Re: Re: Researched-based / READ180

[Guest guest]

Here I disagree I think too much repeptition can make children shut down. Also my son has the verbal abilities of a five year old. His understanding of vocabulary is on a high school level. Just because he cannot SAY a word does not mean he doesn't understand it. For instance he once spelled " Malingering " in reference to his sister. This is not a word he says verbally. We actually had to look this one up in the dictionary. Because we read to him on a high level it is possible we ran across this word at some point or he heard it in class. We certainly never did it in repetition. Just thought I'd point that out. I agree with the one to one and the intensive though. My son has been doing one to one teaching now for 3 years and is inlcuded with a aide who takes notes and helps to scribe homework. One of my in home tutors is a high school resource teacher, at another district she uses RPM with my son. Words that trip him up are funny, Today I told him his brother would get fired from a job one day if he doesn't learn to manage his job. Matt said verbally " Fired? Zach will get burned? " So funny. So yes in these cases I think you have to teach that the words don't necessarily have to make sense. Word webs? Never needed them.

Trina

 

You are correct - the research should correspond to the population of the disability. Unfortunately, not many programs are specifically tailored to autism. Read 180, like you say, is tested on the NT population and was developed to target the population of children coming from distressed economic means.

What research does say is that children with autism need 1) intensive intervention, 2) repetition, 3) visuals to assist in the learning process, 4) programming for generalization of skills, etc. Then you have to map those teaching techniques onto reading skills. Reading assumes a typical rate of language development. If the language development is atypical, then reading is unlikely to proceed like most of the research indicates. Note that a 5yo typically developing child has a vocabulary of 1,500+ words, understands and uses irregular past tense verbs, and makes up jokes/engages in word play, etc.

That said, I agree with Louis; by far the largest problem I have seen with clients is the comprehension piece. Comprehension is frequently tied to a decreased level of vocabulary and rigidity in language use. So, similes, metaphors, allegories, etc. can trip up our kiddos.

One speech path I knew recommended doing word webs to help build language and associations. (For our part, we turned that into a dinner word game, as many of our language programs became). You could also begin specifically teaching funny phrases (ex: " that tripped me up! " v. " What a trip that was " v. " I'm going on a trip to Seattle " ). An ABA consultant should able to help develop these type language programs, but really I think parents can make them up just as well.

A quick oogle search came up with helpful hits:http://www.saidwhat.co.uk/spoon/similes.phphttp://www.saidwhat.co.uk/spoon/metaphors.php

HTH - R>> What exactly does the term " research-based " entail when it comes to Autism? Does it mean it has to be research based to work with children with an ASD? My child is using READ 180 and I'm told it is research based but according to Scholastic (the company that created it) they don't have any research on it's use with children with spectrum disorders and their website only shows it works with kids in upper grades not elementary.

>