Evaluating Visual Activity Schedules as Evidence-Based Practice for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders

Abstract

A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted for articles published between 1993 and 2013 to evaluate the quality of the Visual Activity Schedules (VAS) literature using current evidence-based criteria developed by Horner et al. (Except Child 71:165-179, 2005). Authors sought to determine whether VAS can be considered an evidence-based practice by expanding on the findings from previous reviews. A total of 31 studies met inclusion criteria for the use of VAS to various behaviors to students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Of these studies, 16 met criteria for acceptable quality. Results suggest that VAS can be considered an EBP for individuals with ASD, especially when used in combination with systematic instructional procedures. VAS can be used to increase, maintain, and generalize a range of skills of individuals from preschool through adulthood in a variety of settings (e.g., general education, community). Implications for practitioners using VAS, limitations, and recommendations for future research are discussed.

The use of visual schedules and work systems to increase the on‐task behaviour of students on the autism spectrum in mainstream classrooms

“…Visual schedules are used to orientate students and provide predictability within the classroom by informing students of an anticipated sequence of events using pictures, symbols and/or written language. Making transitions predictable is thought to reduce anxiety for individuals on the autism spectrum (Sterling‐Turner and Jordan, ), and is associated with reductions in problem behaviour (Knight, Sartini and Spriggs, ). The National Autism Center () lists ‘schedules’ as ‘established interventions’ indicating that they are useful in promoting independence and helping students to plan.…”

“…Wong, Odom, Hume, et al. () similarly categorise ‘visual supports’, including schedules, as an evidence‐based practice, and a review by Knight, Sartini, and Spriggs () concluded that visual schedules were effective in promoting on‐task behaviour and facilitating independent transitions. Together, these reviews indicate that visual schedules are an effective way to support students on the spectrum.…”

“…There is less evidence for work systems than for visual schedules, although they share common elements (e.g., sequencing tasks, or task elements), and may have similar effects on anxiety and behaviour. Work systems were included in the review by Knight, Sartini, and Spriggs (); however, both the National Autism Center () and Wong, Odom, Hume, et al. () have found insufficient evidence for work systems due to the small number of studies focussing on this practice.…”

The Effects of Mentor Instruction on Teaching Visual Supports to Novice, Special Education Teachers

“…To be considered evidence-based, a practice must have at least five studies, conducted by different researchers, in different locations, with a minimum of 20 participants over all of the studies (Horner et al, 2005). It was determined that visual supports were an evidence- Instruction, January 2018 • Vol.11, No.1 based practice and can be used for a variety of different behaviours (Knight, Sartini, & Spriggs, 2015).…”

A Review of Activity Schedules for Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Lequia, Machalicek, and Rispoli (2012) conducted a systematic review, focusing on problem behaviors in relation to di erent variables. Knight, Sartini, and Spriggs (2015) evaluated the quality of the activity schedule literature using evidence-based criteria.…”