University of Massachusetts Boston
University of Massachusetts Boston
ScholarWorks at UMass Boston
ScholarWorks at UMass Boston
Graduate Masters Theses
Doctoral Dissertations and Masters Theses
8-2020
Parent-Teacher Relationship Quality as a Predictor of Changes in
Parent-Teacher Relationship Quality as a Predictor of Changes in
Externalizing Behaviors at School for Children with ASD
Externalizing Behaviors at School for Children with ASD
Lana Andoni
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umb.edu/masters_theses
Part of the Psychology Commons, and the Special Education and Teaching Commons
PARENT-TEACHER RELATIONSHIP QUALITY AS A PREDICTOR OF CHANGES IN
EXTERNALIZING BEHAVIORS AT SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WITH ASD
A Thesis Presented
by
LANA ANDONI
Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies,
University of Massachusetts Boston,
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
August 2020
Clinical Psychology Program
ii
© 2020 by Lana Andoni
All rights reserved
iii
PARENT-TEACHER RELATIONSHIP QUALITY AS A PREDICTOR OF CHANGES IN
EXTERNALIZING BEHAVIORS AT SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WITH ASD
A Thesis Presented
by
LANA ANDONI
Approved as to style and content by:
__________________________
Abbey Eisenhower, Associate Professor
Chairperson of Committee
__________________________
Alice S. Carter, Professor
Member
______________________________
Laurel Wainwright, Senior Lecturer II
Member
_________________________________________
David Pantalone, Program Director
Clinical Psychology Program
_________________________________________
Lizabeth Roemer, Department Chair
Psychology Department
iv
ABSTRACT
PARENT-TEACHER RELATIONSHIP QUALITY AS A PREDICTOR OF CHANGES IN
EXTERNALIZING BEHAVIORS AT SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN WITH ASD
August 2020
Lana Andoni, B.A., University of Pennsylvania
M.S., Northeastern University
M.A., University of Massachusetts Boston
Directed by Professor Abbey Eisenhower
Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) exhibit high rates of externalizing behaviors
compared to children with other disabilities and typically developing peers. These behavioral
challenges may impede their ability to successfully transition into school settings. Higher quality
relationships between parents and clinicians working with children with ASD have been shown
to yield positive student outcomes. Additionally, parent involvement is considered to play a
critical role in the success of interventions for children with ASD. Teachers may benefit from
parents’ extensive knowledge about their child and parents may benefit from greater knowledge
of school behavior plans to promote continuity of behavior plans between school and home
settings. In order for teachers and parents to share and discuss information with each other, to
support each other or to implement interventions in multiple environments, they must also have a
comfortable relationship with each other in which they are able to listen and agree or disagree
with each other. Therefore, the current study examined the role of parent-teacher relationship
v
(PTR) quality in predicting changes in externalizing behaviors among 119 young children (mean
age = 5 years, 6 months 77.3% males) with ASD over the school year. In addition, the study
examined whether student-teacher relationship quality, communication frequency between
parents and teachers, and classroom placement moderate the relation between PTR quality and
changes in the student’s externalizing behaviors. The current study found that PTR quality did
not predict changes in externalizing behaviors from the fall to spring of the school year, nor was
the relation moderated by student-teacher relationship quality, communication frequency
between parents and teachers, or classroom placement. The current study is one of the first
studies to examine the direct impact of PTR quality on outcomes of students with ASD,
specifically, externalizing behaviors, in a longitudinal design. The findings provide some support
that the relation between parent and teacher perceptions of PTR are not direct. Implications for
how PTR should be assessed in future studies, as well as implications of our findings are
discussed.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
…………………………………………………………………………….
vii
LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………………..
viii
CHAPTER Page
1. BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE
………………………………
1
Parent-Teacher Relationships in School Settings ……………..
2
Externalizing Behaviors in Children with ASD
………………..
6
2. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ………………………………
16
Participants
………………………………………………………………….
16
Procedures
…………………………………………………………………..
18
Measures …………………………………………………………………….
19
Proposed Statistical Analyses ……………………………………….. 23
3. RESULTS ………………………………………………………………………….
25
Preliminary Statistical Analyses …………………………………….
25
Statistical Analyses of Specific Aims ……………………………..
27
4. DISCUSSION …………………………………………………………………….
34
Strengths and Limitations ……………………………………………..
40
Clinical Implications
…………………………………………………….
42
REFERENCES
……………………………………………………………………………..
53
vii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
Page
1. Selected Demographics of Participants ………………………………….
43
2. Average Scores on Key Variables at Time 1 and Time 2
………….
44
3. Bivariate Correlations Between Coefficients
………………………….
45
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1. Structural Model Between PTR Latent Variable and Externalizing
Behaviors
……………………………………………………………………………..
46
2. Structural Model Between PTR Latent Variable and Externalizing
Behaviors with a Moderator Variable
……………………………………….
47
3. Structural Model Between PTR Latent Variable and Externalizing
Behaviors with STR Quality as Moderating Variables
…………………
48
4. Structural Model Between PTR Latent Variable and Externalizing
Behaviors with Parent and Teacher Communication
Frequency as moderating variables
…………………………………………..
50
5. Structural Model Between PTR Latent Variable and Externalizing
Behaviors with Classroom Placement as a Moderating Variable
…..
52
1
CHAPTER 1
BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE
Transitioning to formal schooling is an important milestone for all children and
reflects a substantial adjustment for children regardless of their disability status (Daley,
Munk, & Carlson, 2011). Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) may find this
transition particularly challenging due to social and communicative deficits as well as
restricted and repetitive behaviors. Teachers report being more concerned about the ability of
children with autism to transition smoothly compared to other children with disabilities
(Quintero & McIntyre, 2011). Additionally, children with autism have a higher incidence of
externalizing behaviors than typically developing peers and children with other
developmental disabilities (Bauminger, Solomon, & Rogers, 2010; Mahan & Matson, 2011),
which poses additional barriers to being successfully included in school settings.
According to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, in addition to individual child
characteristics that influence a child’s successful adaptation to school (such as cognitive
abilities, language, and temperament; Rimm-Kaufman & Pianta, 2000), a child’s interactions
with others around them (typically referred to as their microsystems) influence their
successful adaptation to school. For example, children’s relationships with their teachers
have been shown to predict their academic, social, and behavioral outcomes in school
(Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Moreover, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory emphasizes the
2
importance not only of the child’s microsystems, such as parent-child interactions and
teacher-child interactions, but also the relations between these microsystems. These relations
across microsystems (referred to collectively as the mesosystem) include the relationship
between the child’s parents and teachers, and are important predictors of developmental
patterns (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). For the purpose of the current study, we
examined parent-teacher relationship quality. The quality of the parent-teacher relationship
(PTR) encompasses the underlying affective qualities of parent-teacher partnerships such as
attitudes towards each other and feelings of collaboration and alliance with each other
(Vickers & Minke, 2007).
Parent-Teacher Relationships in School Settings
Within the context of school settings, the relationships between parents and teachers
and its association with positive outcomes for children with ASD has been explored in
several studies. It is important to note that none of the studies with children with ASD
explicitly used the term “parent-teacher relationship quality.” However, they assessed similar
constructs that include trust and respect between parents and teachers. For instance,
Labarbera (2017) used open-ended items and Likert-scale items to assess collaborative
practices between parents and teachers that are intended to build relationships based on trust
and demonstrate an attitude of respect. Based on responses from 28 caregivers and 102
educators of children with ASD, they found that higher ratings of collaborative practices
correlated with higher reported satisfaction with the relationship. Hsiao (2017) used the
Beach Center Family Professional Partnership scale to assess parent reported level of content
with their service providers. This scale included a child-focused subscale which measures the
parents’ level of trust in the provider’s ability to help their child succeed, and a family-
3
focused relationship subscale which measures the degree to which families feel that the
provider is available, listens to them, and respects them (Summers, 2005). Among 236
parents of school children with ASD (children aged 3-21), Hsiao (2017) found that higher
quality collaborative partnerships were correlated with higher family quality of life. Burke
and Burke (2015) used the same scale, the Beach Center Family Professional Partnership
scale, with 507 parents of children with ASD (average child age: 10.7 years, range 3–21
years) and found that parents’ reporting of higher quality collaborative partnerships was
associated with a reduced need for parents to resort to safeguards with the school such as
mediation and due process for their child. While these safeguards are intended to provide an
unbiased forum to resolve disputes, the process has also been associated with increased
parent stress (Burke and Hoddap, 2014). The previously mentioned studies have all found
evidence of the positive association between PTR quality of a child with ASD with family
outcomes such as parent satisfaction or family quality of life. However, to date, no study has
specifically examined the association or impact of the PTR quality on specific child-focused
outcomes
for
children
with
ASD
(such
as
academic,
behavioral,
or
social
outcomes). However, as a parallel, a repeated reversal design study has demonstrated that
higher quality relationships between parents and clinicians working with children with ASD
is associated with positive outcomes, including a reduction of parent stress levels and
increases in a child’s positive responses to the intervention (Brookman-Frazee & Koegel,
2007).
Among typically developing children, only one study has examined the impact of
PTR quality on problem behaviors (Serpell and Masburn, 2012); in their study of 1939 pre-K
and kindergarten children, they found that teacher rated PTR quality was concurrently
4
associated with problem behaviors during the fall and spring of the school year.
Longitudinally, they found that higher parent rated PTR quality in pre-kindergarten was
associated with higher ratings of social competence and lower student-teacher conflict as
rated by kindergarten teachers, even after controlling for entry-level scores. However, teacher
rated PTR quality did not predict behavior levels after controlling for baseline levels. Similar
to Serpell and Mashburn, our study also examines the question of whether PTR quality
predicts change in problem behaviors over time, with slightly different ways of measuring
this in a different sample. Our study looks specifically at externalizing behaviors, rather than
problem behaviors more generally, and uses both parent and teacher rated PTR Quality as a
measure of PTR quality (as opposed to teacher-rated quality only), and by focusing on an
ASD sample.
Studies with non-ASD samples have found associations between positive PTRs with
several indicators of positive current and future student outcomes. For example, positive
parent ratings of the quality of the PTR were strongly associated with concurrent quality of
teacher ratings of student-teacher relationship (Chung et al., 2005), which in turn has been
associated with behavioral adjustment, social acceptance, and social competence (Baker,
2006; Pianta & Stuhlman, 2004). Positive PTRs appear to be particularly important for
children with academic or behavioral risks. For example, Hughes et al. (2005) examined the
association between PTR quality and teacher expectations in 607 ethnically diverse first
grade children who were academically at risk (as determined by low scores in a literacy test).
Teacher expectations, or teacher perceptions of a child’s ability, are considered to be an
important indicator of child academic outcome because of how such perceptions, be they
accurate or not, have been shown to predict students’ grades on standardized tests (Jussim &
5
Harber, 2005). Hughes et al. (2005) demonstrated that higher teacher-rated PTR quality was
associated with higher teacher expectations of the child’s academic competence in these
academically at-risk children. Further, in a sample of 207 children with behavior problems,
PTR quality was shown to mediate the relation between receipt of a family-school
intervention (conjoint behavioral consultation compared to a control business-as-usual
condition in which traditional school support was provided by school personnel), and
reduced externalizing behaviors from pre- to post-treatment (Sheridan et al., 2017).
As mentioned previously, no studies have examined PTR quality in relation to future
outcomes in children with ASD. Moreover, no studies thus far have examined both parent
and teacher perspectives of the PTR with children with ASD. However, the quality of the
dynamic interactions between parents and teacher plays an important role, particularly within
contexts that create greater vulnerability to strained relationships (Mautone, Marcelle,
Tresco, & Power, 2015). Indeed, the larger special education system within which parents
and teachers of children with ASD interact often places strain on their relationships. Parents
of children with ASD experience greater discontent in their experiences with school
communication compared to parents of children without ASD (Zablotsky, Boswell, & Smith,
2012). In addition, it is not unusual for parents of children with ASD to experience conflict
and dissatisfaction with the IEP process and/or team (Slade, Eisenhower, Carter, & Blacher,
2018). Given the potential for more highly strained PTRs in children with ASD, as well as
the importance of understanding both parent and teacher perspectives of the relationship; this
study examined how both parent and teacher perspectives of the PTR plays a role in students
with autism’s behavior outcomes.
6
Externalizing behaviors in Children with ASD
It is important to consider the role of PTR quality in reducing externalizing behaviors,
given that children with ASD exhibit higher rates of externalizing behaviors compared to
children with other disabilities (Brereton, Tonge, & Einfeld, 2006; Eisenhower, Baker, &
Blacher, 2005; Mahan & Matson, 2011). Additionally, externalizing behaviors contribute to
difficulty integrating students in general education placements (Brereton et al., 2006).
Rationale Aim 1: Relation between PTR quality and externalizing behaviors in children
with ASD
Parent-teacher relationships may be particularly important in addressing the
externalizing behaviors of children with ASD. Among other reasons, parents may be able to
share their knowledge about the child with teachers, including antecedents to the child’s
behavior as well as successful behavior strategies that have been introduced by other service
providers. Children with ASD are more likely to receive services such as educational or
school-based services, vocational services, family support services, and social recreational
services than children with non-ASD diagnoses (Carbone et al., 2016; Mandell, Walrath,
Manteuffel, Sgro, & Pinto-Martin, 2005). Consequently, parents often act as primary care
coordinators and navigate the different service delivery systems. Family involvement in early
intervention, which includes behavior intervention, is a critical aspect of the intervention
process (National Research Council, 2001), and many behavior intervention models are
incorporating parent-training components (Matson, Mahan, & Matson, 2009). As a result,
parents may have extensive information that would support teachers in identifying and
implementing strategies for supporting children’s positive behavior in the classroom.
7
Additionally, the effectiveness of interventions and teaching methods are enhanced
when there is consistency across children’s multiple environments. Generalization of skills is
difficult for some children with ASD (Church et al., 2015) and therefore the ability to
practice their skills with both their teachers and parents, at school and at home, will increase
the likelihood that reductions in behavior (and appropriate replacement skills) are maintained
(Carothers & Taylor, 2004). Such consistency is surely fostered by greater frequency of
effective communication between parents and teachers.
In order for teachers and parents to share and discuss information with each other, to
support each other or to implement interventions in multiple environments, they must also
have a comfortable relationship with each other in which they are able to listen and agree or
disagree with each other. Previous work with parents of children with special needs has
established that positive parent-teacher collaboration involves parents feeling that their
concerns are being heard and solicited by teachers, and that they discuss how to address these
concerns (Esquivel, Ryan, & Bonner, 2008). Azad & Mandell (2016) found that parents and
teachers often agree on a primary concern but do not communicate with each other about that
concern and instead may both talk about a non-primary concern. The authors suggest that a
potential reason for this disconnect is that parents and teachers may not feel comfortable with
each other. In order to expect parents and teachers to discuss and implement behavior plans
consistently across settings or to support each other; they must first be comfortable enough to
share their concerns with each other; thus, a positive, comfortable relationship between
parents and teachers may be an important foundation for fostering behavioral improvements.
Therefore, in this study I hypothesized that higher quality relationships between parents and
teachers predicts reductions in externalizing behaviors of children with ASD over time.
8
Reductions of externalizing behaviors in this context may also encompass lower gains in
externalizing behavior for those children whose externalizing behaviors are increasing over
time, as opposed to absolute reductions per se.
Rationale Aim 2: Student Teacher Relationship as a moderator for the relation
between PTR and externalizing behaviors in children with ASD.
In addition to parent-teacher relationships, the quality of student-teacher relationships
(STR) has also been associated with both the level of externalizing problems (Brown &
McIntosh, 2012; Robertson, Chamberlain, & Kasari, 2003) and the degree of change in
externalizing behavior over time for children with ASD (Howes, 2000). High quality student-
teacher relationships, typically rated by the teachers, are those characterized by low conflict,
high closeness, and appropriate dependency. In their cross-sectional study of 12 second and
third grade students with ASD in an inclusive classroom, Robertson et al. (2003) found that
children with ASD who had poorer quality STRs, and specifically more conflict in the
relationship, showed more behavior problems and were less socially included. Additionally,
in a 5-year longitudinal study with 307 typically developing children (152 girls, average age
51.6 months in year 1 and 96.4 months in year 5), Howes (2000) examined the impact of
demographic factors, classroom climate, previous behavior problems and STRs on children’s
rate of behavior problems. Howes (2000) evinced that the best predictor of child behavior
problems in elementary school controlling for previous behavior problems was the presence
of a current conflictual student-teacher relationship followed by previous student teacher
closeness.
9
The greater behavioral and psychiatric problems facing children with ASD relative to
children with other developmental disabilities or typical development (Eisenhower, Blacher,
& Bush, 2015) may make them particularly vulnerable to poorer quality STRs (Mahan and
Matson, 2011). The current study examined whether STR moderates the association between
PTR quality and changes in externalizing behaviors. Hamre & Pianta (2001) postulated that
high quality STRs might motivate teachers to devote additional time and resources to
ensuring children’s achievement. It is possible that high quality STR may result in reductions
in externalizing behaviors because these positive STRs may position teachers well to act on,
or implement, any strategies or ideas gained from their interactions with parents. With a
higher quality PTR where teachers and parents are comfortably sharing information with
each other, a higher quality STR may make teachers more motivated to implement strategies
or plans suggested by parents, as well as to collaborate with parents on implementing
consistent behavior plans. In this sense, a higher quality STR was expected to strengthen the
positive predictive impact of PTR quality on changes in externalizing behaviors, such that the
association between PTR quality and changes in externalizing behaviors was hypothesized to
be stronger for students who have higher quality STRs compared to lower quality STRs.
Rationale for aim 3: Communication frequency as a moderator for the relation
between PTR and externalizing behaviors in children with ASD.
The association between PTR quality and children’s subsequent externalizing
problems may also vary by frequency of communication between parents and teachers.
While there is limited research on the ways in which high quality PTRs promote positive
10
student outcomes, one possible way is that a high quality parent-teacher relationship may
facilitate more effective and frequent communication between parents and teachers.
Despite the consensus that parent-teacher communication is an essential component
of successful relationships with parents (Christenson, 2004; Sheridan & Kratochwill, 2007),
especially for children with ASD (Azad, Kim, Marcus, Sheridan & Mandell, 2016), the
relations between parent-teacher communication and both PTR quality and student outcomes
remain unclear. Findings with typically developing children indicate that PTR quality and
communication frequency do not always go hand in hand. A PTR can be positive and
mutually respectful even if the frequency with which the parent and teacher communicate is
quite low. In addition, a PTR can be marked by tension or strain even if the frequency with
which the parent(s) and teacher communicate is rather high. In their study of 1234 parents
and 209 teachers of a K-12 classrooms in a suburban school district, Adams & Christenson
(2000) established that the perceived quality of family-school interaction is a better predictor
of trust than the frequency of contact. This finding suggests that, whereas PTR quality may
have a direct, positive association with child outcomes such as behavioral adjustment, the
association between frequency of parent-teacher communication and child outcomes may be
less clear-cut, a point further solidified by more recent research. For instance, Rimm-
Kaufman et al. (2003) found that stronger teacher-rated PTR quality in a sample of 223
kindergarten teachers was associated with more positive child outcomes including fewer
behavior problems as well as higher competence, language, and math ratings. However,
greater teacher-reported family involvement in activities (including frequency of
volunteering in school activities and frequency of communication) was associated only with
higher language ratings and surprisingly, more behavior problems. In addition, in their study
11
of 1939 pre-K and kindergarten children, Serpell and Mashburn (2012) demonstrated that
teachers reported lower social competence, more problem behaviors and more conflict in
their STR for children whose pre-school teachers reported greater frequency of phone
contacts with their parents. Both studies suggest that higher frequency of communication was
associated with greater behavior problems, (an undesirable outcome), even though in one of
the studies there was a positive association between communication frequency and language
ratings (a desirable outcome). Taken together, these studies suggest that the relationship
between frequency of communication and child outcomes is not always beneficial, or direct.
Indeed, as I hypothesize here, it may be that communication frequency works as a moderator,
rather than a direct predictor, in relation to children’s externalizing behavior outcome.
Understanding how parent teacher communication frequency impacts the relation
between PTR and child outcomes is of particular importance because communication (or lack
of communication) has often been cited as a source of conflict between parents and teachers
of children with ASD (Blue-Banning, Summers, Frankland, Nelson, & Beegle, 2004; Tucker
& Schwartz, 2013). In the current study, it was hypothesized that higher quality parent-
teacher relationships, when paired with more frequent communication, may provide more
opportunities for teachers to benefit from parents’ insight (and vice versa) in order to put
strategies in place to reduce externalizing behaviors. On the other hand, when PTR quality is
high but communication frequency is low, then there are limited opportunities for parents and
teachers to share goals and implement them, thus limiting their ability to benefit from this
positive PTR.
In the current study, the role of communication was considered as a moderator when
examining the association between PTR quality and changes in externalizing behaviors.
12
Lower frequency communication was expected to reduce the positive predictive impact of
PTR quality on changes in externalizing behaviors, such that the association between PTR
quality and externalizing behavior changes was hypothesized to be weaker for children
whose parents and teachers communicate less frequently.
Rationale for Aim 4: Classroom placement as a moderator for the relation
between PTR and externalizing behaviors in children with ASD.
The association between PTR quality and children’s subsequent externalizing
problems may also vary by the type of classroom – special education classroom or general
education classroom – in which children are enrolled. Specifically, the link between PTR
quality and subsequent externalizing problems may be stronger for children in general
education classes and weaker in special education classes, where more systems may be in
place to address challenging behaviors in a way that is less dependent on individual parent-
teacher interactions. As such, it is possible that, due to factors such as a smaller class size and
special education teachers’ greater expectation of collaboration with teachers, that the impact
of PTR quality on externalizing behaviors may be weaker for students in special education
classrooms compared to students in general education classrooms.
As noted previously, one of the possible ways in which PTR quality may relate to
subsequent externalizing behavior is that a high quality PTR may facilitate better and more
frequent communication between parents and teachers around addressing these challenging
behaviors (Christenson & Sheridan, 2001). In special education classrooms, there may be
more systems and processes set in place to promote routine communication between parents
and teachers compared to general education classrooms; as such, regular communication
13
between parents and teachers may occur to some degree regardless of PTR quality. Existing
research does not directly address this question with regard to classroom type; however,
research comparing special education schools versus mainstream schools may also be
relevant here. In their study of parents’ perceptions of PTR quality in Dutch schools,
Leenders, Haelermans, de Jong, & Monfrance (2018) interviewed 11 parents from
mainstream schools and 8 from special education schools to gain insight into PTR practices.
The results of the interviews demonstrated that special education schools are more
accustomed to “two-way communication” in contrast to mainstream schools such that it was
more common practice for parents from the special education schools to talk about their
ambitions and their teacher’s ambitions of their child on a regular basis, compared to
mainstream school parents and teachers. In addition, the same study measured parents’
perceptions of the PTR using a Parental Involvement Questionnaire developed on behalf of
the Dutch Ministry with 125 parents from two mainstream schools and 83 parents from two
special education schools. The questionnaire tapped into different themes including searching
for agreement, trust, communication, volunteering, learning at home, and decision-making.
The questionnaire results portrayed that parents felt that their special education teachers had
more genuine interest in their child compared to mainstream school teachers.
This pattern is likely present with special education classroom practices as well, in
which there may be more processes set in place for parent and teacher communication than in
general education classrooms for several possible reasons. Primarily, special educational
classrooms tend to have markedly smaller class sizes and thus more teachers per students,
which has often been the justification for why students are placed in special education
classrooms (Ysseldyke, Algozzine & Thurlow, 1992, (Zarghami & Schnellert, 2003).
14
Therefore, special education teachers may have more time dedicated to ensuring timely and
more frequent parent communication patterns compared to general education teachers. In
turn, parents of children in special education classrooms may have more opportunities to
collaborate, regardless of PTR quality. On the other hand, parents of children in general
education classrooms may require a higher quality PTR to ensure more frequent
communication patterns.
Secondly, special education teachers may be more accustomed to collaboration
between the home and school such that these practices are already ingrained as part of their
day-to-day practices as compared to general education teachers. While there is limited
research on this, Spann and colleagues (2003) surveyed 45 parents of children with autism
(of whom 73% spend at least part of their day in general education classrooms) about their
home-school communication, and found that parents frequently referenced their child’s
paraprofessional or special education teacher, with only a few parents referencing the general
education teachers (Spann, Kohler, & Soenksen, 2003). Additionally, in a study of 437
parents of children with mild, moderate, or severe disability in either special education
classrooms or mainstreamed classrooms, Leyser and Kirk (2004) found that almost 60% of
parents felt that teachers do not have enough time to help their child with individual
instruction. If parents of children in general education perceive that the teachers do not have
enough time for their children, they may also be less likely to seek out the teachers and
collaborate with them. Therefore, parents may expect and anticipate more frequent
communication from special education teachers than general education teachers and may
seek that out regardless of their PTR quality. On the other hand, parents may feel less
comfortable seeking collaboration with their general education teachers in the absence of a
15
strong PTR, which may limit the opportunities parents and teachers work together towards
bettering the child’s outcomes such as reducing challenging behaviors at school.
As a result, the current study hypothesized that the association between PTR quality
on changes in externalizing behaviors will be stronger for children who are in general
education classrooms, because high quality PTRs may facilitate communication between
parents and teachers that, in the general education context, may not be happening otherwise;
such parent-teacher communication, when present in the general education classroom, may
enable teachers to effectively address externalizing problems. On the other hand, the
association between PTR quality and changes in externalizing behaviors was expected to be
weaker for children who are in special education classrooms, where regular parent-teacher
communication is already the norm, because these placements are likely to already have
processes and resources set in place to promote communication in ways that will address
externalizing problems.
16
CHAPTER 2
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Participants
Participants in the current study are a subset of participants that were in the Smooth
Sailing study, a federally-funded, longitudinal two-site study that followed young children
with ASD as they transitioned into formal schooling. Participating families were from a
Northeastern metropolitan area (36%) and southern California (64%). Participants were
recruited through a variety of methods including online advertisement, in-print
advertisements, and word of mouth, through local school districts, clinicians, autism resource
centers, intervention agencies, autism related conferences and websites, and parent support
groups.
Inclusion criteria for the larger study included a prior diagnosis of ASD and an IQ
above 50. Data were collected through direct child assessments, parent interviews and
questionnaires, and teacher questionnaires at three time points (fall of the school year, spring
of the school year, and spring of the subsequent school year). In the current study, only
children for whom teachers participated in the first two (fall and spring) data collection
points were included, as determined by teacher completion of the Parental School
Involvement: the Parent and Teacher Involvement Scale during those two time points. This
subsample is 64.67% of the overall sample (N= 184) and included 119 children (81.5%
