TEACCH and Autism Ranking: Strong positive evidence

Additional Information

Some researchers have suggested that there are more similarities than differences between the TEACCH Autism Program and some other comprehensive, multi-component educational interventions (including programmes based on the principles of applied behaviour analysis). For example,

  • According to Boyd et al (2014), in their comparison of LEAP, TEACCH and standard teaching practices “All three programs were found to produce statistically significant changes in children’s outcomes across the school year. This finding may shift the field’s thinking around [comprehensive treatment models] designed for students with ASD. Perhaps it is not the unique features of the models that most contribute to child gains; instead it is the common features of the models that most influence child growth… Early analysis of the overlap of scores on the fidelity measures indicate that perhaps those components common to the intervention approaches (e.g. classroom organization, teacher interaction with students and families) account for outcomes more than components that are unique to each approach (e.g. peermediated instruction in LEAP classrooms, structured work systems in TEACCH classrooms)”
  • According to Mandell et al (2013), “While STAR and Structured Teaching have many differences, some similarities emerged during the training that were not apparent from reading the manuals or communication with the trainers. Specifically, the classroom organizational and scheduling/transition strategies in Structured Teaching were very similar to the use of functional routines in STAR. The primary differences between the two programs therefore were the use of one-to-one instructional strategies and a highly specified curriculum in STAR.”

Related Additional Information

12 Dec 2017
Last Review
01 Nov 2017
Next Review
01 Nov 2020