Reducing the Gap: Preparing Teachers to Use Evidence-Based Practices in Autism

Research shows that there is a gap between the educational research and classroom practice regarding students diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) (Callahan, Henson, & Cowan, 2008; Cook & Odom, 2013; Dingfelder & Mandell, 2011; Lord et al., 2005; Smith et al., 2007; Stahmer, 2007). While evidence-based practices (EBPs) have been established specific to students diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, these practices are not consistently used in public school classrooms (Callahan et al., 2008; Cook & Odom, 2013; Cook, Tankersley, & Landrum, 2009; National Autism Center, 2015; Wong et al., 2015). This gap may be the result of limited access to effective professional development that was designed to meet the complex needs of those with ASD (Boyd & Shaw, 2010; Lord et al., 2005; Scheuermann, Webber, Boutot, & Goodwin, 2003; Wong et al., 2015). The purpose of this mixed methods concurrent study was to increase a) the knowledge of ASD and EBPs in teachers working with students with ASD, b) the frequency of use of discrete trial training and visual supports in the classroom, two EBPs designed for students with ASD, and c) self-efficacy of teachers working with students diagnosed with ASD. The participants were self-contained special education teachers from a district located in the southeastern United States. Each participant took part in four face-to-face professional development sessions, completed two online modules, and participated in four coaching individualized sessions. Qualitative and quantitative data included professional development sign-in sheets, coaching logs including an implementation checklist and anecdotal notes, a social validity survey, pre- and post-program surveys focusing on knowledge of ASD, evidence-based practices, and self-efficacy. Results indicated the participants showed growth in knowledge of the characteristics of ASD. Participants also demonstrated an 81% increase in their level of knowledge of twenty-seven of EBPs, and an 85% increase in their comfort in implementing twenty-six of the EBPs. In contrast, there was a decrease in comfort of implementation of one of the EBPs. Finally, the self-efficacy levels of the participants improved in 23 out of 30 questions