CHILDREN WITH AUTISTIC SPECTRUM DISORDER IN

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAMS: A SOCIAL

CONSTRUCTIVIST PERSPECTIVE ON INCLUSION

Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen

SUMMARY
This research investigated the nature of play activities and the social engagement of young children with Autistic
Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in inclusive early childhood settings. Twelve focus children with a diagnosis of ASD
participated in the research. These children were enrolled in regular early childhood education programs with
typically developing peers aged four to five years. A comparison group of 30 children with typical development
were also included in the research. Children completed the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) to assess
their linguistic competence. Time-sampled observations of free play activities were made in the preschool settings
on two occasions for periods of one hour. Teachers also provided an assessment of children’s peer acceptance
and social behaviour. The observational data and teacher reports indicated that the focus children spent
proportionally less time than their peers in activities requiring higher levels of social skills. However, focus
children engaged in most types of play but with lower levels of engagement than the comparison group. This
indicated that the focus children were able to perform the play and social behaviours that were of interest in the
observations. These children with ASD were capable of more extensive social and play engagement because
they had demonstrated the requisite skills. These results indicated the need for greater teacher support to
scaffold and support the interactions of children with ASD with their typically developing peers in order to increase
their social and play participation in inclusive programs.

RÉSUMÉ
Cette étude a pour objectif d'analyser, pendant la petite enfance, la nature des activités ludiques de même que
les aptitudes sociales des jeunes enfants atteints de troubles du spectre autistique (TSA). Douze enfants atteints
de TSA ont été le centre d'attention de ces recherches. Tous étaient inscrits à une structure d'accueil petite
enfance conventionnelle au côté d'autres enfants âgés de quatre à cinq ans. Pour établir une comparaison, les
chercheurs ont également fait appel à un groupe de 30 enfants sans troubles similaires. Les enfants ont passé le
test de vocabulaire par l'image de Peabody (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) permettant d'évaluer leurs
compétences linguistiques. Les activités ludiques dans le milieu préscolaire ont été observées à deux reprises,
de manière aléatoire et sur une période d'une heure chacune. Les instituteurs ont également évalué l'acceptation
des enfants par leurs camarades et leur comportement social vis à vis d'eux. Les données relatives aux
observations ainsi que les rapports des instituteurs ont démontré que les enfants atteints de troubles autistiques
passaient moins de temps que leurs petits camarades sur des activités nécessitant des aptitudes sociales plus
développées. Néanmoins, ces enfants se sont impliqués dans la plupart des jeux mais avec des niveaux
d'interactions sociales moins élevés que pour le groupe de comparaison. Ces observations tendent à démontrer
que les enfants atteints de ces troubles sont capables de prendre part au jeu et d'interagir avec leurs camarades.
Les enfants atteints de TSA ont montré de vraies aptitudes sociales et de réelles capacités d'implication au jeu.
Cette étude a démontré l'importance du soutien de l'Instituteur qui favorise les interactions entre les enfants

33
34 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

atteints de TSA et leurs camarades. Il permet en outre d'encourager la participation au jeu et de renforcer les
liens sociaux dans le cadre des programmes inclusifs.

RESUMEN
Este estudio analiza la naturaleza del comportamiento durante las actividades lúdicas y los vínculos sociales de
los niños y niñas pequeños con trastornos del espectro autista (TEA) en el marco de la primera infancia. En esta
investigación han participado doce niños diagnosticados con TEA. Todos ellos formaban parte de programas de
educación para la primera infancia junto a niños con un desarrollo normal de edades comprendidas entre los
cuatro y los cinco años. También se incluyeron en el estudio a 30 niños con un desarrollo normal. Los niños
completaron el Test de Vocabulario en Imágenes de Peabody (PPVT) para evaluar su competencia lingüística.
En dos ocasiones se realizaron observaciones de muestra durante periodos de tiempo de una hora sobre el
comportamiento lúdico en entornos de preescolar. Asimismo, los profesores proporcionaron evaluaciones sobre
la aceptación de los niños por parte de sus compañeros y sobre el modo en el que se relacionaban socialmente.
Tanto los datos obtenidos tras la observación como los informes facilitados por los profesores indicaban que los
niños objeto del estudio dedicaban menos tiempo que sus compañeros a las actividades que requerían
destrezas sociales. Aunque estos niños participaban en la mayoría de los juegos, lo hacían con menor nivel de
interés que el otro grupo cotejado. De esta información se desprende que los niños examinados podían
desarrollar los comportamientos sociales y lúdicos en los que se centraron las observaciones. Estos niños con
TEA eran capaces de participar más ampliamente en las actividades sociales y lúdicas, puesto que demostraron
poseer las destrezas necesarias. Con estos resultados se muestra la necesidad de disponer de un mayor apoyo
por parte de los profesores para mantener y aumentar la interacción de estos niños con el resto de sus
compañeros y así incrementar su participación en las actividades sociales y lúdicas de los programas inclusivos.

KEYWORDS: autistic spectrum disorder; inclusive programs, social constructivism

BACKGROUND
One of the premises of inclusive early childhood services is that young children
with disabilities should be able to engage meaningfully in all aspects of an inclusive
program that welcomes and supports diversity (Ainscow, 2007). Successful
engagement requires a supportive environment that enables young children with
disabilities to form relationships with peers. A key issue in the inclusion of children
with disabilities is the development of social competence. Given that one of the
major benefits of inclusive early education is expected to be the opportunity to
participate in social interactions and acquire social skills, it is critical to ensure that
inclusive early education programs provide the support young children need to
learn to play together and make friends. However, social acceptance is not always
the outcome for children with disabilities in inclusive programs. In fact, there is
increasing evidence that some children, in particular those with developmental
disabilities or delays, may be socially isolated or excluded within regular early
childhood settings (Guralnick, Hammond, Connor, & Neville, 2006; Guralnick,
Connor, Hammond, Gottman & Kinnish, 1996; Hestenes & Carroll, 2000). If
social engagement is indeed a goal of inclusion, then new understandings and new
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 35

strategies are needed by teachers about how social engagement can be facilitated
within inclusive early education programs.
Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) are the focus of this study.
Autism is a pervasive developmental disorder that is distinguished by social and
communication difficulties (National Research Council, 2001). However, autism is
not a single condition; rather, it is a spectrum disorder that results in individuals
presenting with a wide range of abilities and disabilities and the specific needs of
each individual child with ASD need to be understood. The purpose of this paper
is to examine the social engagement of young children with ASD within inclusive
early childhood settings and to present an argument for the efficacy of a social
constructivist perspective as a framework for understanding how best to support
the play and social engagement of all young children with disabilities, including
those children with ASD.
SOCIAL COMPETENCE AND YOUNG CHILDREN WITH AUTISTIC SPECTRUM
DISORDER
Social competence in the preschool years includes the ability to establish effective
and positive relationships with others and engage in positive social interactions
with peers. According to Guralnick (1993), the development of peer-related social
competence is not only a critical developmental milestone for children of preschool
age, but of significance for children’s overall development including cognitive and
linguistic development. Guralnick (2002) suggests that children’s social integration
in inclusive programs is a function of their social engagement and their peer-related
social competence. Children with ASD have particular difficulties that affect their
social interactions, communication and understandings of the thoughts and feelings
of others (National Research Council, 2001). These difficulties affect important
aspects of quality of life for these children.
Children with ASD typically display qualitative impairments in reciprocal
social interaction and communication, and a tendency for restricted, repetitive, and
stereotyped patterns of behaviour, interest, or activity (American Psychiatric
Association, 2000). Results from numerous studies have demonstrated that children
with ASD have significant difficulties in their ability to represent mental states and,
in particular, to demonstrate an understanding that the thoughts and feelings of
others differ from their own (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Yirmiya, Solomonica-Levi, &
Shulman, 1996). The impact of ASD may limit the success children have in
engaging in play with their peers and inhibit the opportunities for children to fully
participate in inclusive early childhood programs. However, children with ASD do
not represent a homogeneous group and, as for typically developing peers, their
play and social interactions with other children will be characterised by
considerable variability. Therefore, children with ASD require significant attention
by teachers in order that they are provided with the individual and appropriate
support needed to engage in positive play experiences with their peers. This can
provide pleasure through the interactions and extend the children’s repertoire of
play and social behaviours in inclusive programs. While specific behavioural
36 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

characteristics are associated with ASD that will have an impact on children’s ability
to engage in positive social interactions with peers, the degree to which they are
supported in acquiring peer-related social skills will have an effect on the
opportunities for positive social exchanges. The teacher, as an important
environmental influence, has a significant role in creating a learning community
within which all children are valued.
While the research of Nabors, Willoughby and Badawi (1999) did not
specifically focus on children with ASD but more generally on a group of children
with diverse diagnoses of disabilities (three had ASD), they suggested that the
potential for play and interaction between typically developing children and
children with disabilities may differ with respect to different types of play in which
children with disabilities engage. They found that children with disabilities were
more likely to engage in play that made fewer demands on their cognitive or
linguistic skills. Another crucial factor in inclusive early education settings is the
teacher. Results from a number of studies have indicated that the extent to which
young children with disabilities engage in the physical and social environment is
related to the level of adult involvement in children’s play (Hestenes & Carroll,
2000; Malmskog & McDonnell, 1999).
In the research findings of Harper and McCluskey (2003) it was not just the
level of involvement but also the nature of teachers’ involvement which was
important to facilitate full inclusion. They found that different types of adult-
initiated involvement either inhibited or facilitated children’s subsequent
engagement with peers, for both typically developing children and children with
disabilities. These effects were context-dependent. Their findings point to the
importance of increasing teachers’ understanding of whether, when, and in what
contexts, to intervene in social play exchanges. Notwithstanding the developing
understanding of the role of the teachers on the social inclusion of young children
with disabilities, there have been few attempts to conceptualise how young children
with disabilities, and, in particular, children with ASD, learn play and social skills in
inclusive early childhood settings. A theoretical framework that provides a useful
platform for understanding the environmental influences on children’s social
participation in inclusive settings is social constructivism.
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORY AND INCLUSION IN EARLY CHILDHOOD
PROGRAMS
Social constructivist theory has had a considerable impact on early childhood
educational practice over the last decade (Penn, 2005). In social constructivist
theory, play has an important role in development. Vygotsky (1976) proposed that
learning through play supports the development of abstract thought because
children learn to think about meaning independently of the objects that they
represent. Vygotsky (1978, cited in Roskos & Christie, 2001) also “distinguished
between ‘actual development’ (independent performance) and ‘potential
development’ (assisted performance) with the zone of proximal development (ZPD)
defined as the distance between the two (p. 324). Assistance in any context by an
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 37

adult or more competent peer enables a child to learn new knowledge and skills
that the child could not perform alone. This scaffolding, as well as a child’s own
independent learning through play, allows the child to stretch their existing
competencies in areas such as self-regulation of behaviour, cooperation with
others, using memory and language (Bodrova & Leong, 1996) and promotes
learning and development when the scaffolded occurs within the child’s ZPD.
Social constructivist theory provides a framework to inform best practice
about inclusion in early childhood programs but has had a limited role in the
inclusion debate (Mallory & New, 1994). It can explain the processes for
understanding children’s learning (individual processes) and provides guiding
principles for teachers (social processes) in their pedagogical practices. Social
constructivist theory contributes to our understanding about how children might
learn within inclusive programs by acknowledging the role of social activity in
learning, the contributions of the active learner to his or her own development, and
the importance of supporting learning through the ZPD. The ZPD provides a
conceptualisation of how young children with ASD in inclusive programs can be
supported to engage in increasingly more complex levels of play with peers.
Mature, cooperative play characterized by reciprocal verbal and non-verbal
interactions provides for optimal developmental outcomes and leads to new social
and cognitive understanding.
Our understanding of the potential of play to promote learning as children
interact with their peers as scaffolders can be informed by social constructivist
perspectives. Reciprocity between peers develops through engagement in
cooperative play involving complex language and actions. Complex social play
increases the cognitive demands on children by requiring participants to negotiate
shared understandings and solve problems within the play context (Roskos &
Christie, 2001). It is the cognitive challenges presented within cooperative play that
provide the context for significant learning to occur.
Within inclusive settings, it might be considered that social integration is
successful when young children with ASD receive the support they need to make
social connections, engage in social play and make friends with typically developing
children. Given that a major goal of inclusive early childhood practices is to
promote social competence for young children with disabilities, it is essential to
determine the extent to which social integration occurs and whether children have
the opportunities to make social connections with their peers. An understanding of
the nature of the play interactions of young children with ASD in inclusive settings
can inform the profession about how we are best able to support the development
of social competencies of these children who have additional needs.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
The aim of the present study was to investigate the nature of the play interactions
of young children with ASD within typical inclusive early education settings in
Australia. Specific objectives were:
38 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

1. To explore the level of social competence and degree of social acceptance of

children with ASD within inclusive programs;
2. To examine the nature of the play and social engagement of children with
ASD with their typically developing peers

METHOD
In Queensland, Australia, early childhood special education programs for children
aged 3 to 6 years are provided by Early Childhood Developmental Units (ECDUs).
Attendance at ECDU programs is usually on a sessional basis with children
attending two or more sessions of generally three hours duration each week.
Children who attend an ECDU are also likely to attend a regular, inclusive early
childhood program on the days when they are not at the special education setting.
Children who attend ECDUs have (or are in the process of obtaining) a formal
diagnosis of disability in the areas of physical or sensory impairment, intellectual
impairment, autistic spectrum disorder or language impairment.
Three ECDUs were approached to identify children with a diagnosis of ASD
in their programs who were attending both the ECDU and a regular prior to school
program. Eight prior to school programs that had children from ECDUs attending
were then approached and asked to participate in the project. The teachers
negotiated relevant parental permissions for all children in the program to also
participate in the study. The final sample comprised 12 focus children who
attended both an ECDU and a regular prior to school program and a comparison
group of 30 typically developing children matched for age and sex (all participants
were male).
PRESCHOOL SETTINGS
Prior to school settings in Queensland provide play-based programs in the year
before children enter Year 1 of primary school. Children attend these prior to
school programs (preschools) in the year that they have their fifth birthday.
Preschools offer a part-time and non-compulsory program - either with sessional
programs (usually of 3 hours) on five days per week or whole day programs (usually
6 hours) for five days per fortnight. Preschool programs are staffed by a qualified
teacher, with a degree in early childhood education and a teacher aide who may
hold a certificate level qualification as a teaching assistant. 1.
In Australia, preschools typically provide extended periods for free play
activities both indoors and outdoors. Indoor activity centres that children might
engage in during free play usually include dramatic play areas, a block area, book
corner and tables set up for sensory and expressive play (e.g., painting, collage, play
doh). Outside, there might be fixed and moveable structures for gross motor
activities (e.g., climbing, sliding, swinging), a sandpit and possibly other areas set up
with specific activities (e.g., finger-paint).

1
Note that provision for children of this age in Queensland is now a full-time preparatory year program.
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 39

Participants
The total sample consisted of 42 children participating across the eight preschools.
There were 12 focus children (male) with a diagnosis of ASD and a mean age of
62.3 months (SD – 6.41) and 30 typically developing children (male) with a mean
age of 61.1 months (SD – 8.24). The entirely male sample reflects the higher
incidence of ASD in males as compared to females in the population (Siegel, 1999).
In four preschools, there was one focus child, and, in four preschools, there were
two focus children. This latter situation was not viewed as a difficulty for the study
focus since many preschools in Australia frequently have a number of children with
disabilities included. Having more than one child with a disability enrolled is
therefore more typical of an inclusive setting.
PROCEDURE AND MEASURES
Data were collected for all participating children through individual sessions,
teacher ratings of children’s social competence, and observations of children’s
social and play activities during free play sessions. The data were collected late in
the preschool year in order to ensure that the focus children were familiar with the
setting, peers and teachers. The data collection was completed by one research
assistant. She also made extensive field notes in the settings and of the children that
were useful in developing profiles of the children.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-III, Dunn & Dunn, 1997) was
administered to each participating child. The PPVT-III serves as a measure of
receptive vocabulary and has high reliability and validity (Sattler, 2001). The test
takes approximately ten minutes to administer and is designed for use with
individuals from 2 years to 90 years of age.
Teacher ratings of social competence
Focus children’s social competence was measured by teacher report using the Profile
of Peer Relations. This inventory is used to assess children’s typical social and play
behaviours with their peers (Walker, Irving & Berthelsen, 2002; Walker, 2005).
Teachers were asked to rate the competence of children on the identified social and
play behaviours. The items assess the frequency of positive and negative play
behaviours; strategies used by children when attempting to gain entry into the play
of other children; involvement in conflict situations; and use of conflict resolution
strategies. There are 23 items on the inventory. Ratings are made on a four-point
Likert scale with a range of 1 (rarely) to 4 (almost always). There are three scales
derived from factor analyses on the inventory. These are called Prosocial Behaviour (8
items); Aggressive Behaviour (9 items); and Withdrawn Behaviour (6 items). Item ratings
are summed and mean scores are derived for each scale. Reliability (Cronbach’s
alpha) of the factor scores for Aggressive Behaviour, Prosocial Behaviour and
Withdrawn Behaviour are .91, .89 and .75 respectively (Walker, Irving &
Berthelsen, 2002). The questionnaire has been demonstrated to distinguish between
popular and unpopular preschool age children (see Walker, 2004). The
40 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

questionnaire is self explanatory, dealing with types of behaviour that are easily
visible within preschool environments. No prior training is needed by qualified
early childhood teachers to complete this inventory.
Observations of social engagement and play activities
Observations of social and play activities were made for all participating children in
each early childhood program for two free play periods. Each play period was
approximately one hour in duration. Thus, observational records for all children
were available for a total of two hours of free play across two different occasions.
A time sampling technique was used to record each child’s behaviours on two
dimensions of behaviour (social play and play activities) in each five-minute interval
in each observation session. Thus, the possible number of records for each child
across two hours was 48. Within each 5 minute interval, the observer located the
target child within the play space (indoors or outdoors) and recorded the nature of
the child’s activity (Play Activities) and the nature of the social interactivity (Social
Engagement) with peers or adults who were present.
The Play Activities categories were functional play, gross motor play,
constructive play, dramatic play and games with rules. The Social Engagement
categories used in this study were titled onlooker, alone or solitary play, parallel
play, social play and teacher interaction. The categories for each dimension were
mutually exclusive (i.e., only one behaviour could be recorded for each dimension
of behaviours in any interval). This observational process and the behavioural
categories of interest were adapted from Nabors et al. (1999). The definitions of
the behaviours are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Description of Observational Coding Categories

CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
Social Engagement
Social play Child is actively engaged in play with others with reciprocal verbal
and non-verbal interactions for sustained periods.
Parallel play Child is engaged in play close to others who have similar activities but
is not interacting.
Onlooker play Child is watching activities of others’ without interaction.
Solitary play Child is engaged with materials but not with other children.
Teacher interaction Child is interacting with an adult in the setting.
Play activities
Games with rules The structure and organisation of the play becomes most important
Dramatic play Pretend activities with props including dramatic role play.
Constructive play Play with manipulative materials, such as blocks and puzzles.
Gross motor play Large motor activities with fixed or moveable equipment, including
obstacle courses, balls and bicycles.
Functional play Child uses simple repetitive movements with or without objects.
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 41

Following Nabors et al. (1999), the observational schema was conceptualised in

terms of behaviours requiring different levels of communicative and cognitive
competence – these were considered to be high and low demand behaviours. With
respect to Social Engagement, social play was considered to be of high demand due to
the language competence required to sustain social interaction. Using the same
criteria, parallel play, onlooker behaviour and unoccupied behaviour were low
demand behaviours. For solitary play, no assumptions could be made about
whether it was high or low demand as some solitary tasks (e.g., completing a
puzzle) may place high cognitive demands on children in terms of problem solving
ability.
For Play Activities, engagement in dramatic play and games with rules were
considered to place high demands on children in terms of both communicative and
cognitive competence while functional play was deemed to be low demand. There
were no assumptions made about the level of cognitive demand for constructive
play or teacher interaction. Across any play period, children will engage in play that
may vary considerably with respect to the level of social engagement and the level
of demand placed on the child in terms of social or cognitive complexity. However,
it was expected that overall the children with ASD would spend less time in social
and play activities that placed higher demands on their social and cognitive
competencies.
Approximately 50 observations were available for each child on the
behavioural dimensions that were of interest. Because the period for the free play
periods differed between centres, there was a variation in the time available for
observations and thus the number of observations recorded for each child.
Specifically, across the two observation sessions at five of the centres, there were
50 observations per child. However, at two centres there was less time in free play
sessions so the number of observations per child in those centres ranged from 41
to 46. Ten percent of the observations were independently coded by two trained
observers. Inter-observer agreement for categorising the behaviours on each
dimension for the observation sessions in which two observers participated
averaged 86% agreement.

FINDINGS
In this section, comparisons between the typically developing group and the focus
group of children with ASD are made on the various measures. Non-parametric
tests of significance (Mann-Whitney U, p < .05, two-tailed) were used to test for
differences between the groups of typically developing peers and the group of
focus children with ASD. Non-parametric tests require no assumptions to be met
about the distribution of scores; involve rank ordering to minimize the possible
effects of outliers; and differences in sample size between the groups can be
accommodated (Siegel, 1956). Means, standard deviations and the results of the
tests of significance for group differences on each of the variables of interest are
presented in Table 2.
42 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

PEABODY PICTURE VOCABULARY TEST

Non-parametric tests of significance (Mann-Whitney U, p < .05, two-tailed) were
used to test for differences on the PPVT raw scores between the groups of
typically developing peers and the group of focus children with ASD. The results
from the non-parametric tests, indicated that the focus children scored significantly
lower on this receptive vocabulary test than the typically developing children
(Mann-Whitney U = 51.50, p = .002).
SOCIAL COMPETENCE
The level of social competence of the children was based on teacher reports from
the Profile of Peer Relations. Data from teacher ratings were available for 10 focus
children and 25 comparison children. Children’s scores were derived for prosocial,
aggressive and withdrawn behaviours and an overall rating of peer acceptance. The
results from the non-parametric tests of significance (Mann-Whitney U, p < .05,
two-tailed), found significant differences between the two groups for overall peer
acceptance, prosocial behaviour and withdrawn behaviour. Focus group children
were rated by their teachers as less likely to display prosocial behaviour (Mann-
Whitney U = 13.50, p < .001), more likely to be withdrawn (Mann-Whitney U =
33.50, p = .001), and as less well accepted by their peers (Mann-Whitney U = 57.00,
p = .002) than the typically developing children. Therefore, from the teacher
ratings, the children with ASD in this study were identified as less socially
competent than their typically developing peers.

Table 2. PPVT, Theory of Mind Tasks and Profile of Peer Relations: Means, standard deviations,
and significance of group differences
Focus Children Typically developing children
Measure Mann-Whitney U
(n = 12) (n = 30)
M SD M SD U p
PPVT 46.55 22.17 71.52 12.88 51.50 .002
ToM tasks 0.67 1.30 1.27 1.62 141.50 .220
Social Acceptance 3.10 0.74 3.80 0.50 57.00 .002
Prosocial behaviour 1.84 0.45 3.06 0.56 13.50 .000
Aggressive behaviour 1.94 0.56 1.63 0.65 74.00 .080
Withdrawn behaviour 2.18 0.38 1.60 0.41 33.50 .001
Note: Teacher report data was available for 10 focus children and 25 comparison children

SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT AND PLAY BEHAVIOURS

Social engagement
The proportion of the number of observations in which each child was observed to
be engaged in each type of play to the total number of observations for that child
was calculated. The proportions for each category for focus children and typically
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 43

developing children are presented in Table 3. Non-parametric tests of significance

(Mann-Whitney U, p < .05, two-tailed) were used to test for proportional
differences between the groups on each social engagement category. The results
from the non-parametric tests found significant differences between groups for
solitary play, social play and teacher interaction. Specifically, the focus group
children were less likely to engage in social play (Mann-Whitney U = 89.00, p =
.020), more likely to engage in solitary play (Mann-Whitney U = 81.50, p = .010),
and more likely to be in interactions with the teacher (Mann-Whitney U = 69.00, p
= .003) than the typically developing children.

Table 3. Social engagement: Means, standard deviations and significance of group differences
Social Engagement Focus children Typically developing Mann-Whitney U
(n = 12) children (n = 30)
M SD M SD U p
Solitary play 18.17 12.40 9.14 8.90 81.50 .010
Onlooker play 8.17 6.29 8.34 6.72 170.59 .919
Parallel play 22.17 12.34 24.14 13.12 153.50 .668
Social play 30.00 20.14 44.07 15.24 89.00 .020
Teacher interaction 13.67 11.66 5.10 7.66 69.00 .002

Play activities
The proportional frequency for the number of observations in which each child
was observed to be engaged in each type of play activity to the total number of
observations made for that child was calculated. The proportions for each category
for focus children and typically developing children are presented in Table 4. The
differences between the proportions were tested using the non-parametric test,
Mann-Whitney U. There were no significant differences between the groups on the
proportion of time that children engaged in any of the play activities except for
functional play where results indicated that focus children were more likely than
typically developing children to engage in functional play activities (Mann-Whitney
U = 103.00, p = .043). These results indicate that focus children were able to
engage at comparable levels to typically developing children across many categories
of play activity but that they spent more time in a play activity that could be
considered of low cognitive demand.
44 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

Table 4. Play activities: Means, standard deviations, and significance of group differences
Play Activities Focus children Typically developing Mann-Whitney U
(n = 12) children (n = 30)
M SD M SD U p
Functional play 6.50 8.40 1.79 2.33 103.00 .043
Gross motor play 6.33 6.14 13.64 12.90 111.50 .096
Constructive play 38.17 16.72 36.36 16.01 161.50 .850
Dramatic play 14.33 13.75 15.36 10.36 139.50 .405
Games with Rules 1.00 2.34 2.41 5.67 168.00 1.00

CASE STUDIES OF THE CHILDREN WITH ASD

While the group findings in the preceding quantitative analyses indicated
differences between the groups of children in their social and play behaviours, the
findings also indicated that the group of children with ASD were capable of more
complex behaviours. However, they were less likely to engage in behaviours with
higher social and cognitive demands (e.g. dramatic play) than the typically
developing children. Thus, the need for more adult intervention in the play setting
to support these children in activities and interactions was evident. What is also
masked in reporting the group results is the individual variability in behaviours of
the children with ASD and, of course, there would also be considerable variability
in the behaviours of the children who were considered to have typical
development. It is this variability that should be a primary interest to the teachers
of children with ASD. Observational records can inform teachers’ practice of how
and when to intervene to support play and social engagement. This is where a
social constructivist approach to practice comes into play. By understanding the
zone of proximal development (ZPD) for each child and providing appropriate
scaffolding for children with ASD then important social and cognitive learning can
occur. Critical and informed judgements by teachers are necessary based on
observational information, using such a schema as was developed for observation
in this research.
To provide greater insight about the individuality of the children with ASD
and where and when intervention support might occur, three profiles of the
children with ASD involved in this study are presented. These serve to illustrate
that it is not the diagnostic label but an understanding of the additional needs of
each individual that is important for informed practice. Profiles of Eric, Hayden
and David are presented to illustrate their competencies and the specific additional
needs of each of these children. The profiles are developed from the field notes
made by the observer who visited the children’s early childhood programs as well
as from additional notes made by the teacher on the Profile of Peer Relations.
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 45

Eric
Eric is 4 years and 8 months. On the receptive language measure (PPVT), Eric’s
standard age score was 85 (one standard deviation below the mean of 100). From
the formal observations, compared to the other children observed in his early
childhood program, Eric had the highest number of observations of all the children
for playing alone and the highest levels of onlooker play. Eric often chose to sit in
the reading corner and was the only child in his early childhood program with
directly observed aggressive behaviour. Eric likes to make own rules with games
and expects others to do it his way or else he is likely to become very aggressive
and upset. Eric does engage in make-believe play and enjoys playing with puppets,
felt board pieces and dolls or props from the home corner. Sometimes this play is
parallel with others and he will talk to himself in close proximity to other children
who are also playing with puppets. From the observer field notes:
His teacher aide told me he screams when he tries to write his name because he
can't get the letter E to look even and with parallel lines. I also observed these
behaviours. Eric also does not like to share materials. Although Eric is assigned a
teacher aide she did not need to tag him during free play time. Mainly, she
supports him if there are writing or drawing tasks or if for any reason he is likely
to have a tantrum. During free play time he has fewer tantrums. The worst
tantrum I saw was when the teacher directed the children to draw an Australian
animal they had just been shown. He screamed and pushed the paper off the desk,
while the aide tried to help him to start the drawing.
Eric’s receptive language competence would indicate that he has the potential to
engage in social play. However, it appears that he has difficulty with regulating
negative emotions. The ability to regulate negative emotions is one of the basic
skills that children need to master in order to engage in play with peers (Guralnick
et al., 2006). Observations of Eric’s behaviour indicate that it is likely to be most
beneficial for the teacher to work initially on assisting Eric with emotional
regulation outside the context of peer relationships and then to carefully scaffold
small group interactions with peers.
Hayden
Hayden is 5 years and 7 months. Receptive language competence on the PPVT was
low for age (standard age score of 68, more than 2 standard deviations below the
standard mean score of 100). For the observations of all the children observed in
the centre that Hayden attended, he had the highest engagement in social play
observations and the highest frequency of interactions with his teacher. His
behaviours seemed less typical of a child with ASD. He had the lowest observed
levels of playing alone, parallel play or onlooker play. Hayden often led dramatic
play, inventing or starting the game in which other boys participated. He initiated
many interactions with peers during outside play. However, during inside play,
Hayden seemed less able to fit in with the program. For example, he interfered
with another child’s blocks and would not share toys. He was observed playing
running games inside until the teacher asked him to sit with her for an activity. The
observer’s field notes indicated:
46 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

… I observed Hayden asking for help to open a juice box by holding up the box
to teacher and saying ‘open’ while he looked in another direction. It seemed
difficult for him to understand how to make a polite request even when prompted
by the teacher aide.
During the one-on-one assessment with the PPVT, the observer recorded:
… Hayden sometimes became angry, saying to me ‘I told you’ or ‘I told you
already’ when he hadn’t made any response at all. His attention span seemed short
and he became agitated.
Hayden had a much defined sense of right and wrong and regularly reported to
adults any misdemeanours of others, requesting justice for himself. He was not
disruptive during group-times and was very helpful at tidy-up time. However, he
frequently exhibited quite possessive behaviour about materials during play (e.g.,
blocks or the pirate treasure chest).
These observations suggest that Hayden needs to develop what Guralnick et
al. (2006) referred to as the foundational process of shared understanding. Hayden
needs help understanding ownership and taking turns. While Hayden is social and
engaged in play, despite his low receptive language competence, the ability to share
and take turns is basic to social interactions. Hayden’s interactions with his peers
could be therefore be enhanced through development of a shared understanding
including knowledge of social rules operating in the play context. Hayden’s
participation can be supported by the teacher through her planning for Hayden and
his peers to engage in cooperative and collaborative activities.
David
David is aged 4 years and 5 months. Receptive language competence on the PPVT
was average (standard age score of 89, less than 1 standard deviations below the
standard mean score of 100). For the observations of all the children at the early
childhood centre that David attended, he had the highest number of observations
for teacher interactions and for games with rules, primarily, because he was
engaged with the teacher aide in games with cards and picture dominoes. He also
had the highest number of observations of the children observed in his centre for
aggressive behaviours. From the observer’s field notes on his behaviour during the
language assessment:
David worked well with the PPVT. At first he wanted to take over the book and
make the pages turn the right way (like a normal book). Then he wanted to say the
names of all the pictures. Somehow he found the picture of the elephants and that
was very exciting for him. He told the teachers and ran around the room and then
looked at the picture for a long time. We got through the testing well but it wasn’t
easy for him to fall in with the ‘game’.
From the teacher’s comments on the Profile of Peer Relations, it was indicated that
David is often aggressive and disruptive. When he wants to join other children’s
play, he directly asks to join the play but then he tries to change the group’s
activities. He never minimises his requests or compromises and always seeks an
adult to resolve conflict. If things are not solved to his satisfaction he insults his
peers if they don't give in to him. From the observer’s field notes of David’s play:
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 47

David doesn't share easily and often interrupts other children’s play to take some
object from them (sometimes 3 or 4 times in the one session). During one
observation session he was playing snap and had trouble sharing, gathering all the
cards to himself. He got very upset – yelling and hitting the table when the rules
were broken. In another session, a girl took some of the lego he was playing with
and he started shouting very loudly, not crying but angry, until the teacher came.
Observations of David suggest that he needs assistance in developing both of the
foundational processes of shared understanding (ownership, taking turns) and
emotional regulation (Guralnick et al., 1996). However, he also needs support with
the important social tasks of peer group entry, maintaining play and conflict
resolution (Guralnick & Groom, 1988). As David acquires and refines his skills
through adult support, his participation will be enhanced. Interaction and
cooperation between peers in the setting is essential to cognitive and social
learning.
Summary on the case studies
Children with ASD present special challenges in the early educational system.
Important responsibilities are placed on teachers and parents to determine the
unique characteristics of each child and match appropriate educational
interventions and practices that will allow the child to make progress. Before
children can move on to the challenging social task of engaging in social play, they
need to have developed the foundation processes identified by Guralnick et al.
(1996) as essential for competent peer-related social interaction. These foundation
processes of emotional regulation and shared understanding form the basic skills
that children need to master before they can effectively enter groups, resolve
conflicts or maintain play. Children learn best in a context where meaning is co-
constructed and scaffolded by more able members of the community. Vygotsky
(1978) emphasised the social orientation of cognitive development: ‘what the child
is able to do in collaboration today, he will be able to do independently tomorrow’
(p. 206). Features of social constructivist theory that contribute to understanding
how children might learn within inclusive programs include an emphasis on
learning through engagement, the role of social activity in learning, the
contributions of the active learner to his or her own development and the
importance of supporting learning through the ZPD (Vygotsky, 1978). Thus,
children learn within relationships and targeting of specific skills such as sharing,
taking turns or learning how to regulate emotional states is best approached as a
social enterprise, as a transaction between individuals and their social and physical
environment within a community in which diversity is celebrated and the interests
and aspirations of each child are encouraged.

DISCUSSION
A social constructivist approach requires the teacher to be active in engagement
and to facilitate the opportunities in which peers can support the learning of
children with ASD. For any individual child, the teacher must take account of the
child’s cognitive and communicative competence. Although the main goal of
48 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

inclusive practice for young children with disabilities is to enable the development
of meaningful social relationships with their peers, previous research has suggested
that, in fact, these children are often socially isolated or excluded within inclusive
early childhood settings (Guralnick et al., 2006). The present study explored the
social engagement of young children with ASD in Australian preschool settings.
This group of children, due to their specific disability, could be expected to
experience particular difficulties with social relationships.
Overall, the results indicated that, as a group, the focus children with ASD
had less social engagement in the inclusive settings compared to the typically
developing children. This is in line with previous research which has documented
similar patterns of results. However, when the individual data for the children with
ASD is analysed, it is evident, that as for typically developing children, there is
considerable variability within the group in social and behavioural functioning. This
needs to be considered when interpreting the aggregated group results. It is not a
diagnostic label, in itself, that is important to teacher planning but the individual
needs of each child.
The aggregated group observational data on social engagement revealed
significant differences between the focus children with ASD and the typically
developing children in the extent to which they engaged in play which could be
considered to be of high social demand. Specifically, focus children were
significantly more likely to spend time in solitary play and less likely to spend time
in social play than the typically developing children. However, these findings need
to be considered together with the significantly poorer scores that the focus
children received on the PPVT. Given that communication is such an essential
feature of social play with peers, it is perhaps not surprising that the focus children
were less socially engaged. In fact, some recent research has indicated that limited
communication skills are strongly associated with peer acceptance and rejection for
young children with disabilities in inclusive settings (Odom, Zercher, Li, Marquart
Sandall & Brown, 2006). Taken together, these results clearly demonstrate that
increased support is needed for young children with limited communication skills
in order to increase their social engagement. Our data indicated that adult
interaction did, in fact, occur for a higher percentage of the time for the focus
children with ASD than the typically developing children. However, adult
interaction that is not clearly focused on supporting children’s social engagement
may in fact be counterproductive. For example, Harper and McCluskey (2003)
suggested that increased adult-child interaction may lead to a low percentage of
peer interaction and may actually interfere with children’s opportunities to engage
in meaningful social interactions with their peers. Finding the right balance of
scaffolded support for productive peer-to-peer interactions is clearly important.
With respect to play activities, while the focus children were significantly
more likely to engage in functional play requiring low cognitive demand than the
typically developing children, there were no other significant differences in play
activity. In other words, the focus children engaged in most types of play activity at
comparable levels to the typically developing children. These results provide some
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 49

evidence to support the impression that the focus children were capable of more
extensive and productive social engagement than the programs, in general,
afforded. In the absence of appropriate intervention however, children may be
unlikely to develop the skills required to enable them to sustain reciprocal
friendships with their typically developing peers. Previous research has
demonstrated that the beliefs that teachers hold about their role in mediating peer
interactions will influence the level of social support provided. For example, File
(1994) found that when teachers believe that the development of social skills is
primarily a function of the child’s nature or capability, they are likely to provide a
low level of support for social play. It is essential that teaching and intervention
strategies are systematically designed to support the social engagement of young
children with disabilities, and specifically targeted to the individual needs of the
children in the inclusive settings (Odom, 2002).
An understanding of the level of social and play participation for any
individual child, allows a teacher to consider where the child is operating in the
ZPD and devise strategies to scaffold their social and cognitive learning according
to their competency level. The aim is to place slightly more demand on the child to
participate in higher levels of complex play and to capitalize on teachable moments,
for example, to coach the child in a specific skill, such as entering a play group. In
order for social engagement to occur, children need to develop skills related to
initiating and sustaining interactions, successfully entering play groups and the
ability to maintain play (Broadhead, 2001, 2006; Guralnick, 2001). When adults are
responsive and child-centred in their practice, children with disabilities are more
likely to initiate play with their peers and make greater gains in communication
skills (Mahoney, Robinson & Powell, 1992; Yoder, Kaiser & Alpert, 1991).
Progress in learning for children can be enhanced or impeded by social
factors such as teachers’ beliefs about young children’s capacities to learn and the
play opportunities provided for them to engage with others. Teachers can help
children to build relationships with peers, nurture reciprocity and scaffold sustained
interactions. From a social constructivist perspective, learning does not occur solely
within the child but within social interactions with others. The quality of teachers’
knowledge, thinking and decision making (Bennett, Wood & Rogers, 1997) and
capacity to take advantage of teachable moments (Brown, Odom & Conroy, 2001)
are key factors in their ability to provide the scaffolding needed for learning within
inclusive classrooms.
Social constructivist approaches recognise the contribution that individuals
make to their own learning but also emphasise the important role of the teacher in
supporting cognitive and social development. Social constructivism can inform
effective practices in teaching to diversity and can be informed by key principles:
the development of community of learners to accommodate and value everyone;
direct instruction by adults so that children with ASD acquire functional
competence in specific skills; promoting social relationships as the catalyst for
learning so that materials and activities provide all young children with
opportunities for cooperative play; and providing opportunities for children to play
50 International Journal of Early Childhood, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2008

together in activities that reflect their interests which, in turn, motivate them to
engage in cooperative play (Mallory & New, 1994). By basing practice on social
constructivist principles that place relationships at the centre of the curriculum, all
children have increased opportunities to engage with others in collaborative
learning. Through transactions with more skilled partners, children - including
those with ASD – will have the opportunity to become part of the learning
community, play together and make friends.

REFERENCES
Ainscow, M. (2007). Taking an inclusive turn. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 7(1), 3-7.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders-Fourth edition-Text
revision. Washington, DC: Author.
Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bennett, N., Wood, E., & Rogers, S. (1997). Teaching through play. Teachers’ thinking and classroom practice.
Buckingham, UK: Open University.
Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. (1996). Tools of mind: The Vygostskian approach to early childhood education. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Broadhead, P. (2001). Investigating sociability and cooperation in four and five year olds in reception class
settings. International Journal of Early Years Education, 9(1), 24 – 35.
Broadhead, P. (2006). Developing an understanding of young children’s learning through play: The place of
observation, interaction and reflection. British Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 191 – 207.
Brown, W. H., Odom. S. L., & Conroy, M. A. (2001). An intervention hierarchy for promoting young
children’s peer interactions in natural environments. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 21(3), 162 –
175.
Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, L.M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Third Edition. Circle Pines, MN: American
Guidance Service.
File, N. (1994). Children’s play, teacher-child interactions and teacher beliefs in integrated early childhood
programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9, 223-240.
Guralnick, M.J. (1993). Developmentally appropriate practice in the assessment and intervention of children’s
peer relations. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 13(3), 344-360.
Guralnick, M. J. (1999). The nature and meaning of social integration of young children with mild
developmental delays in inclusive settings. Journal of Early Intervention, 22(1), 70-86.
Guralnick, M.J. (2001). A developmental systems model for early intervention. Infants and Young Children, 14(2),
1-18.
Guralnick, M. J. (2002). Involvement with peers: Comparisons between young children with and without
Down’s syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 46(5), 379-393.
Guralnick, M. J., Connor, R. T., Hammond, M., Gottman, J. M., & Kinnish, K. (1996). Immediate effects of
mainstreamed settings on the social interactions and social integration of preschool children. American
Journal on Mental Retardation, 100(4), 359-377.
Guralnick, M. J., & Groom, J.M. (1988). Friendships of preschool children in mainstreamed playgroups.
Developmental Psychology, 24, 595-604.
Guralnick, M. J., Hammond, M. A., Connor, R. T., & Neville, B. (2006). Stability, change, and correlates of the
peer relationships of young children with mild developmental delays. Child Development, 77(2), 312 – 324.
Harper, L.V., & McCluskey, K.S. (2003). Teacher-child and child-child interactions in inclusive preschool
settings: Do adults inhibit peer interactions? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 163-184.
Hestenes, L. L., & Carroll, D. E. (2000). The play interactions of young children with and without disabilities:
Individual and environmental influences. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 229-246.
Mahoney, G., Robinson, C., & Powell, A. (1992). Focusing on parent-child interaction: The bridge to
developmentally appropriate practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 12(1), 105-120.
Sue Walker and Donna Berthelsen 51

Mallory, B. L., & New, R. (1994). Social constructivist theory and principles of inclusion: Challenges for early
childhood special education. Journal of Special Education, 28(3), 332-337.
Malmskog, S., & McDonnell, A. P. (1999). Teacher mediated facilitation of engagement by children with
developmental delays in inclusive preschools. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19(4), 203-216.
Nabors, L., Willoughby, J., & Badawi, M. A. (1999). Relations between activities and cooperative playground
interactions for preschool-age children with special needs. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities,
11(4), 339-352.
National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. Committee on Educational Interventions for
Children with Autism. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Autism. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Odom, S.L. (2002). Narrowing the question: Social integration and characteristics of children with disabilities
in inclusive settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 167-170.
Odom, S. L., Zercher, C., Li, S., Marquart, J. M., Sandall, S., & Brown, W. H. (2006). Social acceptance and
rejection of preschool children with disabilities: A mixed-method analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology,
98(4), 807-823.
Penn, H. (2005). Understanding early childhood: Issue and controversies. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University
Press.
Roskos, K.A., & Christie, J.F. (2001). Under the lens: The play-literacy relationship in theory and practice. Early
Education and Care, 11, 321-337.
Sattler, J. (2001). Assessment of children: Cognitive applications. Santiago: Sattler.
Siegel, S. (1999). Evaluation of high-functioning autism. In G. Goldstein, P. D. Nussbaum & S. R. Beers
(Eds.), Siegel, S. (1956). Neuropsychology (pp.109-134). New York: Plenum.
Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics from the behavioral sciences. Sydney: McGraw Hill.
Walker, S. (2004). Teacher reports of social behaviour and peer acceptance in early childhood: Sex and social
status differences. Child Study Journal, 34(1), 13-28.
Walker, S. (2005) Gender differences in the relationship between young children’s peer-related social
competence and individual differences in theory of mind. Journal of Genetic Psychology 166(3), 297-312.
Walker, S., & Berthelsen, D. (2007). The social participation of young children with developmental disabilities
in inclusive early childhood programs. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education 2(2).
Walker, S., Irving, K., & Berthelsen, D. (2002). Gender influences on preschool children’s social problem
solving strategies. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(2), 197-210.
Yirmiya, N., Solomonica-Levi, D., & Shulman, C. (1996). Theory of mind abilities in individuals with autism,
Down syndrome, and mental retardation of unknown etiology: The role of age and intelligence. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37(8), 1003-1014.
Yoder, P.J., Kaiser, A. P., & Alpert, C. L. (1991). An exploratory study of the interaction between language
teaching methods and child characteristics. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 155-167.
Vygotsky, L. (1976). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. In J. Bruner, A. Jolly, & K. Sylva
(Eds.), Play: Its role in development and evolution (pp. 537-554). New York: Basic Books.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press. (Original work published in 1933).

Correspondence about this paper should be addressed to:

Dr Sue Walker
Sue.Walker@qut.edu.au
Centre for Learning Innovation
Queensland University of Technology
Kelvin Grove Brisbane 4059
Queensland Australia