Simonetta Panerai1, L Ferrante, M Zingale. 1. IRCCS Oasi Maria SS (Scientific Research Institute for Mental Retardation and Brain Ageing), Via Conte Ruggiero 73, 94018 Troina, Italy. arandelli@oasi.en.it
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Two educational treatments were compared, the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH) programme and the integration programme for individuals with disabilities. METHODS: Two groups of eight subjects were matched by gender, chronological and mental age, and nosographic diagnosis (i.e. autism associated with severe intellectual disability, DSM-IV criteria and Childhood Autism Rating Scale scored. The TEACCH programme was applied to the experimental group, while the control group was integrated in regular schools with a support teacher. The Psycho-Educational Profile-Revised and the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale were administered twice with a one-year interval between assessments. RESULTS: The scores of the experimental group increased more than the control group scores. Statistically significant differences were obtained in both groups because of the differences in the two approaches.
BACKGROUND: Two educational treatments were compared, the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication HandicappedChildren (TEACCH) programme and the integration programme for individuals with disabilities. METHODS: Two groups of eight subjects were matched by gender, chronological and mental age, and nosographic diagnosis (i.e. autism associated with severe intellectual disability, DSM-IV criteria and Childhood Autism Rating Scale scored. The TEACCH programme was applied to the experimental group, while the control group was integrated in regular schools with a support teacher. The Psycho-Educational Profile-Revised and the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale were administered twice with a one-year interval between assessments. RESULTS: The scores of the experimental group increased more than the control group scores. Statistically significant differences were obtained in both groups because of the differences in the two approaches.