Suchergebnisse

Since autism was first recognised, prevalence has increased rapidly. The growing economic as well as social cost to families and society can only be mitigated by effective interventions and supports. It is, therefore, not surprising that there is much heated debate and most governments have developed public policies to address the management of autism. This paper describes how well-known 'propaganda' techniques, that have become prevalent in the helping professions have been used to influence autism policies by spreading 'fake news' about the scientific discipline of Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA). Over the past 40–50 years, meaningful evidence has accrued showing that interventions based on ABA can help people with autism reach their potential. In view of this, nearly all of North America has laws to mandate that ABA-based interventions are available through their health care systems. In contrast, across Europe there are no such laws. In fact, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the body guiding health and social policy in the UK, concluded that it could not find any evidence to support ABA, and therefore could not recommend it. This paper addresses the reasons for these diametrically opposed perspectives.

Since autism was first recognised, prevalence has increased rapidly. The growing economic as well as social cost to families and society can only be mitigated by effective interventions and supports. It is, therefore, not surprising that there is much heated debate and most governments have developed public policies to address the management of autism. This paper describes how well-known 'propaganda' techniques, that have become prevalent in the helping professions have been used to influence autism policies by spreading 'fake news' about the scientific discipline of Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA). Over the past 40–50 years, meaningful evidence has accrued showing that interventions based on ABA can help people with autism reach their potential. In view of this, nearly all of North America has laws to mandate that ABA-based interventions are available through their health care systems. In contrast, across Europe there are no such laws. In fact, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the body guiding health and social policy in the UK, concluded that it could not find any evidence to support ABA, and therefore could not recommend it. This paper addresses the reasons for these diametrically opposed perspectives.

With rising numbers of school-aged children with autism educated in main stream classrooms and applied behaviour analysis (ABA) considered the basis of best practice, teachers' knowledge in this field has become a key concern for inclusion. Self-reported knowledge of ABA of special needs teachers (n=165)was measured and compared to their actual knowledge of ABA demonstrated inaccurate responses to a multiple-choice test. Findings reported here show that teachers' self-perceived knowledge exceeded actual knowledge and that actual knowledge of ABA was not related to training received by government agency.Implications for teacher training are discussed.

This document is the outcome of a European project that aimed to develop an internationally recognized qualification profile for job coaches, to facilitate the social and economic inclusion of people with developmental, cognitive and mental health problems. Although the role of 'Job Coach for person with disabilities' does not currently have the status of an established profession within the European Union, there is common agreement that their main professional task is to provide personal on-site assistance in employment for persons with specific health needs1. As a result, the partner organizations, representing five European nations, set out to design 'Job Coaching' as a new occupation in the 2423 (Personnel and Careers Professional) group2 within the European Skills, Competences Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) system3. Currently, as a non-registered occupation, the position of Job Coach is not regulated within the European Qualification Framework for lifelong learning (EQF), and this is an issue that the present project aimed to address.

Objective A home-based parent training program for the treatment of moderate to severe conduct problems was developed in two stages. Method Study 1, a case study, examined the inverse covariation between child compliance to parental instruction and aversive responding. Study 2, which used a multiple-baseline-across-subjects experimental design with two families, examined the effectiveness of a multicomponent treatment strategy for the reduction of aversive child behavior. Treatment was conducted as in Study 1 with the addition of high-intensity training in a time-out procedure. Direct observations of parent and child behavior were conducted in the home setting. Results Study 1 demonstrated the inverse covariation effect. Study 2 demonstrated significant treatment gains in parent and child behaviors in both training and test settings, which were maintained at 3-month follow-up. Conclusions A home-based parent training program that includes high-intensity training in time-out is an effective treatment method for moderate to severe child conduct problems.