The TEACCH philosophy refers to physical structure as ‘the way of arranging furniture, materials and general surroundings of the classroom’, (Mesibov & Howey, 2003). In order to reduce the auditory and visual distractions of the classroom adaptation was seen as an essential component in our programme as over stimulation has been found to distract some pupils with ASD, (Siegel, 2003). The fundamentals of this approach are that by making the environment more predictable the pupil will be less confused and problems will be reduced (Mesibov, 1997; Seach, 1998).
T has a number of strong points in many areas of the curriculum. However, he struggled at first with the number of class changes moving to secondary school entailed. This manifested itself primarily in T not being aware of where to sit in each classroom thus causing stress and confusion. After discussion it was agreed that T should be able to sit in the same place or position in each of his classes whether this was in the main school or during his lessons in the provision; normally in front of the teacher’s desk.
As a consequence we have now provided T with seating plans which illustrate (pictorially) where he should sit in each of his classes, resulting in structure that has helped his unease. This approach supports the evidence offered by Short in his 1984 study. Surprisingly though this unease does not arise during lunchtime in the school canteen and T insists on eating his lunch in the melee of sounds and smells that arise. This could explain some of the difficulties in finding concrete evidence for the effectiveness of TEACCH (see Mesibov above) as pupils tend not respond in the same way to every situation.
Further, attention was given to the planning of the rooms within the provision. While it is pleasant to display details of work and posters in the walls of the department it was decided that these should be kept to a minimum and if possible under eye level to reduce distractions and over stimulation. We have also worked with T to overcome the potential barriers to learning that come about simply because of the physical structure of the working environment. As the National Curriculum specifically provides for an adapted environment and requires teachers to remove barriers to learning (DfEE/QCA 1999: 34) we felt no reluctance in doing so.
Visual Schedules
The use of visual schedules have long been in use throughout education. These usually take the form of written timetables which focus the pupil’s attention on their daily classes. The most common types of schedules in the TEACCH approach are objects, written words with icons, pictures, photographs or written schedules, (Mesibov & Howey, 2003). When providing a schedule for T we considered and modified his standard timetable so that it was better suited for his use. One consideration was the level of the schedule and it was decided that as T had little difficulty in understanding the written word that this was the best form of structure for him although we were equally conscious of the need to focus the schedule at the most meaningful level that addressed T’s needs on his most difficult days.
Therefore even though he reads very well we have provided a written schedule with icons, (Mesibov 2004). Another consideration was the length of the schedule. As we knew that T could follow a sequence of activities using the visual clues given in the schedule we completed a schedule that contained more than one item, up to half a day, that lead T through the day thus; ‘first….then…..then’. T has now been issued with a pupil’s journal that has been customised for his needs.
The journal allows the schedule to be simplified with room numbers, teachers’ names and a plan of the building. Changes to the schedule are documented within the provision on a whiteboard that allows all pupils in the department to update their journals at the start of the day, break and lunch. All pupils find these reminders reassuring and we believe that they enhance autonomy. The use of cover or supply teachers can also be tracked using this system and we have found that this reduces the element of change and thus stress for the pupils and is in support of the findings of Ozanoff and Cathcart (1998).
Overall the use of the journal results in a better understanding of the sequence of the school day for T and we have found, again in support of Ozanoff and Cathcart, that this allows him access to a wider range of lessons, skills and activities in the mainstream school. Work Systems As visual processing is strong point of so many pupils with autism, (Attwood, 1998) the classrooms within our provision make good use of many visual cues. T has an individual work system organised and signposted to maximise his independent functioning and capitalise on his affinity for routines.
T studies in both the mainstream school, supported by a LSA, and attends 1:1 lessons within the specialist provision. The rationale behind these lessons is to reinforce the work from the mainstream, to secure skills and to extend concentration and attention span. Before these structured TEACCH lessons, T was not spontaneously verbal, co-operated only within his highly structured routine and his fine motor (handwriting) skills were impaired. The use of dedicated LSA guidance, work schedules and the structure of the classroom in addition to these structured lessons have resulted in a more appropriate learning environment in which he contributes and integrates into school life. These improvements support the evidence provided by Ozanoff and Cathcart (1998).
T keeps his work in plastic wallets and writes the teachers’ instructions into his journal. The combination of schedule and system of work is being used in the provision, in support of Schopler (1991), in order to encourage T to become as independent as possible within school and in other situations. T now has the added incentive of being provided with decision making and choice opportunities and we are endeavouring to adapt these systems for T to make them more flexible to circumstances external to school and to enable them to be adapted to adult life.
In order to incorporate the TEACCH principles into an overall philosophy of best practice, it was also important to include parental involvement at all stages of planning and implementation. Parental feedback is encouraging and ongoing and it is reported that many of the stresses, previously reported by T’s parent and siblings, have reduced and the programme is ‘without doubt worth doing’; a parental comment that supports the work of Schopler et al (1982).
Interventions, we believe, should be driven by an ongoing assessment of effectiveness. While at the same time, the programme ought to be individualised and based on appropriate activity-based interventions that address pupils’ needs. Moreover transitions are particularly difficult and should be addressed for each pupil throughout the day. Structure can also help to provide a practical response to the question of what is the best educational environment for each pupil with autism. One possible answer, and one that was successful for us, seems to consist of establishing multi-methodology classrooms which utilise communicative, academic, social and environmental supports, thus finding ways of translating our world into comprehensible segments for pupil’s with autism.
Finally, although the TEACCH approach has resulted in benefits for our pupil we also understand that the approach is broad-based and takes into account all aspects of the lives of people with autism and their families. Although independent skills are emphasised, it is also recognised that life is not all work and that communication, social and leisure skills can be learned by people with autism and can have an important impact on their well being.
An important part of any TEACCH curriculum therefore is developing communication skills, pursuing social and leisure interests, and encouraging people with autism to pursue more of these opportunities. It is this cultivating of strengths and interests, rather than dwelling solely on areas of deficit that is another important priority we are working towards in our provision. It is our goal to offer a curriculum within our department that provides breadth and balance while also reacting to the particular and appropriate learning needs of the pupils in our care and it is our belief that the TEACCH programme, with structured teaching used to enhance the development of pupils with ASD, will help us to achieve this goal.
References
Attwood, T. (1998) Aspergers Syndrome: a guide for parents and professionals, London, Kingsley. De Mayer, M., Portius, W., Norton, J., Barton, S., Allen, J. and Steele, R. (1972) Parental Priorities and Innate Activity in Normal, Autistic and Brain Damaged Infants, Journal of Autism and Schizophrenia, 2, pp49-66. DFEE/QCA (1999) The National Curriculum Handbook for Secondary Teachers in England, London, DfEE/QCA.