Does implementing a new intervention disrupt use of existing evidence-based autism interventions?. (October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pellecchia, Melanie; Beidas, Rinad S; Lawson, Gwendolyn; Williams, Nathaniel J; Seidman, Max; Kimberly, John R; Cannuscio, Carolyn C; Mandell, David S
• Is Part Of: Autism. Volume 24:Number 7(2020)
• Page Start: 1713
• Page End: 1725
• Publication Date: 2020-10
• Subjects: autism spectrum disorder -- computer-assisted intervention -- school-based implementation; Autism -- Periodicals; Autism in children -- Periodicals; 616.85882005
• DOI: 10.1177/1362361320919248
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1362-3613

Abstract

This study examines how the introduction of TeachTown:Basics, a computer-assisted intervention for students with autism spectrum disorder, influenced teachers' use of other evidence-based practices. In a randomized controlled trial that enrolled 73 teachers nested within 58 schools, we used three-level hierarchical linear models to evaluate changes in teachers' use of evidence-based practices across the school year for those who received TeachTown:Basics versus those assigned to control. Both groups received training and implementation support to deliver three well-established evidence-based practices for autism spectrum disorder. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 teachers who used TeachTown:Basics to better understand their experience. Compared with teachers in the control group, teachers in the TeachTown:Basics group reported significantly less growth over the 9-month period in their use of evidence-based practices that require one-to-one instruction ( p s < 0.05), but no difference in their reported use of evidence-based practices that do not involve one-to-one instruction ( p = 0.637). Qualitative interviews indicated that teachers viewed TeachTown:Basics as an effective substitute for one-to-one instruction because it was less burdensome, despite the lack of support for TeachTown:Basics' effectiveness. Before introducing new practices, education leaders should carefully consider both evidence of effectiveness and the potential impact on the use of other evidence-based practices. Lay abstract: Interventions for children with autism spectrum disorder are complex and often are not implemented successfully within schools. When new practices are introduced in schools, they often are layered on top of existing practices, with little attention paid to how introducing new practices affects the use of existing practices. This study evaluated how introducing a computer-assisted intervention, called TeachTown:Basics, affected the use of other evidence-based practices in autism support classrooms. We compared how often teachers reported using a set of evidence-based practices in classrooms that either had access to TeachTown:Basics or did not have the program. We found that teachers who had access to the computer-assisted intervention reported using the other evidence-based practices less often as the school year progressed. Teachers also reported that they liked the computer-assisted intervention, found it easy to use, and that it helped overcome challenges to implementing other evidence-based practices. This is important because the computer-assisted intervention did not improve child outcomes in a previous study and indicates that teachers may use interventions that are appealing and easier to implement, even when they do not have evidence to support their effectiveness. These findings support the idea of interventions' complexity and how well the intervention fits within the classroom affect how teachers use it and highlight the need to develop school-based interventions that both appeal to the practitioner and improve child outcomes.