Cooperative learning and autism

Dugan, E., Kamps, D., Leonard, B. (1995). Effects of cooperative learning groups during social studies for students with autism and fourth-grade peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 28(2): 175–188. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-175.

This study is interesting as it is aimed at determining if students with autism can participate in cooperative learning activities, the forms of learning and engagement between students with autism and their peers during "traditional instruction" and cooperative learning and the type of interaction that occurs between students during both instruction types. Lofty goals. During their literature review the authors commented on a lack of definitive studies of students with learning disabilities in cooperative learning activities, as identified by Tateyama-Sniezek (1990).

The study involved 2 students with autism in a class of 18 fourth grade students in an inner-city (I assume USA) elementary school. One of the students with autism was described as moderate-functioning and other high-functioning, both identified as having problems with comprehension and abstract reasoning.

The traditional teaching method was

The teacher's lecture and discussion format included introducing key words and facts, posing questions to individuals, and using maps. The students were expected to use texts and take notes. (p. 178)

with students seating in assigned groups of 3 or 4. The cooperative learning groups with three or four members consisting of a high ability student, 1 or 2 moderate ability students and one low ability student. In two of the groups the low ability student was one of the students with autism. The cooperative learning method was teacher presentation of new or review content, followed by peer tutoring and whole group activities. Additionally, group member were assigned roles, however it was not specified if they were permanent or rotating. Group social skills training was given, with a sticker-based reinforcement chart provided for each group. Interestingly, after three weeks the students were shifted back to the traditional instruction for two weeks, then shifted to cooperative learning again (duration initially unspecified, however the results reveal it was six weeks).

In the first cooperative learning period, the test results of the students with autism improved compared to the pretest results. In the second cooperative learning period showed general improvement for both students, however for one student the amount of improvement fluctuated. The peer students also improved test results during the cooperative learning periods. The two students with autism had higher levels of engagement during the cooperative learning activities. However, they only cooperatively interacted during the peer tutoring sessions.

This is a good paper as it shows that cooperative learning activities improve the educational outcomes of students with special needs. It also shows that there are small benefits to engagement and interaction for students with autism.