and Picture Exchange Communication Systems (PECS).

Speech and language therapy can also occur in natural and various settings throughout the day and involve teachers, peers, staff, and the child's family. The child's communication goals, therapies, and tools will be listed in the IEP and updated as needed.

Implement Calming Techniques

When a student becomes verbally or physically disruptive or aggressive in the classroom, the staff may respond in kind. A calm demeanor can make a huge impact, though, and often defuses rather than escalates the situation.

Classroom staff can handle behavior challenges more successfully when they implement calming techniques themselves and with the children. Deep breathing, counting to 10, taking a break, pushing on a wall, and using a quiet, slow voice are a few strategies that defuse tension.

These and other calming techniques can be used in the moment or become part of the class's daily routine as every student develops helpful tools that promote peace, tranquility, and calm.

Successfully Handle Autism Behavior Problems In The Classroom

Children with autism may exhibit challenging behavior in the classroom. Several strategies can help staff handle behaviors appropriately, reduce classroom disruptions, and provide every student in the class with access to a safe and effective education.

Despite these steps, some children with autism may need even more support. A specialized school like the Sarah Dooley Center For Autism provides an educational setting that's designed to meet the child's specific needs and successfully handle behavior challenges.
Learn more from these related resources:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Autism In The Classroom: How To Handle Behavior Challenges | Sarah Dooley Center for Autism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Autism behavior problems in the classroom exhibit themselves in different ways specific to each child. Learn strategies to reduce behavior challenges at school.

# data[].attributes.headline
Supporting Students with Autism: 10 Ideas for Inclusive Classrooms

# data[].attributes.subject
Supporting Students with Autism: 10 Ideas for Inclusive Classrooms

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides readers with ten ideas that can be useful for teachers to address some of the needs and provide guidance for bringing out the best in learners with autism. Some of the ideas provided include strategies for fostering communication and social interactions, promoting friendly environments, implementing visual supports, incorporating interest and strength of students with autism into the lessons. This article can be used as a guide for educators seeking to create a supportive and inclusive learning environment for all students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While most educators agree that no recipe exists for teaching any individual student or group of students, there are certainly some guidelines that can be helpful for supporting students with certain labels. Students with autism may have unique needs with learning, social skills, and communication, therefore, teachers will need strategies to address each one of these areas. These ten simple ideas will help teachers address some of the aforementioned needs and provide guidance for bringing out the best in learners with autism labels.

1: Learn about the learner from the learner

Oftentimes, educators needing information about a student will study the individual's educational records. While these documents are certainly one source of information, they are seldom the most helpful source of information. Teachers wanting to know more about a student with autism should ask that student to provide information. Some students will be quite wiling and able to share information while others may need coaxing or support from family members. Teachers might ask for this information in a myriad of ways. For instance, they might ask the student to take a short survey or sit for an informal interview. One teacher asked his student with autism, to create a list of teaching tips that might help kids with learning differences. The teacher then published the guide and gave it out to all educators in the school.

If the student with autism is unable to communicate in a reliable way, teachers can go to families for help. Parents can share the teaching tips they have found most useful in the home or provide video of the learner engaged in different family and community activities. These types of materials tend to give educators ideas that are more useful and concrete than do traditional educational reports and assessments.

2: Teach to fascinations

Whenever possible, educators should use interests, strengths, skills, areas of expertise, and gifts as tools for teaching. Can a passion for GPS be used to inspire more reading (operations manuals), new math skills (be a "human GPS"-calculate shortest route between two places), or fun social studies questions ("How would the world be different today if Christopher Columbus had GPS?") . [For more on using fascinations to support students with autism see Just Give Him the Whale , a book I wrote on this topic with my colleague, Patrick Schwarz.]

3: Get them talking

In some classrooms, a handful of students dominate small-group conversations and whole-class discussions. While it is important for these verbal and outgoing students to have a voice in the classroom, it is equally important for other students - including shy and quiet students, students using English as a second language, and students with disabilities - to have opportunities to share and challenge ideas, ask and answer questions, and exchange thoughts. To ensure that all students have opportunities to communicate, teachers need to put structures and activities in place that allow for interaction.

In one classroom, students were asked to "turn and talk" to each other at various points in the day. A high school history teacher used this strategy throughout the year to break up his lectures and to give students time to teach the material to each other. After giving mini-lectures of fifteen minutes, he asked students to turn to a partner and answer a specific question or re-explain a concept he had taught. For instance, after giving a short lecture on the Presidency, he asked students to discuss, "What qualities do Americans seem to want in a President?; and "How has this list of desired qualities changed over time?" A student with Asperger's syndrome who needed practice with skills such as staying on topic and turn taking was able to practice them daily.

Teachers can also provide opportunities for communication by giving all students "airtime" during whole-class discussion. One way to do this is to ask for physical whole-class responses to certain prompts. For instance, instead of asking, "Who can tell me a fraction that equals one half?", the teacher might say, "Stand up if you think you can name a fraction that equals one half". This strategy not only gives all learners a chance to give an answer, but it allows for some teacher-sanctioned movement, something often welcomed by students with autism. Whole-class physical responses are also appropriate for students who are non-verbal, making it a perfect choice for the diverse, inclusive classroom.

4: Give choices

Choice may not only give students a feeling of control in their lives, but an opportunity to learn about themselves as workers and learners. Choice may be especially helpful for students with autism who have special needs when it comes to learning environment, lesson materials, and communication. Choice can be built into almost any part of the school day. Students can choose which assessments to complete, which role to take in a cooperative group, and how to receive personal assistance and supports. Examples of choices that can be offered in classrooms include:

Solve five of the ten problems assigned

Work alone or with a small group

Read quietly or with a friend

Use a pencil, pen, or the computer

Conduct your research in the library or in the resource room

Take notes using words or pictures

5: Consider handwriting alternatives

Writing can be a major source of tension and struggle for students with autism. Some students cannot write at all and others who can write, may have a difficult time doing so. In order to support a student struggling with writing, a teacher may try to give the child gentle encouragement as he or she attempts to do some writing- a word, a sentence, or a few lines. Teachers might also allow the student to use a computer, word processor, or even an old typewriter for some or for all lessons. For some learners, being able to use a word processor when writing helps them focus on the task at hand (content) instead of on their motor skills (process).

6: Help with organizing

While some students with autism are ultra-organized, others need support to find materials, keep their locker and desk areas neat, and remember to bring their assignments home at the end of the day. Consider implementing support strategies that all students might find useful. For instance, teachers can have all students copy down assignments, pack book bags, put materials away, and clean work spaces together. Structuring this time daily will give all learners the opportunity to be organized and thoughtful about how they prepare to transition from school to home. Specific skills can even be taught during this time (e.g., creating to-do lists, prioritizing tasks).

7: Support transitions

Some students with autism struggle with transitions. Some are uncomfortable changing from environment to environment, while others have problems moving from activity to activity. Individuals with autism report that changes can be extremely difficult causing stress and feelings of disorientation. Teachers can minimize the discomfort students may feel when transitioning by:

Use a visual timer so students can manage time on their own throughout an activity.

Giving reminders to the whole class before any transition.

Providing the student or entire class with a transitional activity such as writing in a homework notebook or for younger students, singing a short song about "cleaning up".

Asking peers to help in supporting transition time. In elementary classrooms, teachers can ask all students to move from place to place with a partner. In middle and high school classrooms, students might choose a peer to walk with during passing time.

Provide a transition aid (a toy, object, or picture).

8: Create a comfortable classroom

Sometimes students are unsuccessful because they are uncomfortable or feel unsafe or even afraid in their educational environment. Providing an appropriate learning environment can be as central to a student's success as any teaching strategy or educational tool. Students with autism will be the most prepared to learn in places where they can relax and feel secure. Ideas for making the classroom more comfortable include providing seating options (e.g., beanbag chairs, rocking chairs); reducing direct light when possible (e.g., using upward projecting light, providing a visor to a student who is especially sensitive); and minimizing distracting noises (e.g., providing earplugs or headphones during certain activities).

9: Take a break

Some students work best when they can pause between tasks and take a break of some kind (walk around, stretch, or simply stop working). Some learners will need walking breaks - these breaks can last anywhere from a few seconds to fifteen or twenty minutes. Some students will need to walk up and down a hallway once or twice, others will be fine if allowed to wander around in the classroom.

A teacher who realized the importance of these instructional pauses decided to offer them to all learners. He regularly gave students a prompt to discuss (e.g., What do you know about probability?) and then directed them to "talk and walk" with a partner.

10: Include

If students are to learn appropriate behaviors, they will need to be in the inclusive environment to see and hear how their peers talk and act. If students are to learn social skills, they will need to be in a space where they can listen to and learn from others who are socializing. If students will need specialized supports to succeed academically, then teachers need to see the learner functioning in the inclusive classroom to know what types of supports will be needed.

If it is true that we learn by doing, then the best way to learn about supporting students with autism in inclusive schools is to include them.
This article is from the website of Dr. Paula Kluth. It, along with many others on inclusive schooling, differentiated instruction, and literacy can be found at www.PaulaKluth.com . Visit now to read her Tip of the Day, read dozens of free articles, and learn more about supporting diverse learners in K-12 classrooms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Supporting Students with Autism: 10 Ideas for Inclusive Classrooms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students with autism may have unique needs with learning, social skills, and communication. These ten simple ideas will help teachers address some of these needs and provide guidance for bringing out the best in learners with autism.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Impact of Culture on Parental Perceptions about Autism Spectrum Disorders: Striving for Culturally Competent Practices

# data[].attributes.subject
The Impact of Culture on Parental Perceptions about Autism Spectrum Disorders: Striving for Culturally Competent Practices

# data[].attributes.body
In this article the authors mentions how cultural factors can influence the way parents percieve and understand autism spectrum disorders, include their beliefs about causes, symptoms, and appropriate interventions. The author emphasizes the importance of cultural competence in working with families from diverse cultural backgrounds and highlight strategies for promoting culturally senstive practices. The article has topics about cultural beliefs and attitudes toward autism, barriers to accessing services, family-centered approaches, etc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Despite the increasing number of children from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds in the United States, limited research exists synthesizing what is known about the prevalence and diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in these communities. Children from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are disproportionately diagnosed with ASD and, there is a need for practitioners and educators to be culturally competent at addressing challenges and practices related to ASD for children and youth. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature related to parental perspectives on ASD, in children from a wide range of culturally diverse backgrounds to provide information and resources to practitioners about the importance to strive for cultural competence in practice-related work.

References

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2006). Mental health in the United States: Parental report of diagnosed autism in children aged 4 to 17 years. Retrieved from: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5517a3.htm?s_cid=mm5517a3_x Search in Google Scholar

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2018). Autism Spectrum Disorder: Data and Statistics. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html. Search in Google Scholar

Davidson. (2008). 'More Labels Than a Jam Jar': the gendered dynamics of diagnosis for girls and women with autism. Contesting Illness: Processes and Practices, 239-258. 10.3138/9781442687738-015 Search in Google Scholar

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400. (2004). Search in Google Scholar

Kea, C., Campbell-Whatley, G. D., & Richards, H. V. (2006). Becoming culturally responsive educators: Rethinking teacher education pedagogy. Retrieved from: http://www.nccrest.org/Briefs/Teacher_Ed_Brief.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Mandell, D. S., Wiggins, L. D., Carpenter, L. A., Daniels, J., DiGuiseppi, C., Durkin, M. S., & Shattuck, P. T. (2009). Racial/ethnic disparities in the identification of children with autism spectrum disorders. American journal of public health, 99(3), 493-498. 10.2105/AJPH.2007.131243 Search in Google Scholar

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. Cultural Diversity. (2014). UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/international-migration/glossary/cultural-diversity/ Search in Google Scholar

Ward, H. C. (2014). Engaging first generation immigrant parents of young children with exceptionalities. In Early Childhood and Special Education (pp. 27-44). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. 10.1108/S0270-402120140000018002 Search in Google Scholar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Impact of Culture on Parental Perceptions about Autism Spectrum Disorders: Striving for Culturally Competent Practices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite the increasing number of children from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds in the United States, limited research exists synthesizing what is known about the prevalence and diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in these communities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dimensions of Family–School Partnerships for Autistic Children: Context and Congruence

# data[].attributes.subject
Dimensions of Family–School Partnerships for Autistic Children: Context and Congruence

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides insight to the complexities of family-school partnerships for autistic children. It offers recommendations for enhancing collaboration between families and school to better support the education and developemental needs of autistic children. It mentions cultural considerations and how its a factor that can involve exploring cultural beliefs and practices related to autism. It also includes topics like parental involvement and how it supports the educational and social development of autistic children. Overall, this article examines the dynamics of family-school partnerships in the context of ASD.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sch Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2023 Jan 1.

Published in final edited form as:

Abstract

Family-school partnerships are crucial for promoting positive outcomes and serving as a protective factor for children at-risk for poor school outcomes ( Christenson & Sheridan, 2001). This may be particularly important for autistic children, who are at increased developmental risk ( Garbacz et al., 2016). However, little research has examined variables related to dimensions of these partnerships for parents and teachers of autistic children. The present study examined family socioeconomic resources in relation to two dimensions of family-school partnerships (relationship quality and family involvement) among parents of autistic children, as well as dyadic perceptions of relationship quality among parents and teachers of autistic children. Data were collected across two time points (Time 1 N = 68 parents, child ages = 5-11; Time 2 parent-teacher dyad N = 22, child ages = 7-13). Results suggest that (a) higher appraisal of financial resources was associated with higher parent-reported family involvement after controlling for child ASD characteristics, and (b) higher parent-reported relationship quality and family involvement at one time were significantly associated with positive independent (parent and teacher) and congruent ratings of parent-teacher relationship quality two years later. Study limitations, future directions, and practical implications are discussed.

Keywords: parent-teacher relationship quality, family involvement, autism spectrum disorder, congruence, disagreement

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder affecting approximately 1 in 54 children in the United States ( Maenner et al., 2020) characterized by impairments in social interaction and communication, as well as restricted and/or repetitive behaviors, activities, or interests ( American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Autistic children are at increased risk for adverse outcomes related to social skills, challenging behavior, and adaptive functioning ( National Research Council, 2001). Access to comprehensive supports is beneficial, given the importance of these skills in promoting desired outcomes in areas such as peer relationships, academic performance, and independence in daily activities ( National Research Council, 2001). Many practices for supporting autistic children involve services at home and school, though not always in coordination with each other ( Garbacz & McIntyre, 2016). Given the cross-setting nature of many of these needs, supports which engage parents and teachers hold promise for autistic children ( Garbacz & McIntyre, 2016).

Supports can be conceptualized through ecological systems theory, which posits that development and behavior are shaped by the interconnected systems forming one's environment ( Bronfenbrenner, 1977). Ecological examinations of factors that support student success should incorporate an understanding of microsystems (immediate environments with which individuals interact) and interactions between microsystems (i.e., mesosystems; Glueck & Reschly, 2014). Aspects of home and school environments and the interactions between the two can support positive outcomes for autistic children ( Garbacz & McIntyre, 2016). Since many autistic children may benefit from cross-setting supports to align areas of need which present in multiple settings ( National Research Council, 2001), more research is needed to better understand family-school context.

Family-School Partnerships

One important mesosystemic influence is family-school partnerships. Positive family-school interactions form a protective mesosystemic factor for students at-risk for adverse academic, behavioral, and emotional outcomes, and provide a foundation for interventions ( Christenson & Sheridan, 2001). Family-school partnerships are comprised of multiple dimensions based on each microsystem and their interactions. Research exploring dimensions of parent-teacher relationships suggests that these relationships are associated with positive outcomes for autistic children, their parents, and their teachers. For example, one study found that parent-school connectedness was associated with individualized education program satisfaction among parents of autistic children ( Slade et al., 2018). In a study exploring effects of a parent-teacher consultation model for parents and teachers of autistic children, participants reported increases in child outcomes and parent-teacher communication ( Azad et al., 2018). The present study explored two family-school partnership dimensions: parent-teacher relationship quality and family educational involvement (hereafter referred to as family involvement). In addition, given the wide variation in behaviors across autistic individuals ( Chang et al., 2013) and the connection between ASD characteristics and aspects of family-school partnerships ( Garbacz et al., 2016), the present study aimed to explore family-school partnerships beyond the potential role of ASD. Specifically, the study included child ASD characteristics as a covariate.

Parent-Teacher Relationship Quality

When families and schools interact, relationships are created between parents and teachers. The quality of these relationships is separate from interactions alone. High-quality parent-teacher relationships are characterized by cohesion, adaptability, joining, and communication ( Vickers & Minke, 1995). Research suggests high-quality parent-teacher relationships promote positive outcomes for children. One meta-analysis identified effective components of family-school interventions (e.g., communication) and found that parent-teacher relationships significantly moderate effects between family-school interventions and social-emotional outcomes ( Sheridan et al., 2019). Among autistic children, parent perceptions of relationship quality have been negatively associated with developmental risk ( Garbacz et al., 2016), and interventions focused on collaborative problem-solving contribute to higher parent-teacher relationship quality ( Garbacz & McIntyre, 2016).

Family Involvement

Family involvement refers to parenting behaviors across home-based activities (e.g., helping with homework), school-based activities (e.g., attending school events), and home-school communication ( Fantuzzo et al., 2000). These behaviors shape the contexts from which families partner with schools and therefore contribute to family-school partnerships. Family involvement protects against risk (e.g., reduces challenging behavior), and is a malleable construct which can be strengthened through intervention to improve child outcomes ( Stormshak et al., 2005). Family involvement can enhance treatment effectiveness among autistic children ( Matson et al., 2009), and greater developmental risk related to ASD has been associated with lower family involvement ( Garbacz et al., 2016). However, relatively little research has explored factors associated with family involvement among families of autistic children.

Family Socioeconomic Context

Family context influences the course of child education among families of autistic children. Children with disabilities are more likely than children without disabilities to live in economic hardship, which affects resource access and can negatively impact development ( Murray et al., 2015). Families of autistic children may experience different economic difficulties compared to families of children with other diagnoses. For example, one study found that household income among families of autistic children was 21% less than that of families of children with other diagnoses ( Cidav et al., 2012). Given the importance of family socioeconomic context, as well as the sparse literature exploring family-school partnerships for autistic children, more work is needed to examine family resources that may serve as risk and protective variables in relation to family-school partnerships. Ecological systems theory suggests that systemic factors shape home microsystems and influence resource access. One critical dimension affecting home microsystems is socioeconomic context, which includes external variables (e.g., socioeconomic status) and internal variables (how families experience their socioeconomic situation).

Three variables are commonly combined to comprise socioeconomic status: parental education, parental occupation, and family income ( Kohl et al., 2000). Parental level of educational attainment may influence school-related knowledge and skills ( Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005). Aspects of parental occupation, including time-based barriers such as the extent of scheduling flexibility, affect opportunities to be involved in children's education ( Posey-Maddox & Haley-Lock, 2020). Time-related difficulties related to number of hours worked (e.g., fewer opportunities to attend school events; Posey-Maddox & Haley-Lock, 2020) may yield particularly relevant information in the context of families of autistic children, since they are likely to work more hours than families of children with other diagnoses ( Cidav et al., 2012). Family income is associated with access to involvement-related resources, including time, energy, and disposable income ( Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005). Families of autistic children are likely to earn less than families of children with another diagnosis or no diagnosis ( Cidav et al., 2012) and are therefore at increased risk for income-related barriers. Historically, these components have frequently been examined as a single combined construct, but researchers have called for separate examinations of these variables to better understand the unique contributions of each component in relation to family-school partnerships ( Kohl et al., 2000).

Beyond these three external components of socioeconomic status, subjective appraisals of financial resources are important to consider as one dimension of socioeconomic experience. Family involvement can vary widely among families in comparable socioeconomic status categories; therefore, exploring variables related to socioeconomic status may enhance understanding of family involvement patterns ( Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005). One study with families of autistic children found that there was no significant difference in income level or receipt of public services between parents who reported having financial problems due to ASD-related care costs and parents who did not report having these financial problems ( Sharpe & Baker, 2007). The ways in which families experience their resource access can influence how they interact with various ecological systems, although little research has explored this among families of children with disabilities. Since financial resource access has particular relevance to the experiences of families of children with disabilities ( Cidav et al., 2012), research exploring how families of autistic children describe their experience related to economic resource access may enhance understanding of how families approach and engage with school systems.

Parent-Teacher Congruence in Relationship Quality Perceptions

Continuity across home and school is one component of positive family-school partnerships ( Clarke et al., 2010). One dimension of continuity is relational congruence-the extent to which parents and teachers share perceptions of an aspect of their relationship. Congruence may relate to child academic, social, and behavioral outcomes, particularly when both dyad members have positive perceptions ( Minke et al., 2014). Congruence is a dimension of home-school mesosystems and contributes to successful family-school partnerships ( Clarke et al., 2010) and positive child outcomes ( Minke et al., 2014).

A line of research suggests that parent-teacher congruence may have an important role in family-school interventions. One study found that higher congruence in perceptions of consultation roles and processes was associated with more positive consultation outcomes ( Sheridan et al., 2004). In another study parent-reported home-school communication was positively associated with congruent parent-teacher reports of a positive relationship, suggesting that bidirectional communication is one part of developing positive, congruently-perceived relationships ( Minke et al., 2014). Through understanding parent-teacher congruence, family-school interventions may be better-positioned to address specific components of collaboration ( Garbacz et al., 2021).

Parent-teacher relational congruence research is limited. One study among parents and teachers of children with behavioral difficulties found that congruent perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality were associated with higher parenting self-efficacy, higher home-school communication, and positive teacher ratings of child social skills and externalizing behavior ( Minke et al., 2014). A study of children from low-income families found that congruent perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality were associated with teacher and parent report of child social competence ( Iruka et al., 2011). These findings suggest that congruent perceptions of relationships are related to positive parent and teacher perceptions in other domains.

Little dyadic research has involved parents and teachers of autistic children ( Azad et al., 2018), who are likely to benefit from supports that draw upon home and school resources ( Matson et al., 2009). Given the malleability of parent and teacher perceptions and the extent to which they align with each other, as well as congruence's potential for supporting positive outcomes ( Glueck & Reschly, 2014), more research is needed to explore congruence in this population. In addition, parent-teacher dyads have mainly been investigated cross-sectionally; more work is needed to explore associations among family-school partnership variables across time. Investigating relations over time, particularly related to perceptions reported by parents-a consistent microsystem for youth as other aspects of the school microsystem change-may contextualize how past family experiences may shape partnerships with schools. The present study will address this gap by exploring family-school partnership dimensions at two time points.

Study Purpose and Research Questions

Ecological systems theory and existing research support the role of collaborative family-school partnerships in improving service delivery and child outcomes for at-risk students using cross-setting supports. This may be particularly important for autistic children, who face unique developmental risk. However, limited research has examined dimensions of these partnerships for parents and teachers of autistic children. In exploring these dimensions, research would benefit from considering possible relations above and beyond ASD characteristics to obtain more nuanced information, as well as exploring variables over time. Thus, research exploring family-school partnership dimensions in relation to family socioeconomic context (a microsystemic influence) and parent-teacher dyadic perceptions (a mesosystemic influence) may yield an understanding of the factors contextualizing family engagement with schools and contribute to identifying contextually-relevant ways to support outcomes for autistic children.

This exploratory study addressed the following research questions (RQs):

RQ1: Do parent education, parent work hours, family income, and appraisal of family financial resources relate to parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality and family involvement after controlling for child ASD characteristics?

RQ2: Among parent-teacher dyads, to what extent do parent-reported relationship quality and family involvement at Time 1 relate to (a) parent perceptions of relationship quality at Time 2, (b) teacher perceptions of relationship quality at time 2, and (c) the extent of congruence in parent-teacher perceptions at Time 2?

Method

This exploratory project consisted of the second and third waves of the Oregon Early Autism Project, a longitudinal descriptive study examining variables associated with identification and treatment of ASD in the Northwestern United States ( McIntyre & Barton, 2010). Families were originally recruited when children were in early childhood (Wave 1; mean age 4.80 years). There were three inclusion criteria, all verified by parent report: Children (a) were six years old or younger, (b) had a current or prior autism special education eligibility, and (c) lived with their primary caregiver for at least one year at the time of recruitment. There were no separate inclusion or exclusion criteria in the current study. At Wave 2 (Time 1 for the present study; 2013-2015), families were re-contacted and invited to participate, and additional families were recruited using the same Wave 1 eligibility criteria; there were no separate criteria for the current study. At Wave 3 (Time 2 for the present study; 2016-2018), all reachable families from the previous wave were invited to participate and provide consent for researchers to invite their child's teacher to participate. Families who did not have a corresponding participating teacher (e.g., parent did not consent to contacting a teacher, teacher declined to participate) were included in the overall longitudinal study from which the present samples were drawn but were not included in present analyses due to the dyadic focus of RQ2 (i.e., not having a complete dyad an exclusion criterion for the RQ2 analyses, but not for the overall study). Teachers participated at Time 2 only.

RQ1 focused on Time 1 data when children were an average age of 7.72 years (range = 5-11) and included primary caregivers (hereafter referred to as parents) as participants. RQ2 included Time 1 and Time 2 data. Time 2 was conducted approximately two years later; children were an average age of 9.45 years (range = 7-13). The study was conducted in compliance with the university's Institutional Review Board.

Participants

Parents and Children

See Table 1 for parent and child demographics. Among Time 1 parents ( N = 68), the majority were the child's biological mother and White. Nearly half of families were eligible for the state's Medicaid plan at Time 1; slightly more than one-quarter were eligible at Time 2. The majority of children were White and male.

Table 1

Demographic variable

Parents, Time 1

Parents, Time 2

Children, Time 1

Children, Time 2

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

Age in years - M ( SD)

38.1 (6.5)

40.6 (6.1)

7.2 (1.6)

9.5 (2.0)

Family income in thousands of $ - M ( SD)

52.2 (41.0)

70.9 (38.3)

Teachers

See Table 2 for teacher demographics. Teacher ages were relatively evenly spread across age ranges between 26 and 65 years. The majority of teachers identified as White and female and held a master's degree and general education teaching license. On average, teachers had approximately 14 years of teaching experience.

Table 2

Demographic variable

n

%

Years of teaching experience a - M ( SD)

14.1 (9.1)

Education license b

Procedure

At Time 1, parent data were collected through mail-home questionnaires and in-person interviews. Packets took approximately 1 hour to complete; parents completed these independently. Interviews took approximately 1.5 hours and were held primarily in family homes; some were held in a private clinic room or via telephone. Parents who completed an in-person interview gave completed packets to the researcher; parents who completed a telephone interview mailed packets to researchers using a pre-stamped envelope. Parents received $50 honoraria for their participation at Time 1. At Time 2, parents completed a mail-home packet of questionnaires and a telephone interview. Parents received $75 honoraria at Time 2.

At Time 2, participating parents provided consent for researchers to contact the teacher with whom their child spent the most time (e.g., general or special education teacher). Parents provided teachers' contact information; researchers contacted teachers by phone and email and mailed packets to teachers who indicated an interest in participating. Multiple contact attempts were made if teachers did not respond. Teacher data were collected via a mail-home packet of questionnaires that took approximately 45 minutes to complete. Teachers completed packets independently, then mailed packets to researchers using a pre-stamped envelope. Teachers received a $25 or $50 check for their participation. The check amount increased partway through the project to increase the response rate from teachers who had been invited to participate, since only dyads with both parent and teacher responses were included in analyses for this study.

Parent-Report Measures (Times 1 and 2)

Time 1 mail-home packets included measures assessing parent-teacher relationship quality and family involvement. In-person interviews included measures assessing family socioeconomic resources and child ASD characteristics. Time 2 mail-home packets included a measure assessing parent-teacher relationship quality.

Family Socioeconomic Status (Time 1)

Parents reported on parental education (number of years of education they completed), parental work hours (average number of hours worked per week in the previous month), and family income (annual income). Responses were included in analyses as a continuous variables; higher values reflected higher levels of education, number of hours worked, and family income.

Appraisal of Financial Resources (Time 1)

This item was adapted from the MacCarther Scales of Subjective Social Status ( Goodman et al., 2001). Parents indicated their perception of how much money their family had (1 = Not enough to get by, 2 = Just enough to get by, 3 = We only have to worry about money for fun or extras, 4 = We never have to worry about money). This item was included in analyses as a categorical variable.

Parent Perception of Parent-Teacher Relationship Quality (Times 1 and 2)

This was assessed using the parent version of the Parent-Teacher Relationship Scale-II (PTRS-II; Vickers & Minke, 1995). Parents rated 24 items (e.g., "We understand each other.") using a 5-point scale indicating the frequency of relationship components (1 = Almost Never to 5 = Almost Always). The total score was included in analyses as a continuous variable; higher values reflected higher relationship quality. Evidence supports the internal consistency reliability of the parent version of the PTRS-II ( Minke et al., 2014). At Times 1 and 2, sample α = .95.

Family Involvement (Time 1)

This was assessed using the Family Involvement Questionnaire-Elementary (FIQ-E; Manz et al., 2004). Parents rated 46 items using a 4-point scale indicating the frequency with which parents engaged in each behavior or activity (1 = Rarely to 4 = Always) across three domains: home-based involvement, school-based involvement, and home-school communication. The total score was included in analyses as a continuous variable; higher values reflected higher family involvement. Evidence supports the internal consistency reliability of the FIQ-E ( Manz et al., 2004). In this sample, α = .94.

ASD Characteristics (Time 1)

ASD characteristics were assessed using the interview administration of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale - 2 nd edition (CARS 2; Schloper et al., 2010). Based on parent report, research assistants rated children's ASD characteristics on 15 items. Scores indicated the extent to which children's behavior compared to that of same-age, typically developing children. Item ratings were provided on a 7-point scale at 0.5-point increments (1 = Within normal limits for that age, 4 = Severely abnormal for that age; scale midpoint of 2.5). For this study, scores were included in analyses as a continuous variable; higher values reflected greater ASD characteristics. The CARS 2 has strong internal consistency reliability ( Vaughan, 2011). In this sample, α = .83.

Teacher-Report Measures (Time 2)

Teacher perception of parent-teacher relationship quality was assessed using a parallel 24-item teacher version of the PTRS-II. Strong evidence supports the internal consistency reliability of the teacher version ( Minke et al., 2014). In this sample, α = .95.

Data Collection

Completed packets were processed using teleform technology and scanned into SPSS. Graduate research assistants interviewed parents and were trained and supervised by the second author, a licensed psychologist with substantial assessment and intervention experience with autistic children. At each time point, assessor training took approximately 8 hours and included didactic training on protocol administration, observation of administrations, and peer practice. Before beginning data collection, assessors were required to accurately administer all protocols based on PI review of a live or video-recorded administration. Assessors received weekly group supervision during data collection.

Analysis Plan

Preliminary Analyses

Data were analyzed visually to determine missing data among study variables. At Time 1, no analysis variables had missing data. At Time 2, parents who did not have a corresponding teacher were excluded from exploration of RQ2, given the dyadic focus of the question. Among the 22 full dyads, no analysis variables had missing data.

A Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to investigate associations among study variables (see Table 3 ). To determine whether there was any multicollinearity that would necessitate creating a composite for the socioeconomic status variables (family income, hours worked, and years of education), correlations were examined and found to be significant. Correlations ranged from r = .29 to r = .51, indicating significant associations among the variables, but not to a degree that multicollinearity would be a concern if considering the variables separately. Thus, these variables were not combined into a composite.

Table 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1. Education

--

2. Hours worked

.29*

--

3. Income

.51***

.32**

--

4. Financial resources

.28*

−.14

.29*

--

5. Child ASD characteristics

.03

.08

.05

−.04

--

6. Family involvement (Time 1)

.12

−.10

−.03

.38**

−.11

--

7. Parent PTRQ (Time 1)

.03

.11

.12

.16

−.29*

.31*

--

8. Parent PTRQ (Time 2)

.14

−.09

.07

.21

−.09

.65**

.60**

--

9. Teacher PTRQ (Time 2)

.18

−.15

−.03

.04

.12

.35

.35

.48*

--

10. P-T distance score (Time 2)

−.06

−.08

.17

.10

.02

−.12

−.37

−.38

−.56**

Congruence Computation

For RQ2, parent-teacher congruence was calculated using a distance formula ( Garbacz et al., 2015; Kenny et al., 2006), calculated as the square root of the sum of squared differences between parent and teacher responses to the 24 PTRS-II items at Time 2:

This formula yields a continuous variable in the form of an absolute difference score. Higher scores reflect a greater degree of incongruence (i.e., disagreement) regardless of the direction of difference. Sheridan and colleagues (2004) described congruence and incongruence as opposite ends of a spectrum, rather than dichotomous. Thus, in calculating dissimilarity scores, we can interpret results in an inverse fashion (i.e., a dyad with a high distance score has high incongruence and low congruence in their reports).

Although multiple dyadic indices are available for exploring congruence and incongruence, this distance method has been used in other parent-teacher congruence research for two main reasons. First, dissimilarity measures have psychometric benefits over similarity measures (which focus on extent of resemblance rather than degree of difference; e.g., covariance, correlation). Specifically, dissimilarity measures have greater sensitivity to differences in level and ability to calculate regardless of variability across items. Second, distance formulas have an interpretability advantage relative to other dissimilarity measures ( Garbacz et al., 2015; Kenny et al., 2006). This distance formula has been used in other parent-teacher congruence research exploring parent-teacher relationship quality ( Ren & Fan, 2021) and perceptions of communication ( Garbacz et al., 2015).

Analytic Approach

RQ1 was examined using hierarchical multiple regression analyses to examine relations among family socioeconomic resources (parent education, number of hours worked, family income, and appraisal of family financial variables) and parent-teacher relationship quality and family involvement at a single point in time (Time 1). Two analyses were run: (a) family socioeconomic resources regressed on parent-teacher relationship quality and (b) family socioeconomic resources regressed on family involvement. To explore variability above and beyond child ASD characteristics, this was controlled for in Block 1, and family socioeconomic resources were entered into Block 2.

RQ2 was examined using hierarchical multiple regression analyses to examine how Time 1 parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality and family involvement related to Time 2 independent and congruent dyadic perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality. Time 1 parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality and family involvement were regressed on Time 2 (a) parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality, (b) teacher-reported parent-teacher relationship quality, and (c) congruence in parent-teacher relationship quality perceptions. Time 1 parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality was entered in Block 1 (followed by family involvement in Block 2) to control for potential stability paths in the first regression; this was maintained in subsequent analyses for consistency.

Statistical Significance and Effect Size

For all analyses, p < .05 was the criterion for statistical significance. Posthoc power analyses indicated that with two-tailed α set to .05, the present study had sufficient power (> .80) to detect effects of R ² = .16 for RQ1 hierarchical multiple regressions and R ² = .39 for RQ2 hierarchical multiple regressions. Due to the small sample size for RQ2, effect size was used as an indicator of a meaningful effect, rather than statistical significance. Four interpretation levels were used: .01 = small effect, .09 = medium effect, and .25 = large effect ( Cohen, 1988). Effect sizes were interpreted as the overall model R ² after adding family involvement, as well as R ²⁻changed and semipartial R ² values to identify the unique variance of family involvement and parent-teacher relationship quality.

Results

Descriptive Statistics

See Table 4 for study variable descriptive statistics at both time points. Time 1 parent-teacher relationship quality was not normally distributed (positive excess in kurtosis, 3.65; significant Shapiro-Wilk test of normality outcome, p = .001), suggesting that in this sample, there is an increased likelihood of obtaining higher or lower Time 1 parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality scores compared to a normally-distributed sample. Given the small sample size, we did not transform the dataset.

Table 4

Variable

Total - M (SD)

Time 1 ( N = 68)

Appraisal of financial resources g - n (%)

Not enough to get by

7 (10.30%)

Just enough to get by

24 (35.30%)

We only have to worry for fun or extras

35 (51.50%)

We never have to worry about money

2 (2.90%)

Time 2 ( N = 22)

Parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality

104.59 (15.83)

Teacher-reported parent-teacher relationship quality

102.36 (16.84)

Of the 68 Time 1 parents, 32 did not participate in Time 2 (47.1% attrition). Of the 36 parents who participated in both time points, 14 did not have a corresponding teacher participate (either the parent did not consent for the team to contact a teacher, or the contacted teacher chose not to participate; 38.9% of teacher data missing), leading to the final sample of 22 parent-teacher dyads for the present analyses (about two-thirds of the Time 1 sample). Independent samples t-tests were run to determine if there were significant differences between child characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, gender, grade, ASD characteristics, special education eligibility), parent/family characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, gender, years of education, hours worked, family income, family size, family Medicaid eligibility, presence of another parenting figure in the home besides the respondent), and family-school partnership variables (parent-teacher relationship quality, family involvement) among families who participated in both time points ( N = 22) and families who participated in only Time 1 ( N = 46). Families who participated at both time points were significantly more likely to have (a) a parent who identified as White, t(64.02) = −1.88, p = .021, equal variances not assumed; (b) higher family income, t(66) = 2.18, p = .033; and (c) another parenting figure in the home besides the respondent, t(64) = 2.15, p = .035, equal variances not assumed. Attrition should be considered when interpreting longitudinal results.

To establish context for distance scores, an ICC(3, 1) analysis (i.e., a two-way mixed ICC examining average ratings using an absolute agreement approach; Shrout & Fleiss, 1979) was used to examine the extent to which parents and teachers held congruent perceptions of relationship quality at Time 2. Parent and teacher reports were correlated at .66, p = .010, falling within the "good agreement" range ( Cicchetti, 1994). Confidence interval bounds indicated 95% confidence that agreement falls between .17 and .86.

RQ1

See Table 5 for full hierarchical multiple regression results.

Table 5

Predictor variable

Model 1

Model 2

B

SE B

β

Semipartial r

t

β

SE B

β

Semipartial r

t

Parent-teacher relationship quality

ASD characteristics

−0.75

0.31

−.29

−.29

−2.47*

−0.77

0.31

−.30

−.30

−2.50*

Family involvement

Financial resources

12.77

4.10

.40

.36

3.11*

Family Socioeconomic Predictors of Parent-Reported Parent-Teacher Relationship Quality

Family socioeconomic resources did not predict parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality after holding child ASD characteristics constant, nor did the overall model explain a significant amount of variance in parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality. Child ASD characteristics significantly predicted parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality in Block 1 (semipartial correlation of r = −.30, β = −.30, SE B = 0.31, t = −2.50, p = .015), suggesting that child ASD characteristics were negatively associated with parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality, but family socioeconomic resources did not predict parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality beyond variance explained by child ASD characteristics.

Family Socioeconomic Predictors of Parent-Reported Family Involvement

Appraisal of financial resources significantly predicted parent-reported family involvement when controlling for ASD characteristics (semipartial correlation of r = .36, p = .003). Appraisal of financial resources accounted for 13% of the variance in parent-reported family involvement. A one-unit increase in appraisal of financial resources was significantly related to a .40 standardized unit increase in parent-reported family involvement ( β = .40, SE B = 4.10, t = 3.11, p = .003). Independent variables accounted for 18% of the total variance in a given parent's parent-reported family involvement, F(5, 62) = 2.73, p = .027, R ² = .18. The other family-level predictors were not significant.

RQ2

Time 2 Parent-Reported Relationship Quality.

Results indicated a large effect of Time 1 parent-reported relationship quality and family involvement on Time 2 parent-reported relationship quality, explaining 64% of the variance, F(2, 18) = 15.70, p < .001, R ² = .64. Family involvement explained 28% of the variance after holding parent-reported relationship quality constant ( R ²-change = .28, β = .56, SE B = 0.10, t = 3.69, p = .002; large effect); parent-reported relationship quality explained 22% of the variance after holding parent-reported family involvement constant (semipartial R ² = .22, β = .48, SE B = 0.18, t = 3.30, p = .004; medium to large effect).

Time 2 Teacher-Reported Relationship Quality.

Results indicated a medium to large effect of Time 1 parent-reported relationship quality and family involvement on Time 2 teacher-reported relationship quality, explaining 20% of the variance, F(2, 18) = 2.28, p = .131, R ² = .20. Parent-reported family involvement explained 8% of the variance ( R ²-change = .08, β = .29, SE B = 0.16, t = 1.32, p = .196; approaching a medium effect); parent-reported relationship quality explained 8% of the variance (semipartial R ² = .08, β = .29, SE B = 0.28, t = 1.32, p = .203; small effect approaching a medium effect).

Time 2 Congruence in Relationship Quality Ratings.

Results indicated a medium effect of Time 1 parent-reported relationship quality and family involvement on Time 2 congruence in parent- and teacher-reported relationship quality ratings, explaining 14% of the variance, F(2, 18) = 1.45, p = .260, R ² = .14 (higher family-school partnership scores associated with lower distance scores, meaning greater congruence). Parent-reported family involvement explained less than 1% of the variance ( R ²-change = .001, β = −.04, SE B = 0.02, t = −0.16, p = .877; not a meaningful effect); parent-reported relationship quality explained 13% of the variance (semipartial R ² = .13, β = −.36, SE B = .04, t = −1.62, p = .123; medium effect). In other words, as Time 1 parent-reported relationship quality scores increased, Time 2 incongruence scores decreased (i.e., congruence between parent- and teacher-reported relationship quality increased).

Discussion

This exploratory study investigated family-school partnerships for parents and teachers of autistic children through an ecological systems theory framework. Results indicated that parent appraisal of family financial resources was positively associated with parent-reported family involvement above and beyond child ASD characteristics. Results also indicated that parent perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality at one point in time were positively associated with parent perceptions of relationship quality, teacher perceptions of relationship quality, and parent-teacher agreement of relationship quality approximately two years later. Findings highlight the role of parent experience in contextualizing parent perceptions, teacher perceptions, and the extent of agreement between perceptions. Findings also highlight the stability in parent perceptions of a mesosystemic factor (parent-teacher relationship quality) over time, even with changes in microsystem factors like classroom contexts and teachers. For parents of autistic children, who may engage with service providers from an early point, these findings suggest that early partnerships may provide context for understanding family experiences and working toward collaborative partnerships across autistic children's educational careers.

Building on previous work on family context and resource access ( Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005), the finding on appraisal of financial resources suggests that subjective dimensions of socioeconomic experience may play a role in involvement for families of autistic children, and that exploring dimensions of socioeconomic status and experience as individual constructs may yield greater nuance regarding family context ( Kohl et al., 2000). This is particularly important for families of autistic children, given their increased risk of economic difficulty ( Cidav et al., 2012).

Findings on independent perceptions and relational congruence in relationship quality expand on prior work with children with externalizing behavior (e.g., Minke et al., 2014) by exploring this construct in a new population (i.e., autistic children) and suggest that exploring relational congruence is a potential avenue for engagement between parents and teachers of autistic children. In the context of prior research emphasizing congruence in successful family-school partnerships ( Glueck & Reschly, 2014), findings identify further connections between parent perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality and the extent of parent-teacher relational congruence, and contribute to the growing support for exploring the role of congruence in family-school partnerships. Shared approaches across home and school are one component of successful family-school partnerships ( Clarke et al., 2010); exploring congruence may be one way to explore whether dyad members are actively moving toward a partnership in support of positive child outcomes rather than merely having an automatic association with each other on behalf of a child ( Glueck & Reschly, 2014). In the context of research on associations between home-school congruence and child outcomes, findings on the associations between family experiences and parent-teacher relationship perceptions over time suggests that parent-teacher relational congruence is a positive component of partnerships. Further exploration of relational congruence may yield a better understanding of its association with child outcomes.

Limitations

Although this study provides unique contributions to literature on family-school partnerships for autistic children, several limitations reduce the inferences that can be made. First, Time 1 parent-reported parent-teacher relationship quality was not normally distributed. Although choosing not to transform the dataset was appropriate given the sample size, this decision influences the generalizability of results. Second, this study utilized a cross-sectional dataset of a relatively small sample for RQ1, and the longitudinal analysis for RQ2 utilized a smaller sample. Although cross-sectional data can yield important findings, robust longitudinal datasets are better-positioned to identify causality between variables and relations over time. Third, the study had limited racial and ethnic diversity. This affects generalizability of findings to children, parents, and teachers from minoritized backgrounds, and it is important to interpret findings in the context of sample demographics. Fourth, attrition between Times 1 and 2 limits generalizability of longitudinal results. Given differences between families who participated at both time points compared to participating at Time 1 only, Time 2 findings may not generalize to families from minoritized backgrounds, families with low income, and families with one parenting figure in the home. Fifth, this study relied on self-report. Although this is valuable in studying dyadic relationships, direct observations can yield a wider range of information. In addition, the reliance on a single method and single reporter for most analyses (i.e., parent report via questionnaires and interviews) means that results may reflect shared method variance. Although this is common in research in this area, it limits interpretation of findings. Sixth, there are limitations associated with measuring parent-teacher relationship variables. Measures used in this study use relatively narrow dimensions of relationships and involvement. Further work exploring cultural influences on measurement of relationships and involvement would enhance validity of the findings. Seventh, this study focused primarily on parent and teacher experiences. Although child ASD characteristics were considered as a covariate, the emphasis on adults means less information about the children in question, limiting generalizability.

Implications for Practice

Findings suggest that in the absence of intervention, parent report of a mesosystemic influence-parent-teacher relationship quality-was stable over time. This highlights the importance of parent-teacher relationships in elementary school and the presence of greater barriers to educational involvement faced by families who report lower levels of financial resources. In addition, although these data were collected before the COVID-19 pandemic, findings contextualize the existing socioeconomic inequities that were exacerbated by the pandemic, and therefore have implications for educators' understanding of family socioeconomic context during the pandemic and in the future.

Findings have implications for prevention and intervention across multi-tiered systems of support. For example, findings suggest the importance of prioritizing relationship-building with families, understanding home context, and emphasizing family-school partnership objectives. In addition, for children who start elementary school after receiving early childhood services, school-based teams may emphasize building relationships during the transition-to-kindergarten process and meaningfully including parents and early childhood providers. Although early intervention is key, these implications span the service delivery time frame. Not all autistic students enter kindergarten with special education services, nor will all autistic children need special education. In addition, as children move to different schools across their educational careers, new relationships are formed between families and schools, creating new partnership opportunities with new microsystem contexts. The present findings highlight the stability of parent perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality over time. Parents bring their early school relationship experiences with them across time into new relationships, even as classrooms, teachers, and other aspects of the school microsystem change. Regardless of whether children access early childhood services, the present study highlights the importance of understanding families' earlier histories of interactions with educators and service providers.

In the area of intervention, findings have implications for ecologically-grounded family-school partnership strategies. For example, in interventions such as conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC)-a problem-solving family-school partnership model ( Garbacz & McIntyre, 2016)-consultants working with families and teachers of autistic students could consider exploring relational congruence during the consultation process as a way to explore the extent to which parents and teachers are moving toward a collaborative partnership ( Glueck & Reschly, 2014). Findings also have implications for focusing on parent-teacher relationship quality in higher tiers of support (e.g., selected and intensive supports). For example, for practitioners conducting functional behavior assessments, it may be beneficial to integrate family communication and input regarding family context and experiences.

Family-school partnerships have entered new territory during the COVID-19 pandemic. A shift toward distance and hybrid learning models brought new ways of interacting; families of children starting their educational experience may have only met school staff virtually, if they had the resources to navigate new virtual platforms. In addition, COVID-19 is shining a spotlight on existing, deep-rooted socioeconomic inequities, which grow wider as families face heightened economic challenges (e.g., furloughs) and new considerations for helping their children access education (e.g., helping their children access synchronous distance learning within hybrid education models). The present finding on the association between appraisal of financial resources and parent-reported family involvement offers one perspective on the effect of these widening inequities. Specifically, for families experiencing financial strain and the resulting barriers to getting involved with their children's schooling, these difficulties may be amplified and contribute to greater barriers to sustaining educational involvement. This is consistent with research on remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, which indicates that the pandemic highlighted existing inequalities in access to technology ( Correia, 2020) and that schools which provided both online and paper opportunities during distance learning (i.e., options for engaging families with less technology access) saw greater parent involvement ( Bansak & Starr, 2021). As society navigates the pandemic's effects, it is increasingly important that educators consider how families experience their home situation and work to integrate parent-teacher relationships as a critical component of supporting students.

Future Research

This study shapes five primary directions for future research. First, future studies should utilize a larger, more diverse sample to explore cross-sectional and longitudinal relations. This would improve generalization and increase opportunities to explore cross-cultural implications related to parent-teacher dyads, the stability of parent perceptions across time, and relations not explored in this study (e.g., between family socioeconomic resources and relational congruence). Second, future studies could utilize a multitrait-multimethod approach and include reports from a wider range of participants (e.g., children) and direct observations of behavior. This reduces the risk of monomethod bias that comes with using few respondents, increases representation of the constructs, and enhances external and internal validity. In addition, given this study's focus on family factors, future research could explore teacher characteristics; the bidirectional nature of parent-teacher relationships and the contributions of independent perceptions of each member of a parent-teacher dyad highlight the importance of considering teacher context. Third, future studies could examine the distance formula in larger samples and compare with other dyadic indices, which would enhance understanding of dyadic measurement of parent-teacher relational variables. Fourth, future research could explore additional dimensions of socioeconomic experience to identify mechanisms through which families' experiences of financial strain may promote or impede family engagement with their children's school. Fifth, future explorations of family-school partnerships for autistic children would do well to integrate a more comprehensive consideration of the children at the center of the parent-teacher dyads. Adult perceptions arise from the context of the strengths and needs of the autistic children whom they support (e.g., child characteristics and parent functioning bidirectionally influence each other; Hickey et al., 2020). Future work integrating a multifaceted consideration of the autistic children in the context of family-school partnerships will yield a more nuanced understanding of mesosystemic dynamics.

Conclusion

Limitations notwithstanding, this study explored important partnership dimensions in an understudied population and identified risk and malleable factors that relate to family-school partnerships. Findings highlight areas for future research and practical applications for autistic children, their parents, and their teachers.

​

This study explored family-school partnerships among parents and teachers of autistic children. Findings suggest that (a) parents' perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality at one time point were related to independent and congruent parent-teacher perceptions of their relationship about two years later, and (b) parents' appraisals of lower family financial resources were associated with lower educational involvement. Findings highlight the importance of understanding families' perceptions of parent-teacher relationship quality and emphasizing these relationships in early years.

Acknowledgments

This investigation was supported in part by the Fairway Foundation and NICHD R01 HD059838, awarded to Laura Lee McIntyre.

Footnotes

We have no known conflict of interest to disclose.

References

Garbacz SA, Santiago RT, Kosty D, Zahn M, Stormshak EA, Smolkowski K, & Seeley JR (2021). Examining congruence in parent-teacher perceptions of middle school supports for students and families. Psychology in the Schools, advance online publication. 10.1002/pits.22495 [[CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Sheridan SM, Witte AL, Holmes SR, Coutts MJ, Dent AL, Kunz GM, & Wu C (2017). A randomized trial examining the effects of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation in rural schools: Student outcomes and the mediating role of the teacher-parent relationship. Journal of School Psychology, 61, 33-53. 10.1016/j.jsp.2016.12.002 [[PubMed] [CrossRef] Google Scholar]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dimensions of Family-School Partnerships for Autistic Children: Context and Congruence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Family-school partnerships are crucial for promoting positive outcomes and serving as a protective factor for children at-risk for poor school outcomes (). This may be particularly important for autistic children, who are at increased developmental ...

# data[].attributes.headline
Understanding Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for Autism

# data[].attributes.subject
Understanding Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for Autism

# data[].attributes.body
This article emphasizes the importance of collaborating with parents and professionals in order to develop effective IEP goals for children with autism. It mentions that by working together the IEP team can receive insights into the child's strengths, challenges, and individual circumstances. The parents are the ones that can provide with information about this child's abilities and the professional can contribute their knowledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Understanding Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for Autism

In the realm of special education, Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) play a vital role in supporting students with autism. These comprehensive plans are designed to address the unique needs of each child and provide them with the necessary support and accommodations to thrive in an educational setting.

What are Individualized Education Programs (IEPs)?

An Individualized Education Program (IEP) is a legally binding document that outlines the specific educational goals, objectives, and services for a student with autism. It is a collaborative effort involving parents, teachers, therapists, and other professionals who work together to create a tailored educational plan for the student.

The IEP includes detailed information about the student's current academic and functional abilities, as well as areas of challenge. It also encompasses a range of supports and services, such as specialized instruction, accommodations, and therapies, to ensure that the student receives an education that meets their individual needs. The IEP is reviewed and updated annually to reflect the child's progress and evolving requirements.

Importance of IEPs for Autism

IEPs are of paramount importance for students with autism as they provide a framework for addressing the unique learning and developmental needs associated with the condition. These programs offer several benefits, including:

Tailored Support: IEPs enable educators to develop strategies and interventions specifically tailored to the strengths and challenges of each student. By recognizing the individuality of each child with autism, IEPs ensure that their educational experience is personalized and meaningful.

Clear Goals and Objectives: The IEP sets clear and measurable goals and objectives for the student's academic, social, and functional development. These goals serve as benchmarks to gauge the student's progress and guide instruction and support.

Collaboration and Teamwork: IEPs foster collaboration among parents, teachers, therapists, and other professionals involved in the student's education. By bringing together a multidisciplinary team, the IEP process encourages a holistic approach to support the student's overall well-being and success.

Legal Protections: IEPs are legally binding documents that provide students with autism and their families with certain rights and protections under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These safeguards ensure that the student receives the appropriate services and accommodations necessary for their educational progress.

IEPs serve as a roadmap for driving positive change and fostering growth in students with autism. By setting meaningful goals and providing targeted supports, these programs empower students to achieve their full potential. Regular review and evaluation, as well as modifications when needed, ensure that the IEP remains relevant and effective.

Setting Meaningful IEP Goals for Autism

When creating Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for children with autism, it is crucial to set meaningful and impactful goals that address their unique needs. This section explores the key steps in setting these goals: collaborating with parents and professionals, identifying the child's strengths and needs, and utilizing SMART goal setting.

Collaborating with Parents and Professionals

Collaboration between parents, educators, therapists, and other professionals is essential to develop effective IEP goals for children with autism. By working together, the IEP team can gain valuable insights into the child's strengths, challenges, and individual circumstances. Parents can provide firsthand information about their child's abilities and preferences, while professionals can contribute their expertise and knowledge.

Regular communication and IEP meetings should be scheduled to ensure everyone is on the same page and actively involved in the goal-setting process. This collaborative approach helps to create a comprehensive and well-rounded IEP that supports the child's overall development.

Identifying the Child's Strengths and Needs

To set meaningful goals, it is vital to have a clear understanding of the child's strengths and needs. This involves conducting a thorough autism IEP evaluation and gathering information from various sources, such as assessments, observations, and input from parents and professionals.

By identifying the child's strengths, such as exceptional visual memory or a talent for music, the IEP team can leverage these abilities to enhance their learning experience. Simultaneously, understanding the child's specific challenges, such as difficulties with social interactions or verbal communication, allows the team to develop goals that target those areas effectively.

SMART Goal Setting for Autism

When setting goals within an IEP, it is crucial to follow the SMART framework: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. Applying this approach ensures that the goals are well-defined, trackable, realistic, aligned with the child's needs, and have a clear timeline for achievement.

For example, rather than setting a general goal like "improve communication skills," a SMART goal could be "The child will use at least 50 functional words to express basic needs and preferences in social settings, as measured by weekly observations over a period of six months."

By using the SMART criteria, the IEP team can create goals that are precise, meaningful, and measurable. This facilitates effective progress monitoring and allows for adjustments, if necessary, during the IEP review process.

Setting meaningful IEP goals for children with autism requires close collaboration, a deep understanding of the child's strengths and needs, and adherence to the SMART goal-setting framework. By following these steps, the IEP team can create a personalized plan that maximizes the child's potential and supports their growth and development.

Examples of Impactful IEP Goals for Autism

When developing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for children with autism, it's essential to set meaningful and achievable goals that address their unique needs. Here are some examples of impactful IEP goals for autism across different areas of development:

Communication and Language Skills

Goal: The child will improve expressive language skills by using functional words and phrases to communicate needs and wants.

Objective: Within six months, the child will use at least 50 functional words and phrases in daily interactions, as documented through a language sample assessment.

Goal: The child will develop social interaction skills by initiating and maintaining appropriate peer interactions during playtime.

Objective: Over the course of the IEP period, the child will initiate and engage in play activities with peers for at least 10 minutes, demonstrating appropriate turn-taking and sharing behaviors in 80% of observed opportunities.

Goal: The child will improve reading comprehension skills by identifying main ideas and key details in grade-appropriate texts.

Objective: By the end of the school year, the child will read and summarize grade-level texts, accurately identifying the main idea and at least three key details in written or verbal responses with 90% accuracy.

Goal: The child will develop independent self-care skills by completing daily hygiene routines with minimal support.

Objective: Within the IEP period, the child will independently complete daily hygiene routines (e.g., brushing teeth, washing hands) with no more than verbal prompts in 90% of observed instances.

Goal: The child will enhance fine motor skills by independently using utensils for eating and writing.

Objective: By the end of the school year, the child will consistently use utensils for eating and demonstrate legible handwriting in daily assignments, with no more than occasional assistance from adaptive tools.

Goal: The child will enhance problem-solving skills by utilizing strategies to solve math word problems.

Objective: Within six months, the child will solve grade-level math word problems using visual representations and verbal explanations, demonstrating accurate problem-solving strategies in 80% of opportunities.

Goal: The child will enhance emotional regulation skills by utilizing self-calming strategies when faced with challenging situations.

Objective: Within three months, the child will independently identify and use at least three self-calming strategies (e.g., deep breathing, taking a break) to manage frustration or anxiety in at least 80% of observed instances.

Goal: The child will enhance receptive language skills by following two-step directions and understanding basic concepts.

Objective: By the end of the school year, the child will correctly follow two-step directions and demonstrate understanding of basic concepts (e.g., colors, shapes) with 80% accuracy in structured activities.

Social and Emotional Skills

Academic and Cognitive Skills

Adaptive and Functional Skills

These examples illustrate the diverse range of goals that can be included in an IEP for a child with autism. Remember, IEP goals should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART goals) to ensure effective progress monitoring. Collaborating with parents, professionals, and the IEP team is crucial in setting and evaluating these goals to drive positive change in the child's development.

Strategies for Implementing IEP Goals

Implementing Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals requires careful planning and implementation strategies to ensure that each child with autism receives the support they need to thrive. In this section, we will explore three key strategies for effectively implementing IEP goals: individualized instruction and accommodations, data collection and progress monitoring, and collaboration and communication with the IEP team.

Individualized Instruction and Accommodations

To effectively implement IEP goals, it is vital to provide individualized instruction and accommodations tailored to the unique needs of each child with autism. This involves adapting teaching methods, materials, and strategies to match their learning styles and strengths. By recognizing and building on their strengths, educators can create a supportive and inclusive learning environment.

Accommodations can include modifications to the learning environment, such as visual supports, sensory breaks, or assistive technology. These adjustments help to create a more accessible and inclusive setting that promotes optimal learning and development.

Data Collection and Progress Monitoring

Data collection and progress monitoring are essential elements of implementing IEP goals for children with autism. By systematically collecting data on the child's progress, educators can track their development, identify areas of improvement, and make informed decisions about instructional strategies.

Collecting data can involve various methods, such as observations, checklists, or standardized assessments. This data provides valuable insights into the child's progress towards their IEP goals and helps educators and parents to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategies being implemented.

Collaboration and Communication with the IEP Team

Successful implementation of IEP goals requires strong collaboration and communication among all members of the IEP team, including educators, parents, therapists, and other professionals. Regular communication ensures that everyone is working together towards common goals and can make necessary adjustments as needed.

Collaboration involves sharing information, discussing progress, and collectively problem-solving to address any challenges that may arise. Through open and transparent communication, the IEP team can provide consistent support and ensure that the child's needs are met effectively.

By implementing individualized instruction and accommodations, collecting data for progress monitoring, and fostering collaboration among the IEP team, educators can effectively support children with autism in achieving their IEP goals. These strategies promote a supportive and inclusive learning environment, setting the stage for meaningful progress and positive outcomes.

Evaluating and Adjusting IEP Goals

Once Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals have been set for a child with autism, it is important to regularly evaluate and adjust those goals to ensure they remain meaningful and effective. This ongoing process allows for continuous improvement and ensures that the child's educational needs are being met. Three key steps in this process include regular review and evaluation, modifying goals as needed, and celebrating progress and success.

Regular Review and Evaluation

Regular review and evaluation of IEP goals is crucial in tracking the progress of the child with autism. This involves scheduling periodic meetings, known as IEP meetings, where parents, teachers, therapists, and other professionals come together to discuss the child's progress. During these meetings, the team reviews the child's current goals, assesses their progress, and identifies any areas that may require adjustment.

By conducting regular evaluations, the IEP team can gather valuable data and insights to determine whether the current goals are appropriate and effective. This process promotes transparency, collaboration, and open communication among all team members involved.

Modifying Goals as Needed

Modifying goals as needed is an essential part of the IEP process for children with autism. As the child progresses and develops new skills, it may be necessary to adjust the goals to ensure they remain challenging yet attainable. Additionally, if it becomes evident that certain goals are not aligned with the child's strengths and needs, modifications should be made to better address their individual requirements.

The process of modifying goals should involve a collaborative effort between parents, educators, therapists, and other professionals. By taking into account input from all team members, the IEP team can create goals that are tailored to the specific needs and abilities of the child.

Celebrating Progress and Success

Celebrating progress and success is a vital aspect of the IEP process for children with autism. Recognizing and acknowledging the achievements of the child helps to build their confidence, motivation, and self-esteem. It also encourages a positive and supportive learning environment.

Throughout the journey of working towards IEP goals, it is crucial to celebrate both small and significant milestones. This can be done through verbal praise, certificates, progress reports, or other means of recognition. By celebrating progress and success, the child feels a sense of accomplishment and is motivated to continue working towards their goals.

By regularly evaluating and adjusting IEP goals, the educational program for children with autism can be adapted to meet their evolving needs. This process ensures that the goals set are meaningful, achievable, and aligned with the child's strengths and areas of growth. By celebrating progress and success, the child is encouraged to reach their full potential and thrive in their educational journey.

‍Conclusion

Through the collaborative efforts of parents, professionals, and the IEP team, meaningful and achievable goals can be set for children with autism across various areas of development. By following the SMART goal-setting framework, IEP goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, enabling effective progress monitoring and adjustment as needed.

Implementing individualized instruction and accommodations, collecting data for progress monitoring, and fostering collaboration among the IEP team are key strategies for effectively supporting children with autism in achieving their goals. Regular review and evaluation, modifying goals as needed, and celebrating progress and success are essential steps in ensuring that the child's educational needs are being met.

Sources:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for Autism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unlock the power of impactful IEP goals for autism. Empower children with tailored strategies for success. IEP goals for autism made easy!

# data[].attributes.body
This source explores the various assistive technology tools and resources available to support individuals with ASD in communication, learning, and other areas. She mentions social skills apps and programs that are designed to teach and reinforce social skills, emotional regulation, and other important social-emotional competencies for individuals with autism. Sensory tools and devices were also mentiond because these help individuals with autism regulate sensory input and manage sensory sensitivities or challenges.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Technology Can Help People With Autism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From weighted blankets to socially responsive robots, there is an incredible range of assistive technology available to help those with autism.

# data[].attributes.headline
Five Steps for DevelopingEffective Transition Plansfor High School StudentsWith Autism SpectrumDisorder

# data[].attributes.subject
Five Steps for DevelopingEffective Transition Plansfor High School StudentsWith Autism SpectrumDisorder

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides guidance and strategies for developing transition plans tailored to the needs of high school students with autism spectrum disorder. This article provides five key components for creating comprehensive and individualized transition plans for students with autism spectrum disorder as they prepare to transition from high school to post- secondary education.

# data[].attributes.body
This resource provides schools with essential information and guidance regarding autism spectrum disorder. This factsheet serves as a reference tool for educators, administrators, and other school personnel to better understand and support students with autism. It provides two topics for teacher of what they should know about autism and what they can do for instructional support.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Teachers Should Know

Autism is one of the most common developmental disabilities. People with autism, also called autism spectrum disorder (ASD), have differences in the way their brains develop and process information. As a result, they face significant communication, social, and behavior challenges.

Symptoms can be severe and interfere with everyday tasks, or they can be mild and cause only a few problems. Experts call this range of symptoms a "spectrum." Asperger syndrome and pervasive developmental disorders (PDD) are conditions that fall within the autism spectrum.

Signs of autism may include:

trouble interacting, playing with, or relating to others

little or brief eye contact with others

unusual or repetitive movements, such as hand flapping, spinning, or tapping

delays in developmental milestones or loss of already-achieved milestones

difficulties learning in school

playing with toys in ways that seem odd or repetitive

low muscle tone, clumsiness, and poor spatial awareness

Although there's no cure for autism, early intervention and therapy can help kids develop skills and achieve their potential. Therapy is tailored to each child's individual needs and may include behavioral, educational, speech, and occupational therapies.

Students with autism may:

get easily frustrated and act out in certain situations

be sensitive to bright lights, loud noises, or busy hallways

need to go to the school nurse for medications

miss class time for doctor visits and therapies

have trouble speaking or not speak at all

seem insensitive or unemotional

need extra time for class assignments and homework

need to take tests in a separate area away from distractions

Because bullies often target students who seem "different," health conditions like autism can put kids and teens at higher risk for bullying.

What Teachers Can Do

Many students with autism can thrive in a structured environment, so establish a routine and keep it as consistent as possible. Adhering to daily schedules and allowing ample time for transitions can help with many students' behavioral issues and frustrations.

Instructional support is often needed within the classroom setting. Students with autism learn better with pictures and demonstrations. Limit long verbal instructions and provide visual cues and written instructions, when possible. Also limit distractions and use positive rewards for positive behaviors.

Many people with autism have strong passions and deep interests. Getting to know your students' likes and dislikes can help you understand what motivates them. Students with autism can participate in most activities that other kids and teens do, so provide encouragement to participate when appropriate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What teachers should know about autism, and teaching strategies to help students with autism do their best in school.

# data[].attributes.headline
Autism in the Classroom: Strategies for Success.

# data[].attributes.subject
Autism in the Classroom: Strategies for Success.

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides educators with strategies and approaches for supporting students with autism spectrum disorder in the class. It covers topics related to understanding autism, creating inclusive learning environments, and implementing effective teaching practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Autism in the classroom: Strategies for success | Autism Speaks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This excerpt from the School Community Tool Kit offers strategies for teachers to help support students with autism so they get the best education possible.