Abstract
Research on teaching mathematics to Arab children with Autism Spectrum Disorder using parents as mediators is limited. The purpose of the present study was to carry out an initial evaluation of an adapted Maths Recovery numeracy programme with three children with Autism Spectrum Disorder, by training and supporting their parents to deliver the intervention over the course of eight weeks intervention. Using a pre-test post-test design, results from a standardised assessment revealed that the three children’s mathematical ability improved over the course of the intervention. Parents also described positive experiences of their training and of using the curriculum,
especially mentioning how much their children had progressed in their understanding of mathematics. The study data show promising results and provide initial evidence that the adapted Maths Recovery programme can be adapted for a home context.
185
Introduction
Competence in mathematics has considerable implications for an individual’s ability to achieve academically, to live independently, e.g., budgeting, scheduling, paying bills, to gain and sustain a job, and to engage socially, e.g., playing games (Sarama & Clements, 2009). According to the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics (2000), numeracy is one of the main domains of early mathematics skills. Numeracy refers to the ability to understand and represent numbers, relationships among numbers, for example e.g., place value, and number operations including addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, and using these concepts to form mathematical judgements and conduct complicated problem solving (Mclntosh, Reys & Reys, 1992).
Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) can demonstrate learning of fundamental and advanced mathematical skills (King, Lemons & Davidson, 2016). However, the mathematics attainment profile of children with ASD is variable
(Charman et al., 2011). Children with ASD as a group have lower levels of mathematics skills compared to children generally (Wei, Christiano, Wagner & Spiker, 2015). Nearly 25% of children with ASD have been found to have a mathematics learning disability (Mayes & Calhoun, 2006), compared with 3% to 14% of typically developing children (Gregoire & Desoete, 2009), even though some children with ASD may have
exceptional mathematics ability (Chiang & Lin 2007). A longitudinal study of individuals with ASD reported slower development rates in calculation abilities as compared to children with mathematical learning disabilities (Wei, Lenz, & Blackorby, 2012).
Some cognitive characteristics associated with ASD may explain some of the difficulties these children face with mathematics (Burney, 2015). For example, children
with ASD may have deficits in visuo-spatial coordination, which is crucial for obtaining mathematics skills (Donaldson & Zager, 2010). Other researchers have reported that deficits in working memory, executive functioning and language development may influence children with ASD’s attainment on mathematics skills (Barnhill, Hagiwara, Myles & Simpson, 2000; Donaldson & Zager, 2010; Griswold, Barnhill, Myles, Hagiwara & Simpson, 2002; Happe, Booth, Charlton & Hughes, 2006; Norbury & Nation, 2011).
Within the research literature on interventions with children with ASD, examining the best methods for teaching mathematics has received limited
consideration (Su et al., 2010). Most existing research has focused on the best methods to teach an isolated mathematical skill rather than looking at how individual skills can be taught systematically as components of a comprehensive mathematics programme that teaches a wider range of skills. For example, Root, Browder, Saunders and Lo (2017) focused on how to use modified schema-based instruction with three elementary children with autism to teach the skill of mathematical word problem solving (see also Jowett, Moore and Anderson, 2012; Bouck Satsangi, Doughty & Courtney, 2013).
In terms of teaching methods, there is some evidence that systematic instruction strategies can be used to teach comprehensive mathematics skills to children with ASD (Browder, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Harris & Wakeman, 2008; Spooner, Root, Saunders & Browder, 2019). Systematic instruction has several important components including: using clearly defined teaching goals, in other words, ‘operationally defined’ targets, using a system of least to most prompts and prompt-fading techniques,
specification of error-correction techniques, data collection to monitor progress, and generalisation (Browder et al., 2008; Spooner et al., 2019).
187
Tzanakaki and colleagues (2014a) adapted an existing numeracy curriculum, the Maths Recovery programme, to meet the needs of children with learning difficulties and ASD. The adapted programme incorporated elements of systematic instruction by including shorter instructions, prompting procedures, use of task analyses (breaking down complex tasks into smaller, more achievable steps), additional generalisation steps, clearly defined goals, and frequent use of reinforcement (Tzanakaki et al., 2014a). Maths Recovery is a curriculum that was developed in Australia in the 1990s and
designed for children in mainstream classrooms who were not meeting age-related expectations for mathematics (Wright, Cowper, Stafford, Stanger & Stewart, 1994; Wright, Stanger, Stafford & Martland, 2006; Willey, Holliday & Martland, 2007). The programme covers a comprehensive range of numeracy skills from very early, e.g., counting 1–20, recognising numerals 1–10, being able to count up to 20 items, counting using fingers, to advanced, e.g., counting by 10s and 100 s to 1000, addition/subtraction of two-digit numbers, word problems involving multiplication/division (Tzanakaki et al., 2014a).
There have been two evaluations of the adapted Maths Recovery (MR) intervention. In the first study, researchers used pre- and post-test assessments to evaluate the adapted MR curriculum to teach early numeracy to six children of primary age with a diagnosis of autism, in a specialised classroom in a mainstream school (Tzanakaki et al., 2014a). Results indicated that over a 20-week period, all children made substantial gains in their numeracy knowledge and skills, and those gains were maintained over time. The second study involved a pilot randomised controlled trial of the adapted MR curriculum with 24 pupils with severe intellectual disability and/or ASD (Tzanakaki, Hastings, Grindle, Hughes & Hoare, 2014b). Results showed that over a 12-week period, the adapted MR curriculum was more effective in teaching
numeracy to pupils than the school’s numeracy as usual curriculum, and results of the intervention were maintained over time.
These studies indicated that staff in special schools can be trained to deliver the adapted MR curriculum. However, due to staffing issues the fidelity of the intervention implementation was compromised. Staff could not have the availability to deliver the intervention (Tzanakaki et al., 2014a; Tzanakaki et al., 2014b). In addition, not all children with ASD attend special schools. Consequently, these issues may confine the number of children with ASD who might benefit from the adapted MR curriculum. Training and involving parents to support their child’s numeracy intervention
potentially increases the number of children who might benefit and is valued in policy. Other research has demonstrated that parent mediated interventions, both in the field of health and education, can have a positive influence on outcomes for children with ASD (Kasari et al., 2014; Kaiser, Hancock & Nietfeld, 2000; Sofronoff, Leslie & Brown, 2004; Beaudoin, Sébire & Couture 2014). Parents are available to practise skills with their child throughout the day and across situations (Nevill, Lecavalier & Stratis, 2018). Fishel and Ramirez (2005) reviewed 24 studies investigating parents involved with interventions with school-aged children generally, and found that parental
involvement was strongest for interventions targeting primary school children, working on a single academic domain including reading and mathematics skills, through home- based parent tutoring. According to McConachie and Diggle (2007), parental
involvement in implementing intervention strategies designed to support their children with ASD has long been noted as useful. The potential advantages are enhanced child’s skills, increased parental knowledge of ASD, improved maternal communication style and parent child interaction, and decreased maternal depression (McConachie & Diggle, 2007).
189
Providing parents with the skills to efficiently manage their child’s
developmental delays can also enhance the parents’ sense of competence, reduce stress, and increase family coherence (Koegel & Koegel, 2002). Consequently, it is of interest to design models for parent-mediated intervention that are both attainable for parents to use and lead to improved developmental functioning (Nevill et al., 2018). Over the last 15 years, there has been an increased emphasis on research on parent mediated
interventions in ASD (Nevill et al., 2018) including a number of reviews on the effectiveness of parent mediated intervention for their children with ASD (e.g., Beaudoin et al., 2014; McConachie & Diggle 2007; Oono, Honey & McConachie, 2013; Lang, Machalicek, Rispoli & Regester, 2009). Research on parent mediated intervention to children with ASD has stressed that parents should be trained using naturalistic methods which would be feasible to use in the home context (Brookman- Frazee, Stahmer, Ericzen, & Tsai, 2006). In addition, parents should receive ongoing supervision and support from researchers/professionals over the period of intervention implementation (Oono et al., 2013). However, research of parent mediated intervention in ASD tend to focus on mediating communication and social skills. Consequently, we were not able to find research on parent mediated numeracy intervention in ASD.
The primary aim of the current study was to carry out an initial evaluation of the adapted MR curriculum by training and supporting parents to deliver the intervention. A secondary aim was to contribute to the literature on teaching skills to children who come from an Arab background. In Chapter 2 we found four studies investigating the impact of intervention strategies on improving social and communicational skills of Arab children with ASD (Al Shammari, Daniel, Faulkner & Yawkey, 2010; Alshurman & Alsreaa 2015; Al zyoudi, Sartawi & Almuhiri, 2015; Fteiha, 2016), but none
academic interventions generally in Arab contexts, but also specifically with parents as mediators.
This study was essentially a modelling study focused mainly on the intervention, in other words, the main purpose was to explore whether the adapted MR curriculum could be delivered in the home context and potentially in Arabic. According to Craig et al. (2008) modelling a complex intervention prior to a full-scale evaluation can provide important information about the design of both the intervention and the evaluation. In addition, modelling studies can identify weakness and lead to refinements, or can show that a full-scale evaluation is unwarranted. It is important to start thinking about
implementation at an early stage in developing an intervention and to ask the question ‘would it be possible to use this?’ before embarking on a lengthy and expensive process of evaluation (Craig et al. 2008). Indeed, it was the first time that this intervention had been used in the home context, and with an Arab population of mothers and their children. Therefore, conducting a modelling study could provide information on what would need to be considered in any future delivery of the intervention in this context. Conducting a small modelling study was needed as we were changing: the delivery agents (mothers), the context (home), and some other dimensions of the intervention (the training, family culture, and telephone rather than face-to-face support).
Consequently, we aimed to explore how all these elements might work.
Evaluation Method and Intervention Description Participants
Three boys with a diagnosis of ASD and their mothers participated in the study (after receiving approval from the University of Warwick Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee (HSSREC, ref: 09/18-19) (see Appendix T, p.