Benefits of the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH) programme as compared with a non-specific approach

318 Journal of Intellectual Disability Research VOLUME 46 PART 4 pp 318 327 MAY 2002 Benefits of the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH) programme as compared with a non-specific approach S. Panerai, L. Ferrante & M. Zingale IRCCS Oasi Maria SS (Scientific Research Institute for Mental Retardation and Brain Ageing), Troina, Italy Abstract Background Two educational treatments were compared, the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH) programme and the integration programme for individuals with disabilities. Methods Two groups of eight subjects were matched by gender, chronological and mental age, and nosographic diagnosis (i.e. autism associated with severe intellectual disability, DSM-IV criteria and Childhood Autism Rating Scale scored. The TEACCH programme was applied to the experimental group, while the control group was integrated in regular schools with a support teacher. The Psycho-Educational Profile Revised and the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale were administered twice with a one-year interval between assessments. Results The scores of the experimental group increased more than the control group scores. Statistically significant differences were obtained in both groups because of the differences in the two approaches. Correspondence: Simonetta Panerai, IRCCS Oasi Maria SS, Via Conte Ruggero 73, 94018 Troina, EN, Italy (e-mail: arandelli@oasi.en.it). Keywords autism, educational treatments, TEACCH Introduction It is commonly recognized that autistic disorder is the behavioural expression of organic damage, even though concurrent organic pathologies have only been found in some cases. A figure of 50% has been reported in some studies (Gillberg & Peeters 1995). Psychological, interactional and environmental factors interact with organic factors, but they do not seem sufficient to be the primary cause of the disorder (Fogliobonda 1987). In the past few decades, the aetiological orientation of autistic disorder has been modified in the light of new studies which have demonstrated the biological bases of the disorder (Schopler 1994). Intervention strategies have been progressively oriented towards a functional approach (Schopler et al. 1980). The role of parents is now considered very important for the treatment (Schopler 1994). They are no longer considered the cause of the disorder, but rather, the most important resource and the most effective factor in promoting changes in the child s behaviour (Schopler 1987). There are many therapeutic approaches to autism within which parents play the role of therapists or co-therapists, 2002 Blackwell Science Ltd

319 but a unique resolving treatment has not been found yet. Most programmes are not specifically autism-oriented, but they are potentially useful to deal with autistic disorder, even if their validity has not yet been investigated scientifically. Consequently, further studies and applications are needed (Heflin & Simpson 1998) to confirm their validity. The Treatment and Education of Autistic and Related Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH) programme is one of the most valid treatment programmes. It was defined by Eric Schopler as a global approach based on a close collaboration between parents and professionals (Schopler 1994). Many studies have shown the effectiveness of the programme in children with autism and severe intellectual disability (ID; Panerai et al. 1997, 1998) in reducing self-injurious behaviours (Norgate 1998) in high-functioning autistic students with Asperger syndrome (Kunce & Mesibov 1998) and in individuals who are entering the job market through support programmes (Keel et al. 1997). A few studies have compared the TEACCH programme with other interventions. Ozonoff & Cathcart (1998) examined the effects of household programmes on pre-school children and the performance of the experimental group was reported to be fourfold better than that of the control group on the basis of some PsychoEducational Profile Revised (PEP-R; Schopler et al. 1990) subtests, i.e. imitation, gross and fine motor skills, and non-verbal concepts. An investigation of a 4-year-old child with autism associated with severe ID revealed a remarkable progression during the application of the TEACCH programme, and on the other hand, several episodes of regression were observed subsequent to the interruption of the programme and the integration of the child in a regular state school (Panerai 1999). At the Oasi Maria SS Institute, Troina, Italy, the TEACCH programme has been applied for several years to children and adolescents with autism, as well as severe and profound ID. All the staff members have been trained by the Opleidingscentrum Autism of Anversa. The results have been encouraging: indeed, several studies (Panerai et al. 1997; Panerai et al. 1998; Panerai 1999) have revealed statistically significant improvements in all PEP-R and Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (VABS; Sparrow et al. 1994) subtests, validating the effectiveness of the TEACCH programme in the present sample. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the TEACCH programme by comparing it to the classic Italian approach for the integration of children with disabilities in regular schools with support teachers. The authors hypothesized that the TEACCH programme might be more successful than other programmes in that it specifically addresses children with autism. In Italy, any children with developmental delay [e.g. Down s syndrome (DS), autism or ID] can be integrated in regular schools with support teachers. Cecchini (1989) made an interesting comparison between groups of children with DS from different countries and found that Italian children scored higher on both measures of IQ and developmental quotient. According to the above author, this was because the Italian school system allows children with handicaps to be integrated in regular classrooms. The legislation cannot take into account the peculiar characteristics of each developmental disorder, but schools should find specific solutions to integrate children with autism in regular classrooms, taking into account children s specific needs in order to facilitate the integration and make it effective. The TEACCH programme has been specifically designed for children with autism: it takes into account the features of the disorder and tries to minimize the child s difficulties using structured and continuous intervention, environmental adaptations, and alternative communication training (Schopler 1994). It is very difficult for a child with autism to give significance to and decode reality signals, while this ability seems to develop in a natural way as a result of an inborn biological talent in non-autistic individuals (Peeters 1994). Children with autism have difficulty going beyond the perceptual aspect: it is extremely problematic for them to understand abstract concepts, gestures, the meaning of imitation, interpersonal relationships, time passing and the how-when-where-why of events. The TEACCH programme makes reality as clear as possible from a perceptual point of view by using visual aids. It takes advantage of the perceptual ability of children with autism, their strong point, to clarify the where-how-when-how long, and makes

320 these children more independent in handling their own space and time. Moreover, it is a global programme in that it deals with any aspects of a child s life. This is crucial for autistic disorder since it is a pervasive developmental disorder. Subjects and methods Subjects Two groups of children with autism, the control group (CG) and the experimental group (EG), were matched by gender (all males) and nosographic diagnosis (i.e. autism and severe ID). In each group, there were eight subjects, and their mean chronological age was about 9 years. Children in the CG attended regular schools with support teachers, while children in the EG benefited from TEACCH programme. Autism was diagnosed according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV; APA 1994) criteria and Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS; Schopler et al. 1988) scores. Intellectual disability was also diagnosed according to DSM-IV criteria. Table 1 shows a comparison between the chronological age (CA), mental age (MA) and CARS scores of the CG and the EG. Statistically significant differences were found between the CG and the EG in that the samples were derived from two populations with statistically different means. The statistical significance was calculated using the Student t-test. Therefore, the EG is in a statistically disadvantaged position compared to the CG (i.e. older chronological age, younger mental age and more accentuated autistic characteristics); in four cases, one or more associated organic pathologies were present and all subjects suffered from epilepsy. Table 2 shows the cultural and socio-economic level of children s families, the parents mean age, the place of residence, and the mean number of children. The description seems representative of the Sicilian population. Procedure Subjects in the EG benefited from the TEACCH programme implemented at the Troina-based Oasi Maria SS Scientific Institute for Hospitalization and Treatment of Individuals with Mental Retardation. They resided at the institute and went home at regular intervals: during weekends, every 2 weeks or for 4 days a month. The habilitation programme was basically implemented by educators with the support of the management team, and the approval and collaboration of parents. Subjects in the CG attended regular schools and benefited from the support teacher for a certain number of hours according to Italian law. Most subjects had psychomotor therapy, speech therapy and sometimes Table 1 Features of the experimental and control groups: (CARS) Childhood Autism Rating Scale; (MS) multiple sclerosis; and (MIAs) multiple inborn abnormalities Chronological age Associated (months) Mental age (months) CARS score pathologies Subject Experiment Control Experiment Control Experiment Control Experiment Control 1 109 102 14 19 48 38 Epilepsy 2 147 149 16 16 48.5 41.5 3 117 111 22 21 52.5 42.5 Epilepsy 4 126 120 19 18 41.5 41.5 Epilepsy 5 77 67 12 13 46.5 34.5 MS 6 175 172 23 24 42.5 42 7 72 74 24 18 39 43.5 MIAs, epilepsy 8 79 81 13 18 44 44.5 Epilepsy

321 Table 2 Description of the families of the children in the experimental and control groups Educational level Father Mother Socio-economic Place of residence Average Mean age (years) level Subject number of High High Small group children Father Mother Primary Secondary school Primary Secondary school High Middle Low City Town town Experimental 2.3 41 37.5 2 0 5 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 5 1 Control 2.1 43.5 36.5 3 4 1 3 4 1 1 5 2 2 4 2 physical therapy in the afternoon. Each subject was evaluated twice with a one-year interval between assessments using the PEP-R and the VABS. The PEP-R offers a developmental approach to the assessment of children with autism or related developmental disorders, and is designed to identify idiosyncratic learning patterns. Positive scores can be divided in two categories: (1) passing when the item was achieved, and (2) emerging when the item was partially achieved but there was not a failure. The VABS assesses adaptive behaviour and has been shown to have utility in the assessment of children with autism (Perry & Factor 1989; Rodrigue et al. 1991). Psychologists working at the Oasi Institute administer these instruments as a routine protocol for all subjects with a suspected diagnosis of autistic syndrome. Therefore, they were not aware of the purpose of the present study. Treatment The TEACCH programme treatment applied to the EG is based on three fundamental principles: (1) an individual educational programme, (2) environmental adaptation and (3) alternative communication training. Individual educational intervention programmes were planned and structured for each child using data collected from the VABS and the PEP-R, and from structured observations of the child s abilities (Schopler 1994; Schopler et al. 1995). The CG was integrated in a regular classroom with support teachers and outpatient treatments (e.g. psychomotor and speech therapy). Neither the teacher nor the educators used structured teaching, or any other treatment method specific for children with autism. The EG and CG subjects were treated for the same number of hours: the hours were distributed throughout the whole day for the EG group, while they were mainly in the morning for the CG group. The principal differences between the two treatment methods are compared below. Working group In the TEACCH programme, EG children with autism and ID were divided in small homogeneous

322 groups, while each child in the CG attended regular 20-student classrooms. Staff training In the TEACCH programme, staff are specialized in the treatment of children with autism. All operators are generalists, and besides their previous education and specialization, they benefit from further training which includes theory and practice on autism. The operator must be able to face the problem in a global manner, and intervene in order to facilitate new learning within the developmental phase as well as to reduce inappropriate and disruptive behaviour. In the CG, treatments were carried out by a regular teacher who had no specific training and support teachers who had followed a multivalent training programme not specifically designed for children with autism. Physical organization The TEACCH programme follows the principle of place activity correspondence (any designed space is adapted to a specific activity). The environment needs to be clear and predictable in order to facilitate child s attention and calmness. In state schools, there are no discrete areas for different activities. Communication system In regular classrooms, the verbal system is normally used in combination with gestures. In the TEACCH programme, communication is individualized (i.e. objects, pictures, drawings, written words are used according to the child s developmental level) and represents an alternative to verbal communication, even though the two systems are often integrated. Intervention In regular classrooms, the intervention is variable because it depends on the methodology of each teacher. The TEACCH programme follows precise routines (e.g. from left to right, and rewards are given when work is completed). This facilitates the child s independence while decreasing the need for assistance. Task organization In regular classrooms, the material is neither individualized nor adapted to different pathologies. In the TEACCH programme, activities are presented using specially designed material, which is individualized and perceptually clear. This facilitates an independent performance of the task, eliminating errors and accelerating, while bringing about a reduction of stereotypic behaviours (Panerai et al. 1998). Time visualization In regular classrooms, the time of activities and their duration are decided by the teacher. In the TEACCH programme, the when is indicated by visual aids. Time, which is an abstract concept, is made visible: subjects can see the schedule of the day, and at the end of the task, anxiety is reduced because they know what is going to happen later. Results Tables 3 and 4 show the PEP-R scores for the CG and EG, respectively. Tables 5 and 6 show the VABS scores for the CG an EG, respectively. As far as the total of emerging categories is concerned, the EG showed an initial mean value of 17.5, while the CG showed an initial mean value of 18.25. Table 7 shows the statistical significance of the differences between the time 1 and 2 PEP-R applications in the EG and the CG. Statistical significance was obtained using the Wilcoxon test. In the EG, the present authors found statistically significant results in the passing categories for imitation (P < 0.05), perception (P < 0.02), gross motor skills (P < 0.05), hand eye coordination (P < 0.05), cognitive performance (P < 0.02), total score (P < 0.02) and developmental age (P < 0.02). In the CG, they only found statistically significant results in hand eye coordination (P < 0.02). The authors did not find statistical significance in emerging categories either in the EG or the CG. Indeed, the number of emerging items only

323 Table 3 Control group scores on the PsychoEducational Profile Revised (Schopler et al. 1990): (P) passing; and (E) emerging Cognitive Hand eye Cognitive verbal Imitation Perception Fine motor Gross motor coordination performance performance Total age 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 (years) Mental Subject P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E 1 2 M 6 4 3 7 9 3 10 2 10 2 7 4 10 5 10 5 4 0 5 1 3 5 4 5 1 0 0 0 43 19 39 24 19 19 R 4 1 2 1 6 3 7 2 6 5 6 5 11 1 12 0 1 4 2 2 2 5 2 5 0 1 0 0 30 20 31 15 16 16 P 3 5 5 3 11 1 10 0 12 1 11 1 12 1 12 4 4 0 8 0 9 7 12 6 0 0 0 0 51 15 58 14 21 23 B 5 8 5 4 7 2 7 3 10 0 9 2 11 4 12 3 3 0 4 0 2 3 2 3 0 1 0 1 38 18 39 16 18 18 D 1 2 1 3 1 6 6 1 2 7 5 4 11 3 11 4 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 0 1 0 18 21 27 17 13 16 S 6 3 6 3 11 0 11 1 13 1 13 1 13 0 13 1 5 2 6 1 8 4 10 3 4 4 2 2 61 14 61 12 24 24 T 1 9 2 5 8 2 9 2 9 1 9 2 13 1 13 1 3 2 5 0 1 7 1 4 0 0 1 0 35 22 40 14 18 18 Z 5 4 8 5 7 1 8 4 6 6 10 4 14 0 15 1 3 2 5 0 3 2 4 7 0 1 2 3 37 17 52 24 18 22 Table 4 Experimental group scores on the PsychoEducational Profile Revised (Schopler et al. 1990): (P) passing; and (E) emerging Cognitive Hand eye Cognitive verbal Imitation Perception Fine motor Gross motor coordination performance performance Total age 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 (years) Mental Subject P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E 1 2 L 0 2 2 5 3 7 9 1 4 6 8 1 10 2 12 3 1 4 4 0 1 7 4 1 0 0 0 1 19 28 39 12 14 18 C 2 5 2 4 6 1 8 2 4 1 3 3 13 3 13 2 1 0 1 3 2 2 2 4 1 0 0 2 29 12 29 20 16 16 D 1 2 5 3 7 5 11 2 14 0 13 1 18 0 18 2 6 1 15 0 7 5 12 2 0 0 1 0 53 12 73 10 22 30 N 1 5 6 5 9 1 11 1 10 1 12 0 13 4 17 0 4 1 6 0 1 4 7 4 1 0 1 0 39 16 60 10 19 24 S 0 2 1 6 4 7 8 3 3 5 6 5 6 6 15 2 1 2 5 0 1 0 3 4 0 1 0 0 15 23 38 20 12 18 M 5 5 6 4 11 0 12 1 13 0 13 0 15 0 16 3 6 1 8 2 9 7 12 7 1 0 1 1 60 13 65 17 23 26 A 9 5 10 4 11 2 13 0 11 4 12 3 17 1 18 0 7 1 8 2 6 6 7 7 1 2 2 3 62 21 70 19 24 28 P 1 3 1 2 3 4 3 5 4 4 5 5 10 3 13 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 3 3 1 0 0 1 21 15 26 17 13 15

324 Table 5 Control group scores on the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (Sparrow et al. 1994): (P) passing; and (E) emerging Communication Daily living skills Socialization Maladaptive behaviour Recep- Expres- Do- Com- Inter- Imitative sive Total Personal mestic munity Total personal Play tion Total Total Part 1 Part 2 Total Subject P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E M 16 12 14 6 30 18 34 31 2 0 2 1 38 32 20 14 10 0 0 0 30 14 98 64 16 20 6 5 22 25 R 15 15 13 5 28 20 22 22 0 5 2 2 24 29 18 9 5 2 0 5 23 16 75 65 20 15 0 6 20 21 P 16 14 1 4 17 18 36 44 0 4 0 2 36 50 13 12 1 3 0 6 14 21 67 89 16 20 5 6 21 26 B 14 10 12 9 26 19 34 32 0 1 0 0 34 33 16 6 3 2 0 0 19 8 79 60 15 10 7 4 22 14 D 5 10 3 3 8 13 10 18 0 0 1 2 11 20 8 8 4 3 0 0 12 11 31 44 16 8 1 0 17 8 S 7 11 0 4 7 15 37 48 1 8 2 3 40 59 4 15 3 5 0 4 7 24 54 88 16 21 8 7 24 28 T 9 10 5 2 14 12 24 38 0 1 2 2 26 41 9 10 2 0 0 0 11 10 51 63 17 25 0 3 17 28 Z 13 18 6 8 19 26 28 39 0 2 2 0 30 41 15 17 5 4 0 0 20 21 69 88 18 15 6 4 24 19 Table 6 Experimental group scores on the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (Sparrow et al. 1994): (P) passing; and (E) emerging Communication Daily living skills Socialization Maladaptive behaviour Recep- Expres- Do- Com- Inter- Imitative sive Total Personal mestic munity Total personal Play tion Total Total Part 1 Part 2 Total Subject P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E P E L 12 8 3 4 15 12 18 20 0 2 0 1 18 23 9 5 1 5 0 0 10 10 43 45 25 24 8 6 33 30 C 14 14 4 3 18 17 29 31 0 1 0 1 29 33 15 15 1 2 0 0 16 17 63 67 12 23 2 3 14 26 D 13 12 8 6 21 18 46 62 4 13 4 2 54 77 14 20 1 7 0 0 15 27 90 122 13 17 7 5 20 22 N 15 16 4 4 19 20 34 38 2 0 2 2 38 40 16 18 6 7 0 0 22 25 79 85 9 14 1 1 10 15 S 9 11 7 4 16 15 34 35 0 0 2 2 36 37 13 15 2 0 0 0 15 15 67 67 9 6 2 0 11 6 M 14 22 8 10 22 32 49 54 3 10 2 4 54 68 17 14 6 7 1 0 24 21 100 121 18 7 3 2 21 9 A 10 19 2 9 12 28 26 51 0 3 0 2 26 56 10 17 4 10 0 0 14 27 52 111 26 7 7 5 33 12 P 5 8 1 3 6 11 20 18 0 0 2 2 22 20 4 11 0 2 0 0 4 13 32 44 14 20 0 0 14 20

325 Table 7 Statistical significance of the differences between the time 1 and 2 applications of the PsychoEducational Profile Revised (Schopler et al. 1990) in the experimental and control groups after one year of treatment Table 8 Statistical significance of the differences between the time 1 and 2 applications of the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (Sparrow et al. 1994) in the experimental and control groups after one year of treatment P-value Experimental Control Scale group group P-value Experimental Control Scale group group Imitation 0.05 NS Perception 0.02 NS Fine motor skills NS* NS Gross motor skills 0.05 NS Hand eye coordination 0.05 0.02 Cognitive performance 0.02 NS Total 0.02 NS Developmental age 0.02 NS * NS: not significant. increased in two CG subjects and three EG children. Table 8 shows the statistical significance of the differences between the time 1 and 2 VABS applications in the EG and the CG. In the EG, the present authors found statistically significant results in personal domains (P < 0.05), total daily living skills (P < 0.02), play and leisure (P < 0.05), and total score (< 0.02). In the CG, they only found statistically significant results in daily living skills (P < 0.05). Discussion The results of the present analysis are discussed taking into account the results obtained from the EG, and analysing the differences between the CG and EG results. The present authors found a statistically significant improvement on the PEP-R scores in all passing categories except fine motor skills. Because there were improvements in gross motor skills and hand eye coordination, it can be inferred that abilities probably increased but they were not applied in a functional manner. This could also be caused by the motor impairment frequently found in children with severe and profound ID. Statistically significant changes were not found in the Communication Receptive NS* NS Expressive NS NS Total NS NS Daily living skills Personal 0.05 NS Domestic NS NS Community NS NS Total 0.02 0.05 Socialization Interpersonal relationships NS NS Play and leisure 0.5 NS Overall total 0.02 NS Maladaptive behaviours NS NS * NS: not significant. emerging categories. This finding was probably influenced by the characteristics of the sample, which was composed of children with autism, as well as severe or profound ID. Both groups initially showed limited emerging scores, especially the EG. Since the latter has clearly improved, it can be assumed that, despite biological autism- and IDrelated conditions common to both groups, the type of treatment is crucial in order to allow the subject to learn new skills. Moreover, the present authors clinical experience highlights that the number of emerging items does not exactly predict the amount of new skills to be learned. An analysis of the VABS scale results did not show statistically significant improvements in communication and interpersonal relationships, probably because these are the most impaired areas of the autistic disorder from a qualitative and quantitative point of view. This could be partly because of the small sample studied (eight subjects) and its peculiar characteristics (they were all non-verbal subjects). Furthermore, the VABS scale only

326 assesses verbal behaviour. In fact, in a previous study (Panerai et al. 1998) using structured observations during different moments of the day, the present authors highlighted positive changes in nonverbal communication with objects, photos, pictures and written words. Regarding maladaptive behaviours, neither significant decreases nor increases were observed. The effort for environmental clarification and individualization is probably not yet optimal enough to facilitate child relaxation. Some maladaptive behaviours could be a source of disturbance for the other children, causing subsequent excessive behavioural reactions. Gillberg & Peeters (1995) stated that maladaptive behaviours, stereotypical and self-injurious behaviours usually tend to become chronic. Previous research (Panerai et al. 1998) reported how those behaviours tended to decrease during structured activities and increase with remarkably higher frequency during non-organized leisure activities. The analysis of the differences between the experimental and the control group results indicates that the TEACCH programme was more effective than the treatment applied to the control group. This was probably because of the differences between the two kinds of treatments. Peeters (1994) stated that, An educational model which refers to persons with developmental delay is not appropriate for those who have a different cognitive style. Unless the integration of children with autism in regular classrooms is accompanied by an effort at simplification, and above all, clarification, it will not have a significant outcome. Several experiments have been carried out in Italy applying the theoretical and operational principles of the TEACCH programme within primary and secondary schools. An effort is being made to rethink the principles and modalities of school integration which, at present, are not sufficient to create the appropriate conditions for development, learning and integration. Despite the difficulties, the present authors are trying to offer a service that could meet the real needs of children with autism, a disorder that requires global and specific interventions over the entire life span. TEACCH is an American programme which represents a model for operators and families. It needs to be adapted to different social and family contexts; however, it represents a valuable reference scheme for a habilitation intervention. References American Psychiatric Association (APA) (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC. Cecchini M. (1989) Sviluppo intellettivo e sociale nella Sindrome di Down: fattori rilevanti. In: (A Cura di) La Sindrome di Down (eds R. Ferri & A. Spagnolo), pp. 127 48. Pensiero Scientifico, Rome. Fogliobonda P. G. (1987) L autismo infantile. Franco Angeli, Milano. Gillberg C. & Peeters T. (1995) L Autisme: aspects educatifs et medicaux. OCA, Antwerpen. Heflin L. J. & Simpson R. L. (1998) Intevention for children and youth with autism: prudent choices in a world of exaggerated claims and empty promises. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 13, 194 211. Keel J. H., Mesibov G. B. & Woods A. V. (1997) TEACCH supported employment program. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 27, 3 9. Kunce L. & Mesibov G. B. (1998) Educational approaches to high-functioning autism and Asperger syndrome. In: Asperger Syndrome or High-Functioning Autism? Current Issues in Autism (eds E. Schopler & G. B. Mesibov), pp. 227 61. Plenum Press, New York, NY. Norgate R. (1998) Reducing self injurious behaviour in a child with severe learning difficulties: enhancing predictability and structure. Educational Psychology in Practice 14, 176 82. Ozonoff S. & Cathcart K. (1998) Effectiveness of a home program intervention for young children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 28, 25 32. Panerai S. (1999) Importanza ed efficacia dell insegnamento strutturato e degli ausili visivi: presentazione di un caso clinico con diagnosi di autismo associato a Ritardo Mentale grave. Ciclo Evolutivo e Disabilità 2, 269 85. Panerai S., Ferrante L. & Caputo V. (1997) The TEACCH strategy in mentally retarded children with autism: a multidimensional assessment. Pilot study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 27, 345 7. Panerai S., Ferrante L., Caputo V. & Impellizzeri C. (1998) Use of structured teaching for treatment of children with autism and severe and profound mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities 33, 367 74. Peeters T. (1994) Autisme.Van begrijpen tot begeleinden. Uitgeverij Hadewijch, Antwerpen. Perry A. & Factor D. C. (1989) Psychometric validation on clinical usefulness of the Vineland Adaptive

327 Behavioral Scales and the AAMD Adaptive behavior Scale for an autistic sample. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 19, 41 55. Rodrigue J. R., Morgan S. B. & Geffken G. R. (1991) A comparative evaluation of adaptive behavior in children and adolescents with autism, Down syndrome, and normal development. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 21, 187 96. Schopler E. (1987) Specific and non-specific factors in the effectiveness of a treatment system. American Psychologist 42, 376 83. Schopler E. (1994) A statewide program for the treatment and education of autistic and related communication handicapped children (TEACCH). Psychoses and Pervasive Developmental Disorders 3, 91 103. Schopler E., Mesibov G. B. & Hearsey K. (1995) Structured teaching in the TEACCH system. In: Learning and Cognition in Autism (eds E. Schopler & G. B. Mesibov), pp. 243 68. Plenum Press, New York, NY. Schopler E., Reichler R. J., Bashford A., Lansing M. D. & Marcus L. M. (1990) Individualized Assessment and Treatment for Autistic and Developmentally Disabled Children, Vol. 1: Psychoeducational Profile Revised (PEP/R). Pro-Ed, Austin, TX. Schopler E., Reichler R. J. & Lansing M. D. (1980) Individualized Assessment and Treatment for Autistic and Developmentally Disabled Children, Vol. 2: Teaching Strategies for Parents and Professionals. University Park Press, Baltimore, MD. Schopler E., Reichler R. J. & Renner B. (1988) The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS). Western Psychological Services, Los Angeles, CA. Sparrow S., Balla D. & Cicchetti D. (1994) Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (Survey Form). American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN. Accepted 16 October 2001