Educators’ engagement with children with autism spectrum disorder in a learning environment with multiple technologies in Finland and China

Figures & data

Table 1. Information on the participating children.

	Child 1	Child 2	Child 3	Child 4	Child 5	Child 6	Child 7
Country	Finland	Finland	Finland	China	China	China	China
Age	6	8	11	7	8	9	12
Diagnosis^a	Moderate intellectual disability (F71.0), Childhood autism (F84.0)	Childhood autism (F84.0)	Unspecified intellectual disability (F79.0), Childhood autism (F84.0)	ASD (CARS-2 score: 43)	ASD (CARS-2 score: 45)	ASD (CARS-2 score: 52)	ASD (CARS-2 score: 49)
Characteristics	Delayed but sentence-length speech. Difficulties in understanding instructions. Perceptional, attentional, and motor difficulties. Engages in eye contact and interactions with others.	Delayed and occasionally repetitive speech. New situations and people difficult. Scarce eye contact. Easily distracted. Understands clear sentences and benefits from support and clear instructions.	Responsive but not initiative. Delayed and occasionally repetitive speech. Benefits from clear instructions and alternative communication methods. Needs prompting to act. Challenges in motor coordination.	Delayed repetitive speech. Restricted interest in balls. Needs prompting to act. Challenges in motor coordination.	Delayed expressive speech and occasionally repetitive speech. Restricted interest in balls. Needs prompting to act. Challenges in motor coordination.	Delayed repetitive speech. Needs prompting to act. Challenges in motor coordination, fine motor skills and gross motor skills.	Delayed receptive speech and no expressive speech. Needs prompting to act. Challenges in motor coordination.

^aThe Finnish diagnoses are according to the ICD-10 criteria.

Figure 1. Symbol-matching, Lego-building, storytelling, and Kinect-playing.

Table 2. Inter-rater reliability in the Finnish and Chinese samples.

	Finnish sample	Chinese sample
Educators’ direct instructions	.990	.994
Educators’ questions	.987	.995
Children’s verbal responses	.854	.996
Children’s behavioral responses	.980	.993

Note: In the Finnish sample, inter-rater reliability was calculated based on the data at the symbol-matching station due to limited availability of coders to code the entire data set including all the four workstations. The Chinese sample included all the four workstations.

Table 3. Average frequencies of educators’ direct instructions and questions for the children at the four workstations.

	Storytelling		Symbol-matching		Lego-building		Kinect-playing
	DI	Q	DI	Q	DI	Q	DI	Q
Child 1	32.57	6.29	19.57	14.43	29.71	9.14	9	0.14
Child 2	6.13	5.13	9.5	9.5	16	1.63	6.5	0.13
Child 3	21.38	6.38	6.75	7	39.38	11.63	9.38	1.25
Child 4	15.7	26.8	16.8	73.5	28.5	24.6	24.8	2.9
Child 5	20.22	57.89	6.44	67.22	31.11	46.11	36.89	4.78
Child 6	11.11	59.67	6.11	25.78	14.89	28.22	22.11	3.22
Child 7	11.88	40.13	8.88	14.75	13.63	36.63	21.38	4.5
Total	118.99	202.29	74.05	212.18	173.22	157.96	130.06	16.92

Note: DI = Direct Instructions. Q = Questions. Data for Child 4 consists of 10 sessions, for Child 5 and Child 6 9 sessions, for Child 2, Child 3, and Child 7 8 sessions, and for Child 1 7 sessions.

Table 4. Average frequencies of children’s verbal and behavioral responses to educators’ verbal instructions at the four workstations.

	Storytelling		Symbol-matching		Lego-building		Kinect-playing
	VR	BR	VR	BR	VR	BR	VR	BR
Child 1	3.71	29.29	9.57	27.29	7.14	33.43	1.57	25.43
Child 2	3.63	6.75	9.13	10	16.88	0.88	0	7.5
Child 3⁠	3.38	23.5	1.63	13.38	5	46.13	0	11.88
Child 4	21.2	10.7	50.3	67.1	20	67.1	2.1	18.5
Child 5	32.33	8.22	39.56	73.56	36	64.22	4	19.33
Child 6	51.33	4.89	26.33	115.22	12.67	115.33	1.89	16.67
Child 7	34.38	5.25	10.25	96.88	35.75	55.88	4.75	19
Total	149.96	88.6	146.77	403.43	133.44	382.97	14.31	118.31

Note: VR = Verbal response; BR = Behavioral response. Data for Child 4 consists of 10 sessions, for Child 5 and Child 6 9 sessions, for Child 2, Child 3 and Child 7 8 sessions, and for Child 1 7 sessions.