Building Capacity to Support Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder - A Modular Approach to Intervention

Oct 15, 2026

Research-based interventions for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often do not translate into everyday classroom practice, creating a persistent gap between evidence and what educators can implement. Drivers include limited external validity, the complexity of ASD, and service-delivery constraints. The article proposes a modular intervention framework as a systematic method for adapting evidence-based practices for typical school settings, and uses a case study to demonstrate implementation.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryHealthcare

FormatPDF

Pages31

Reading Time1 h 18 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Background and gap between research and practice

Evidence-based strategies and limitations in schools

Need for a modular approach

Framework implementation and case study illustration

EDUCATION AND TREATMENT OF CHILDREN Vol. 41, No. 1, 2018 Building Capacity to Support Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Modular Approach to Intervention Cynthia M. Anderson National Autism Center at the May Institute Tristram Smith University of Rochester Medical Center Rose Iovannone University of South Florida Abstract There is a large gap between research-based interventions for supporting children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and current practices implemented by educators to meet the needs of these children in typical school settings. Myriad reasons for this gap exist including the external validity of existing research, the complexity of ASD, and constraints on service delivery systems. Thus, a systematic approach is needed to adapt research-based interventions for use in typical school settings. One way to address these challenges is a modular intervention framework. In this article, we describe how a modular intervention framework could be implemented in schools. A case study is used to illustrate implementation of the framework. Author Note: Cynthia M. Anderson, National Autism Center at May Institute; Tristram Smith, Department of Pediatrics, University of Rochester Medical Center; Rose Iovannone, Department of Child and Family Studies, University of South Florida. The authors thank Suzannah Iadarola and Ryan Martin for their important contributions to the development of the guiding questions for the social communication and interaction modules and the coach’s outline for these modules. Preparation of this manuscript was supported, in part, by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R32A150032 to the University of Rochester. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education. Address correspondence to: Cynthia M. Anderson, National Autism Center, The May Institute, 41 Pacella Park Drive, Randolph, MA 02368. E-mail: can[derson@mayinstitute.org](derson@mayinstitute.org). 108 ANDERSON et al. The estimated prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) con tinues to increase (Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 2014). Rates of school-aged children (age 6 to 21) receiving an educational classification of ASD have risen in tandem with these prevalence figures, multiplying more than ten-fold from 1995 to 2014 and continuing to grow rapidly (Data Accountability Center [DAC], n.d.). As a result, it is certain that nearly all teachers, including general and special educators, will find students with ASD in their classrooms. Fortunately, many interventions are available to address difficulties associated with ASD. A recent review of the literature identified 27 evidence-based strategies (Wong et al., 2015). However, a large gap exists between what is considered best practice and what actually occurs in schools (Kasari & Smith, 2013). For example, school psychologists demonstrate some familiarity with diagnostic characteristics of ASD but little knowledge of, or experience with evidence-based interventions (Wilkinson, 2013). In a state-wide survey of 185 teachers in Georgia currently working with at least one student with ASD, fewer than 5% reported using an evidence-based intervention in their work (Hess, Morrier, Heflin, & Ivey, 2008). Other studies indicate that although most teachers endeavor to adopt interventions supported by research (Stahmer & Aarons, 2009; Stahmer, Collings, & Palinkas, 2005), they tend to deploy such interventions inconsistently, with poor fidelity, and alongside untested intervention approaches (Burns & Ysseldyke, 2009; Hendricks, 2011; Stahmer, 2007). Even with individualized, direct training and ongoing consultation, teachers’ adherence to recommended intervention procedures is uneven (Mandell et al., 2013). Further, after consultation ends, their use of these procedures often becomes even more sporadic (Zandi et al.

FAQs

Why is there a gap between research-based ASD interventions and classroom practice?

The article attributes the gap to factors such as limited external validity of existing research, the complexity of ASD, and constraints within service delivery systems.

What evidence-based resources exist, and what limitation remains for educators?

The text notes reviews and professional development resources identifying evidence-based strategies and providing setup guides and tutorials, but they offer limited guidance on applying strategies to individual student needs and monitoring/troubleshooting progress.

How does the modular intervention framework address implementation challenges?

It offers a systematic approach to adapt research-based interventions for use in typical school settings, and the article illustrates implementation through a case study.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by mieayamfan