Jason C. Travers

Race, Culture, and Autism Spectrum Disorder: Understanding the Role of Diversity in Successful Educational Interventions

The reported prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has increased dramatically since the 1980s. In response, researchers, educators, and policy makers have sought to develop effective technologies for assessment and intervention. A focus on evidenced-based practices is logical, given significant deficits in language, social interaction, cognition, and adaptive behavior that comprise these conditions. Although critical, a technology of best practices is insufficient without understanding the important role that diversity plays in helping persons with ASD, particularly those with the most severe impairments, to lead fulfilling lives. The aim of the current article is threefold. First, we explore the concept of diversity with particular attention to neurodiversity among persons with ASD. We describe how cultural and linguistic diversity influence identification of students with ASD in special education, with data to suggest that racially diverse students are underrepresented in the autism category. We then examine the educational process with particular focus on the impact of parent and family culture on perception of disability, the influence of diverse family systems on interventions, and the successful interventions for diverse contexts. We conclude with recommendations for culturally competent practice and research.

Replication Research and Special Education

Replicating previously reported empirical research is a necessary aspect of an evidence-based field of special education, but little formal investigation into the prevalence of replication research in the special education research literature has been conducted. Various factors may explain the lack of attention to replication of special education intervention research, including emphasis on quantity of publications, esteem for novel findings, and barriers to publishing high-quality studies with null or negative effects. This article introduces the special issue on replication of special education intervention research by first providing an overview of concepts and issues related to replication. Specific attention is then given to replication as it relates to group design and single case experimental design research, two prominent albeit philosophically different empirical methodologies. We then briefly describe how replications using these research designs can be conducted in complementary ways to better understand intervention effects and advance evidence-based practices in special education.

Facilitated Communication Denies People With Disabilities Their Voice

Facilitated Communication (FC) has been rebranded as “supported typing” and repackaged as rapid prompting method, but remains a disproven intervention for people with disabilities. Despite the absence of supportive evidence and abundant evidence that facilitators always author the messages, FC has experienced resurgence in popularity among families, professionals, and advocacy groups. Strategic marketing, confirmation bias, pseudoscience, anti-science, and fallacy explain this troubling renewal. We briefly discuss each of these and contrast the method with authentic augmentative and alternative communication to illustrate differences in values and practices. Our intention is to persuade readers to resist or abandon FC in favor of validated methods and to encourage advocacy organizations to advance agendas that emphasize genuine self-expression by people with disabilities.

A Multiyear National Profile of Racial Disparity in Autism Identification

Disproportionate representation of racially diverse students in special education is a well-documented problem, yet few studies have systematically evaluated disproportionate representation of diverse students with autism. This study examined disproportionate representation of racially diverse students with autism by determining risk and logistical odds ratios among racially diverse and White students from the national population between 1998 and 2006. Although overall risk of autism increased for all racial groups every year, White students were twice as likely to be identified with autism as Hispanic and American Indian/Alaskan Native students during most years of the sample. Although initially overrepresented, the odds ratios for Asian/Pacific Islander and Black students with autism continuously declined in recent years. Hispanic and American Indian/Alaskan Native students were significantly underrepresented every year in the analysis. Potential cause and implications of underrepresentation are described, along with directions for research.

Racial Disparity in Administrative Autism Identification Across the United States During 2000 and 2007

Evidence of disparate identification of autism at national and local levels is accumulating, but there is little understanding about disparate identification of autism at the state level. This study examined trends in state-level administrative identification of autism under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Prevalence rates and odds ratios were calculated for each state using enrollment counts for years 2000 and 2007. Results indicated increases in administrative prevalence of autism for all racial groups from 2000 to 2007, but increasing underidentification of Black and Hispanic students in 2007 compared with White students. Variability existed in the identification of autism among Black and Hispanic students across states over time. Implications for the findings are discussed in the context of the field’s need to establish rigorous policies and practices for eligibility determinations due to autism and equitable access to evidence-based intervention practices.

Racial and Ethnic Diversity of Participants in Research Supporting Evidence-Based Practices for Learners With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Selection of a special education evidence-based practice (EBP) requires developing an understanding of what interventions work as well as for whom they are effective. This review examined participant characteristics in the EBP literature for learners with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) identified by the National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders. Results indicated very limited representation of diverse participants in the entire body of research, and when reported, White youth represented a large majority of study participants. This work is an attempt to begin to better understand the extent that various contextual factors are reported in a body of literature used to identify EBPs. Implications for ASD research are discussed along with recommendations for future research.

Publishing Single-Case Research Design Studies That Do Not Demonstrate Experimental Control

Demonstration of experimental control is considered a hallmark of high-quality single-case research design (SCRD). Studies that fail to demonstrate experimental control may not be published because researchers are unwilling to submit these papers for publication and journals are unlikely to publish negative results (i.e., the file drawer effect). SCRD studies comprise a large proportion of intervention research in special education. Consequently, the existing body of research, comprised mainly of studies that show experimental control, may artificially inflate efficacy of interventions. We discuss how experimental control evolved as the standard for high-quality SCRD; why, in the era of evidence-based practice, rigorous studies that fail to fully demonstrate experimental control are important to include in the body of published intervention research; the role of non-replication studies in discovering intervention boundaries; and considerations for researchers who wish to conduct and appraise studies that fail to yield full experimental control.

Improving Mathematics Performance Among Secondary Students With EBD: A Methodological Review

In this methodological review, the authors apply special education research quality indicators and standards for single case design to analyze mathematics intervention studies for secondary students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). A systematic methodological review of literature from 1975 to December 2012 yielded 19 articles that met inclusion criteria. Findings revealed eight studies investigated functional relation between mathematics interventions and mathematics performance for secondary students with EBD. The remainder investigated functional relation between behavioral interventions and mathematics performance. The body of research had limitations in methodological rigor that prevented identification of evidence-based practices for mathematics interventions for learners with EBD. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Evaluating claims to avoid pseudoscientific and unproven practices in special education

Special education professionals are charged with using evidence-based practices, but various unproven, disproven, and pseudoscientific interventions continue to proliferate. Unproven and ineffective interventions emerge and are adopted for various reasons. Ineffective interventions are inevitably harmful and require professionals to adopt a conservative approach that both minimizes potential for harm and maximizes potential for educational benefit. This is fundamental to the evidence-based movement, but special education professionals may not recognize and avoid ineffective interventions. This article aims to improve recognition of potentially ineffective interventions by shedding light on aspects of science, pseudoscience, and some mistakes frequently made in evaluating claims of intervention effectiveness. By becoming familiar with the distinctions between science and pseudoscience, and by developing an understanding of how errors in thinking are used to promote and defend interventions unsupported by empirical evidence, special education professionals can better protect their students with disabilities from potential harms associated with ineffective practices.

Fad, Pseudoscientific, and Controversial Interventions

Mere tolerance of untested, disproven, and pseudoscientific interventions has too often created significant setbacks, immeasurable difficulties, and countless obstacles for children with autism and their families. The professions associated with autism have been plagued by subscription to and application of dubious interventions. New fads arise and dissipate with astonishing speed while disproven methods like facilitated communication regain popularity and unproven interventions like sensory integration proliferate widely. Previous chapters in this text outline various models derived from the scientific process in ways that reflect increasing emphasis on evidence-based practices for improving outcomes of children with autism and their families. However, delimiting these models, the associated methods and strategies, and the underlying theoretical constructs from which they are derived is insufficient for deterring adoption of unproven and disproven interventions. Accordingly, this chapter represents an attempt to contribute to the discussions about why autism continues to be fertile ground for pseudoscientific and fad interventions while also educating readers about conditions that sustain discredited and unproven practices. We overview some fundamental philosophical tenets of science and contrast them with tactics used by snake oil peddlers and charlatans. We then shift to provide an overview of historical and contemporary of examples of fad, pseudoscientific, and controversial interventions to illustrate the absence of evidence, fallacious logic, and otherwise irrational beliefs associated with them.