Addressing the Academic Needs of Adolescents With Autism Spectrum Disorder in Secondary Education

Impact of Student Characteristics on Academic Performance

Research related to poor academic achievement for students with ASD, which will be described in greater detail in the following section, indicates there are factors related to school structures and student characteristics interfering with classroom success. Though the diagnostic criteria for ASD does not imply academic difficulties, impairments in the social communication domain, as well as engagement in restricted, repetitive, and stereotypic behaviors may contribute to the challenges around academic performance, and may be predictive of future academic achievement (Estes, Rivera, Bryan, Cali, & Dawson, 2011). Deficits in the areas of imitation and observational learning are well documented and may limit a student’s ability to watch others in an effort to learn skills necessary in an academic setting (Plavnick & Hume, 2013). Delayed or limited receptive and expressive communication also may affect academic performance across content areas, impacting primarily comprehension and understanding of vocabulary and sentence structure (Norbury & Bishop, 2002). In addition, students with ASD may have difficulty disengaging from repetitive or stereotypic behaviors, which can interfere with school activities (Zandt, Prior, & Kyrios, 2007). Additional diagnoses can also play a role in academic performance, as a subset of students with ASD has a comorbid diagnosis, such as ID (16%–30%, de Bildt, Systema, Kraijer, & Minderaa, 2004), or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD, 31%, Lecavalier, 2006), which contributes to the varied academic profile.

The impact of social communication differences and their impact on academic performance require additional emphasis. Broadly, limited social initiation may contribute to academic difficulty, as students may not seek out social and verbal learning opportunities and miss opportunities to gain valuable information from the environment (Peck, 1985). More specifically, social communication impairment is a significant predictor of reading comprehension. For example, a recent study indicated these deficits limit reading comprehension above and beyond the influence of word recognition and oral language deficits (Ricketts, Jones, Happé, & Charman, 2013). Researchers theorize that difficulties in understanding social and communicative norms may make inferencing and perspective taking more difficult for readers with ASD (Ricketts et al., 2013). Similarly, a recent meta-analysis of reading comprehension skills indicated that texts with highly social content (e.g., texts requiring perspective taking) were more difficult to comprehend than those with lower social content (e.g., general knowledge; Brown, Oram-Cardy, & Johnson, 2013).

Academic Performance of Students With ASD

These characteristics, related to both ASD diagnosis and cognitive profile, influence student performance across academic domains. While individuals with ASD may share common diagnostic features, there is great heterogeneity across the autism spectrum. This variability, in combination with a limited body of research, makes it extremely difficult to draw general conclusions about academic performance.

In addition, the influence of cognitive variables, as well as the complex relationship between the cognitive variables described (e.g., the influence of EF deficits on the performance of memory tasks) on academic performance, is likely great yet difficult to quantify on measures of academic skill. In the following section, we summarize what is known about reading, writing and science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) skills for students with ASD.

Academic Interventions for Students With ASD

Many students with ASD receive some type of accommodation and/or curricular modification when accessing content area instruction. In addition, roughly half of all students with ASD take alternative tests (Newman, 2007). Regardless of whether students with ASD receive the majority of their academic instruction in general education or in special education classes, they are likely to have difficulty acquiring some academic skills without appropriate instructional and behavioral supports to maintain engagement in classroom activities (Jones et al., 2009). The demand for interventions to improve academic performances for the full range of students with ASD is growing as more individuals are being diagnosed and expected to meet the same academic standards of their typically developing peers. A full description of how to implement specific strategies is beyond the scope of this article; rather, our intention is to provide a broad overview of the different strategies that researchers have found to be effective in helping students with ASD meet the curricular demands in high school. Although these strategies would likely benefit all learners with disabilities, we have included them in this summary because it can be argued that these strategies effectively support specific cognitive deficits that are associated with ASD.

Considerations for Academic Instruction in General Education Classrooms

The number of adolescents with ASD who receive the majority of their academic instruction in general education settings and take standard state assessments has increased over recent years. Because many of these students demonstrate normal or above average intellectual abilities, it is possible for educators to overlook the special academic needs of adolescents with ASD in their classrooms as they may appear to understand more than they actually do (Myles & Simpson, 2001). Accordingly, educators should be aware of potential difficulties that students with ASD may encounter during academic instruction and be able to use instructional strategies that are appropriate given their students’ unique learning styles if needed. A summary of instructional strategies is provided in Table 1 to provide educators and researchers with an overview of the type of research conducted with middle and high school students with ASD in general education classrooms. We have organized these studies as follows: (a) antecedent interventions that occur outside of the immediate teaching context that support students’ participation in academic activities, (b) specific strategy instruction that scaffold students’ thinking during academic tasks, and (c) strategies that occur after skill mastery that facilitate generalization and independence.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Instructional Strategies for Teaching Content to Students With ASD in General Education Settings.

Instructional strategy	Description	Rationale for using the strategy (link to cognitive profile)	Example from literature
Priming	A teacher, parent, or peer familiarizes the student with academic material prior to its use in school by providing a short (10–15 min) overview of the upcoming activity. It is generally recommended that actual instructional materials be used; however, priming can also consist of introducing a task by listing steps or providing a description of the activity.	Priming can reduce students’ stress and anxiety by adding predictability to new or difficult academic tasks (supports EF deficits related to organization and planning).	Koegel, Koegel, Frea, and Green-Hopkins (2003): Exposing school assignments before their presentation in class resulted in improved accuracy of responding and decrease in disruptive behaviors in writing class.
Peer support	Typically developing peers are taught specific strategies to interact and support the engagement of their classmates with ASD during teacher-directed and learner-initiated activities. Peers can be taught to adapt the instruction (i.e., paraphrasing questions, breaking assignments into smaller tasks) to support the participation of the student with ASD, provide frequent feedback, and promote communication between the students with ASD and other classmates.	Peer support interventions reduce the students’ reliance on adult support and provide opportunities for students with ASD to interact with peers (supports social communication difficulties).	Carter, Cushing, Clark, and Kennedy (2005): Pairing a high school student with ASD with two typically developing peers during English class resulted in higher levels of consistency and contact with the general education curriculum and increased percentage of time spent socially interacting with peers.
Video modeling	A form of teaching in which the learner watches videotaped examples of an individual demonstrating a target skill. Types of video modeling include basic video modeling, video self-modeling, and point-of-view modeling.	Individuals with ASD have difficulties learning solely by observing others in the natural environment (supports visual processing and observational learning).	Delano (2007): SRSD instruction delivered via computer-based video self-modeling resulted in gains in the number of words written and number of functional essay elements in persuasive writing.
Explicit strategy instruction	Students are explicitly taught specific strategies that can be used if they encounter difficulties completing academic tasks such as writing or math problems. These strategies involve both students’ thinking (metacognitive) as well as their actions (cognitive). Students are taught memorable routines to follow during a specific task. Students are often taught to use a mnemonic to remember the steps of the routine.	The routine capitalizes on visual strengths and strong rote memory (supports everyday memory deficits).	Whitby (2012): Cognitive and metacognitive strategies were taught to students using the Solve It! Problem-Solving curriculum resulting in improved percent of correct responses on math word problems. Asaro-Saddler and Bak (2013): The SRSD approach was effective in increasing the number of essay elements and overall quality of persuasive writing.
Self-management	Students are taught to monitor their own behavior or performance and deliver self-reinforcement at established intervals.	The expectation and the steps to accomplish the task are explicitly stated. Reduce the need for the teachers to provide performance feedback (supports EF deficits related to self-management).	Myles, Ferguson, and Hagiwara (2007): Student was successfully taught to record his homework assignments in history, English, and science classes.
Graphic organizer	Visual chart that is used to organize a student’s knowledge or ideas. Examples of graphic organizers include Venn diagrams, KWL charts, flowcharts, and story boards.	Individuals with ASD tend to be “bottom-up” thinkers and focus on details. This strategy supports comprehension by helping the learner connect details across the text in a meaningful way (supports central coherence deficits).	Carnahan and Williamson (2013): Students use key words that signal a pattern and a Venn diagram to support their comprehension of expository science text.

Note. ASD = Autism Spectrum Disorder; SRSD = self-regulated strategy development; EF = executive functions; KWL = Know, What, Learn.

Antecedent interventions: Setting the stage for successful participation

The very structure of high school poses several challenges for many students with ASD. The physical environment is often crowded and noisy; students frequently transition between classrooms or buildings; there are different teachers for each subject each with their own expectations and rules; and possibly, a different set of peers is in each class. Being able to anticipate and understand activities, schedules, and expectations improves students’ ability to appropriately participate and respond to classroom demands (Myles & Simpson, 2001). Establishing routines and creating written schedules will support executive functioning difficulties that may impede students’ ability to plan and organize their schedules. Executive functioning deficits have also been attributed to students having difficulty managing their own behavior during a given academic task. The use of priming—exposing school assignments to students before their presentation in class—has been found to be particularly effective in helping students with ASD anticipate what is expected of them and better prepare them to participate in classroom activities and assignments (Koegel, Koegel, Frea, & Green-Hopkins, 2003).

Scaffold student’s thinking

Individuals with ASD require explicit instruction to learn new skills, including academic skills. Generally, the instruction individuals with ASD receive around academic content should include clear explanations of the skill or task sequence, modeling, guided practice, and multiple opportunities to independently practice and apply the learned knowledge (Pennington & Delano, 2012). The use of visual supports has been found to be a useful tool in addressing WCC by enabling students with ASD to identify and connect important ideas and features of writing and reading tasks (Carnahan & Williamson, 2013). Of particular importance for individuals with ASD is providing explicit instruction on the cognitive processes involved in completing academic tasks, as well as teaching self-monitoring skills that will support their ability to identify and address problems they encounter during the task, which is especially problematic for many individuals with ASD due to executive functioning difficulties. During explicit strategy instruction, students are taught a strategy (e.g., a mnemonic) to help them remember specific steps or processes to complete a task, along with modeling and guided practice in using the steps. Cognitive and metacognitive strategies have been successfully used to improve math (Whitby, 2012) and writing (Asaro-Saddler & Bak, 2013) performances of individuals with ASD in general education classrooms. Although teachers have traditionally provided this type of instruction, the use of technology such as video modeling procedures (Delano, 2007), which capitalizes on visual processing strengths associated with ASD, and enlisting support from trusted peers (Carter, Cushing, Clark, & Kennedy, 2005) are gaining popularity and are successfully being used to complement teacher-led instruction in classrooms.

Facilitate skill generalization and independence

The ability to generalize skills beyond the immediate teaching context is a common difficulty encountered by many individuals with ASD (National Research Council, 2001). For this reason, it is especially important that educators specifically plan their instruction to facilitate skill generalization (Alberto & Troutman, 2009). One method for improving students’ ability to generalize learned skills is to provide them with ample opportunities to practice skills across settings by integrating instruction throughout the school day. Developing strong home–school collaborations, through various means such as email correspondence, periodic team meetings, home visits, or communication notebooks, can also support skill generalization (Morrow & Carnahan, 2010). Furthermore, teaching students to monitor and manage their own behavior (Myles, Ferguson, & Hagiwara, 2007) will help ensure that these skills are being used in a variety of settings with the additional benefit of reducing the need for constant adult guidance. Thoughtful educational planning that includes generalization and independence targets will ensure that the skills that are being taught are functional for individuals with ASD.

Considerations for Alternate Achievement

The term alternate achievement became well established in schools when federal policy permitted using alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) for students who could not participate in general assessments with or without accommodations. Students in AA-AAS work toward the same grade-level standards as their same-age peers who are nondisabled but with alternate achievement targets. These alternate achievement standards had to be linked to the state’s academic content standards in the areas targeted by the law (U.S. Department of Education, 2005). As states move toward adopting the CCSS, the new generation of alternate assessments is also being aligned with these standards but with some alternate achievement. Alternate achievement of grade-level standards target some prioritized, pinpointed, or simplified version of the original standard while retaining the original content of the grade level to the greatest extent possible.

Because some students with ASD work on alternate achievement standards in fully inclusive general education classrooms, it would be erroneous to assume that alternate achievement academics are only for students in self-contained settings. Whether students with ASD participate in the general state assessment or an alternate assessment is an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team decision using state guidelines for eligibility. Even if the team selects an AA-AAS as the appropriate way for the student to show progress, it still is important for students with ASD to have full access to the general curriculum content for their assigned grade level based on chronological age. Table 2 includes descriptions of instructional strategies and examples of grade-aligned content successfully taught to students with ASD accessing AA-AAS. Many of the strategies used with this population provide extra support for executive functioning difficulties by breaking down multiple-step tasks into component parts that can be taught incrementally and prompting procedures to support memory deficits.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Instructional Strategies for Teaching Grade-Aligned Content to Students With ASD Who Access AA-AAS.

Instructional strategy	Description	When to use the strategy (link to cognitive profile)	Example from Literature with students with ASD accessing AA-AAS
Task analysis	Breaking a chained task into its component parts and teaching one step at a time. Task analysis for similar skills may vary depending upon individual student (i.e., some students may need skill broken down into simplest steps while other students may be able to complete fewer, more complex steps in the task).	Use when teaching chained tasks (supports EF deficits related to planning).	ELA: Task analysis for teachers to follow when teaching read-aloud of adapted grade-aligned literature Browder, Trela, and Jimenez (2007) a
			Math: Nine-step task analysis on finding points on a plane Browder et al. (2012) a
			Science: Task analysis for participating in science inquiry lesson Browder et al. (2012) a
Time delay	An errorless instructional strategy where a prompt of the correct answer is provided simultaneously with instruction and then after a brief delay (e.g., 4 s). The timing of prompts is faded as students begin to demonstrate the skill within wait time prior to the prompt.	Use when teaching simple facts such as word identification, number identification, and so on (supports memory deficits).	ELA: Vocabulary from grade-aligned adapted literature (e.g., Call of the Wild) Browder et al. (2007) a
			Math: Number identification and telling time to the hour Polychronis, McDonnell, Johnson, Riesen, and Jameson (2004)
			Science: When given definition select correct science term McDonnell et al. (2006) a
System of least prompts	A prompting hierarchy that allows student opportunity to independently perform task before providing prompt. Prompts are introduced from least intrusive to more intrusive until student is able to perform skill.	Use when teaching discrete or chained tasks. Do not use when an error may be harmful, for example, when crossing the street (supports memory and EF deficits related to planning).	ELA: Modified system of least prompts passage reread (paragraph, sentence, answer) for answering comprehension questions with read-aloud of biographies. Mims, Hudson, and Browder (2012) a
			Social Studies: Modified system of least prompts passage reread (vocabulary definition, passage, sentence, answer) for answering comprehension questions with read-aloud of social studies text. Zakas, Browder, Ahlgrim-Delzell, and Heafner (2013) a
MLT	Instructional scaffolding that begins with teacher modeling task, then completing the task simultaneously with the students, and finally testing students by having them demonstrate the skill independently. With some simpler tasks, model-test may be appropriate. MLT can also be used as a systematic error correction. (Student makes error—teacher implements MLT until student is firm on skill).	Use when teaching discrete or chained tasks (supports visual processing and observational learning).	ELA: Systematic error correction using model-lead-test during instruction using Direct Instruction curricula (Language for Learning and Corrective Reading) Flores et al. (2013) a
			Math: Teaching time telling to the 5 min increment using components of Direct Instruction curriculum Connecting Math Concepts Thompson, Wood, Test, and Cease-Cook (2012)
			Science: Identification of science descriptor (e.g., wet, dry, living, dead) Knight, Smith, Spooner, and Browder (2012)
Graphic organizers	A visual template provided to students as a scaffold for grouping, organizing, categorizing information, and/or solving problems.	Use when teaching chained tasks, problem solving, or big ideas (supports central coherence deficits).	ELA: Sorting story descriptors using graphic organizer of “wh-questions” and answering comprehension question related to stories in a Direct Instruction reading program Bethune and Wood (2013).
			Math: Graphic organizer for completing simple linear equation Browder et al. (2012) a
			Science: KWHL graphic organizer for science inquiry lesson Knight, Spooner, Browder, Smith, and Wood (2013) a
			Social Studies: Graphic organizer for event, people, location, details, and outcome of historical event from adapted social studies text. Zakas et al. (2013) a

Note. ASD = Autism Spectrum Disorder; AA-AAS = alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards; MLT = Model-lead-test; EF = Executive functions; ELA = English Language Arts; KWHL = Know, What, How, Learn.

a

Middle/high school study.

Alternate achievement literacy

Alternate achievement literacy is the ability for nonreaders to access and comprehend text that is chronologically age appropriate by using adaptations, modifications, and technology. Although many students with ASD can learn to read and comprehend text, some will need alternate routes to this goal. The primary goal of alternate achievement literacy is for students to apply whatever independent reading skills they have and become fluent in listening comprehension of connected text (Browder, Trela, & Jimenez, 2007). Reading aloud by the student or teacher is a key feature of alternate achievement literacy. Reading aloud can be a target of the lesson; alternatively, the teacher may read the text for her students to provide them with opportunities to develop important skills such as vocabulary (McDonnell et al., 2006; Polychronis, McDonnell, Johnson, Riesen, & Jameson, 2004) and simplified ways to write text (Pennington & Delano, 2012). It may be necessary for teachers to adapt the piece of literature by shortening the text while preserving the overall theme, plot, and important literary elements (i.e., grade-level vocabulary, a mix of sentence structure, author’s tone and purpose) in order for some students to access literary content (Saunders, Spooner, Browder, Wakeman, & Lee, 2013). In addition, because many students with ASD do not use functional speech as their primary form of communication (Noens & van Berckelaer-Onnes, 2005), consideration may also need to be given to alternative ways that these students communicate their understanding of the material.

Alternate achievement of mathematics and science

Researchers have found that students with severe disabilities, including those with ASD and ID, were able to participate in lessons aligned with biology, life science, and chemistry/physical science standards with adaptations that included teacher-directed inquiry (e.g., experiments to discover a concept), explicit instruction in science vocabulary, hands-on materials (Browder et al., 2012), graphic organizers (Knight, Spooner, Browder, Smith, & Wood, 2013), and explicit e-text (Knight, Wood, Spooner, Browder, & O’Brien, in press). While the research on alternate achievement mathematics and science has been inclusive of students with ASD at the secondary level, much more research is needed to build an evidence-base for practice. These initial studies do show promise that students with more severe ASD can learn content of their grade level that has been adapted and prioritized. Until more research emerges, teachers may try using the adaptations demonstrated in these studies using data to evaluate their effectiveness for specific content and students.

Moving Forward

The data on dismally poor postsecondary outcomes for individuals with ASD highlight the urgent need to reevaluate the quality and quantity of academic preparation individuals with ASD receive in schools. If postsecondary outcomes are expected to improve for individuals with ASD, the field must place greater value on the importance of academics for adolescents with disabilities. The CCSS for English language arts and literacy and mathematics, which has already been adopted in most states, provides educators with guidance on what students need to learn across grades and content areas. In reading, this means there will be more emphasis on the comprehension of complex texts in all subjects (Rothman, 2012), and in writing, there will be a shift in the emphasis from narrative to more informational and explanatory writing as these are more useful in the postsecondary educational and work environments (Graham & Harris, 2013). Simply knowing what should be taught, however, will likely be insufficient for those who teach individuals with ASD. Educators will need to not only be able to align educational programming with content grade-level standards but also be skilled at adapting their instruction to meet the unique needs of individuals with ASD.

More research on the academic achievement and instruction for individuals with ASD is needed to move the field forward, especially in the secondary grades. The following are some specific areas of need that practitioners and researchers who are invested in improving academic achievement for individuals with ASD are asked to consider.

Recognize the cognitive profiles for learners with ASD when adapting instruction. There is an urgent need for the development of academic interventions that simultaneously target the specific learning needs of individuals with ASD and are appropriate for the secondary school context. With the CCSS, teachers will be presenting students with more complex texts across content areas, which will present additional challenges for individuals with ASD. Individuals with ASD will benefit from explicit instruction on specific cognitive processes employed by successful readers (e.g., locating referents, asking questions, repair strategies such as rereading) as they tackle more challenging texts (Randi, Newman, & Grigorenko, 2010). While initial studies of explicit strategy instruction have been found to be effective for adolescents with ASD, it is likely that instruction will require further adaptation to be effective for the broader spectrum. The challenge for researchers will be to develop strategies that build upon cognitive strengths (i.e., visual processing) and address areas of weaknesses (i.e., WCC, executive functioning).

Recognize the need for multicomponent interventions. There exists a strong relationship between social skills and academic performance (McClelland, Morrison, & Holmes, 2000). Teachers structure their instruction in a number of different ways, most of which require a level of active participation by the learner. Because there is a strong link between social and academic skills, it is important that researchers consider developing interventions that simultaneously address students’ social and academic needs. This can be done by explicitly targeting both social (e.g., conversation skills) and academic (e.g., identifying key concepts in text) goals during academic instruction. Alternatively, some academic interventions may enhance social communication without explicitly targeting it. Researchers studying reading comprehension may consider adding social communication measures to identify if there are some collateral benefits in this area.

Inform all educators about ASD. Teachers’ ability to understand their students’ learning needs and abilities leads to the success of students with disabilities who participate in general education classes (Marino, 2010). Although special education teachers should be available to support general education teachers, it is important that general education teachers are able to collaborate with specialists and carry out educational plans, as it is deemed appropriate. Professional development of all teachers—preservice/inservice, special education/general education—should include coursework or resources focused on understanding ASD. Some advocacy groups (i.e., Organization for Autism Research) and federally funded projects (i.e., Center on Secondary Education for Students with ASD; National Professional Development Center on ASD) have already created such materials and present information in a way that is practitioner friendly and accessible to all individuals regardless of expertise level.

Although knowledge about how to effectively instruct individuals with ASD has grown over recent years, much more work needs to be done, particularly around adolescence and the transition to adulthood. Schools are experiencing increasing numbers of individuals with ASD who are accessing the general education curriculum and subsequently entering college or pursuing jobs. The limited information currently known about academic interventions for individuals with ASD is promising: Individuals with ASD are able to learn academic content that is aligned with state standards when provided with appropriate instruction and supports. Future research efforts focused on academic achievement for individuals with ASD are needed, and necessary, to support successful postsecondary outcomes for this population.