autism toolboxes used in schools

I cannot disagree with anything you have said.

One cannot construct and use a 'toolbox' like this unless Autism is fully understood by the people who are writing the material and the people who will carry-out the advice.

It seems to me that there is no real understanding of how a child with Autism thinks, and sees and processes the world around her/him.

No doubt the information is all there for the writers of the 'toolbox', the words on paper, but there seems to be no sense of the theory being translated into real life.

My perception is that everything they have been told about the Autistic child has been filtered through what they know...  the familiarity of the behaviour and processes possessed by a Neurotypical child. Hence their solutions to the dfficulties Autistic children may experience bear little resemblence to what is needed to help them.

For example, the environment in Autistic terms refers to ENTIRE surroundings... the building, classroom, furniture, other pupils, teacher, movement around them, levels and pitch and layers of sound, complexity and brightness of visual stimulii around them, light levels and type, air movement and temperature, texture of surfaces and materials encountered, position in the classroom, as well as the amount and nature of communication required. To me, all of this is Environment.

But they interpret Environment literally... the material physical space. And a lot of the solutions seem to be based on altering the physical environment, rather than addressing the real problem. e.g. ASC's cannot communcate well because they cannot read people efficiently and do not understand social cues; solution = tidy the environment.

The concept of assessment and self-reflection is as you point-out, irrelevant to the Autistic pupils thinking. Is it however, advice that is relevant to the Neurotypical child. 
Do they believe that if they apply these strategies the Autistic child will become more Neurotypical... treat them like an NT and they might just become one?
  

The section on Impact of Autism on Assessment was one of the better parts of the learning grid. The impacts were better written and made more sense. But the Teacher responses were irritatingly over wordy.

One of the most crucial issues for pupils on the autistic spectrum is not doing an assessment because they don't see the point of it. This is a frequent reason for failure, especially in critical school examinations. So it was reassuring to see that they had attempted to include this:

Impact: "inconsistent motivation and engagement may result in misleading outcomes. Pupil may not understand and value the importance of assessment".

Teacher response: "Use pupil's interest to increase engagement in assessment process. Identify what is intrinsically motivating for the pupil as they are unlikely to respond to extrinsic or social motivators. Acknowledge that reasonable adjustment has been made in order to maintain a realistic perspective of the pupil and their skills and consequences".

Gosh what was all that about? And is there anything there that would help solve the problem? This is a really crucial issue and I'm not at all convinced they have any notion how to go about solving it. Waffle with some big words basically.

Motivation is really important, so again it was nice to see this raised, or I think it is raised.

Impact: "pupil may lack self awareness resulting in difficulties with meaningful involvement in their own learning".

Teacher response: " Support pupil to notice and comment on their own performance and behaviour in relation to specific or agreed targets. Develop and use visual materials to support pupil in recognising and recording their own development".

Reflection is something teachers are supposed to do - a bit grim imposing that process on a child with autism, and hardly increases motivation. But they go on to suggest doing the Duke of Edinburgh's Award Scheme.......

"The course was adapted so that difficulties associated with the autistic spectrum(eg poor spatial awareness, proprioception and motor planning) could be anticipated, planned-for and overcome allowing pupils to gain recognition for their achievement. With the support of senior management the program was embedded into the curriculum offered as an option to dedicated pupils".

I may have misunderstood the above but they seem to be describing someone with severe mobility issues. Some people on the autistic spectrum may have that level of poor coordination, but I wonder how many parents will recognise the image of helplessness implied.

The thing is this "toolbox" cost money to produce. Money that could have been spent on something more directly relevant to autism needs.

NAS has produced a toolkit for schools. I've not seen it. I just hope it is a great deal better and more informative and applicable than this rubbish.

I think what has happened in this particular toolbox/toolkit is that they had workshops on different aspects of the triad, and came up with some suggestions on flip charts. Someone edited all this, maybe sometime after the event, and somehow muddled the triad derivatives and the solutions.

There being perhaps very little practical understanding, no-one has noticed that the solutions don't match the issues or problems. I think you are right that they haven't spoken to parents in these compilations.

What you get as a result is really weird. I dont want to seem mocking, because there is some really sound and relevant material here, just it comes out of completely different contexts.  I've taken the following from the "learning grid" in the autism toolbox, on the section on "Impact of Autism on Classroom Support". The left hand column describes an impact, and the right hand column is the recommended teacher response. Obviously I've had to do these in sequence.

Impact: "pupils with autism may have poor sense of group culture and a group identity and this may be a factor in relation to collaborative working or group tasks".

Teacher response: "pupils may need a range of prompts including vebal and visual supports in order that the focus of attention is explicit. An environment that is as clutter and distraction free as possible will maximise capacity to concentrate. This does not mean that there should be no visual stimulus present however when pupils are involved in altering their environments eg being present when displays are mounted rather than them appearing overnight are more likely to accept and adjust to such change".

Now I can see some good sense in thet last bit about change, but I don't see what it has in particular to do with collaborative working and group tasks, given they address nothing else I'd expect to see. Here's another example - it starts off with a more relevant answer then???

Impact: "Cognitive processing such as Central Coherence difficulties may impact on the pupil's capacity to identify and act upon common environmental cues. Identifying and understanding the appropriate focus of attention may be problemmatic."

Teacher Response: " pupils may need time to familiarise themselves with the classroom environment and surrounding key areas. Cupboards and resource areas should be clearly labelled to show content and function".

In this case the impact was unintelligible, the response started very sensibly though, but quite where labelling cupboards has to do with it I'm not sure. Maybe its the cupboard where they keep the whisky. Another curious pairing:

Impact: "pupils with autism may appear to be easily and frequently distracted by environmental factors. Such factors may be obvious, uncommon or response to antipated events eg the bell ringing".

Teacher Response: "pupils with autism may benefit from having a map of the school so they are clear about how they will move from area to area. This is increasingly important in primary school but will almost certainly be a valuable support in a secondary environment. Pupils may, on occasion need time to withdraw and settle following upset. They may need to calm down and return to the environment; an explanation of what has occurred; some aspect of the environment may have to be altered. If children are unduly stressed they will be unlikely to be able to learn therefore such approaches are a valued and worthwhile investment of time and are a legitmate strategy to enable learning needs to be met".

That latter part sounds very sensible until you go back to the impact in question - which doesn't match the outcomes, particularly the bit about the map.

The entire toolbox is written like this - like a muddled summary of a series of workshops by people who had lost the plot before it started.

And you have to realise that this muddled thinking is driving how children are suppoorted in mainstream schools, which is the guist of the Scottish strategy for pupils on the spectrum whose autism doesn't justify going to a special needs "base".

I think that the sensory issue, which seems to have been so poorly researched and understood, must be one of greatest stressors in school. To be exposed to that for several hours a day, without anyone in authority comprehending what distress it is causing a child is nothing short of cruelty.

I am as puzzled as you by the link between co-ordination and sensory problems. The people who wrote this seem very badly informed. The assertion that autistic children only see text is complete gibberish... how would they explain children like me - exceptionally visually/artistically talented from a very young age.

One wonders if the people who formulated this toolbox have ever spoken to parents of autistic children to find out what helps their children, and what causes the children distress. Afterall, parents experience the childrens problems and have to find solutions on a daily basis. 

Autism has been recognised in the public domain for so many years... and still the people who are in position to help, get it wrong, seemingly oblivious to the fact that 'solutions' like this are very likely to affect the children for life.