Use individual sets of materials for each student.
Use combination of verbal interaction (discussion format) and media.
Use five-minute rotations of media/concept presentation.
Use a minimum of three sets of materials to teach each concept.
Use frequent group (choral) responding.
Use fast-paced random responding.
Use serial responding—three to five quick responses per student.
Use frequent student-to-student interactions.
They then conducted a series of single-subject designs that demonstrated experimentally (with treatment fidelity measures documenting implementation) the relationship between the instructional measures and the children’s performance on criterion-referenced assessments of academic tasks. This combination of instructional strategies (choral responding, student-to-student responding, rotation of materials, random student responding) was also found to be effective in teaching language concepts to elementary-aged children with autism in a later study (Kamps et al., 1994a). In their subsequent research, Kamps and colleagues (1994b) have examined the use of classwide peer tutoring (i.e., classmates provide instruction and practice to other classmates) with young children with autistic spectrum disorders. In a single-subject design study, these researchers found increased reading fluency and comprehension for children who received peer tutoring, as compared with those who received traditional reading instruction.
Other strategies have also appeared in the literature. Using an incidental teaching technique, McGee and colleagues (1986) embedded sight-word recognition tasks in toy play activities and found that two children with autism acquired sight-word recognition skills and generalized those skills to other settings. Cooperative learning groups are another instructional approach. Provided tutoring by peers, a group of children with autistic spectrum disorders practiced reading comprehension and planned an academic game; the children increased their academic engagement in reading (Kamps et al., 1995).
There is also some evidence that children with autism might benefit from computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in reading. Using a single-subject design, Chen and Bernard-Optiz (1993) compared delivery of academic tasks by an instructor or through a computer monitor and found higher performance and more interest from children in the CAI than the adult-delivered intervention. In a study conducted in Sweden, Heimann and colleagues (1995) used a CAI program and a traditional instructional approach to present lessons to students. Children with autism made significant gains in the CAI program (compared with traditional instruction), while typically developing children progressed similarly in both