The Vantage Reading Program has changed over time in very significant ways. Our ongoing research has helped us develop deeper and deeper understandings of the connection between vision and reading success. As this happened we changed our programs to correlate with our findings. This continues to this very day.
One major change is in the name of our programs. In the beginning our programs were under the umbrella called the “Bonding the Senses” programs. This umbrella of programs is now called “Vantage Reading” programs. All were directly developed by Mrs. Alice Ross and this is still the case.
Our early work tied sensory integration with our vision therapy programs. We have found the programs are more successful and take much less time without this connection.
The following independent study with autistic students was done when the program was called the“Bonding the Senses” program. For continuity we have left this title in this copy of the study. A gentle reminder that this program has evolved into the Vantage Reading program and can be now be found through www.vantagereading.com.
* * * * * * * * * *
SENSORY INTEGRATION AND AUTISM
A Research project Completed
by
Sharon de la Mare, M.A.
Calgary, Alberta
June 1989
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to study the effect of a specific program, Bonding the Senses ,(Ross, 1986), on motor function skills of autistic children. The program was administered to 6 subjects ranging in age from 6 years 8 months to 8 years 4 months. The mean chronological age was 6 years 3 months. All of the subjects were independently diagnosed as autistic using DSM III criteria (APA, 1980). There were 4 males and 2 females. The subjects were pretested using an adapted form of a sensory integration data collection form developed by Ruth Smith, a physiotherapist with R.E.A.C.H. This test assessed exploratory behaviours, reach on sight and sound, and motility. The targeted intervention took place 5 days per week for 1 hour per day, for a 3 month period of time. Post testing was then done using the same instrument used for the pre-testing. Pre and post test data was then compared. In all cases there was a significant increase in responsiveness.
RESULTS
Pre-test Data Post Treatment Data
Subject #1
Exploratory Behaviour 3 min. 35 sec Ex. Beh. 37 min. 11 sec.
Sight 36/54 Sight 54/54
Sound 1/27 Sound 27/27
Motor 10/135 Motor 125/135
Subject #2
11 min. 40 sec. 43 min. 33 sec.
18/54 54/54
1/27 15/27
10/135 40/135
Subject #3
1 min. 40 sec. 32 min. 41 sec
18/54 54/54
3/27 27/27
120/135 135/135
Subject #4
11 min. 49 sec. 44 min. 3 sec.
24/54 54/54
11/27 25/27
70/135 125/135
Subject #5
2 min. 4 sec. 43 min. 12 sec.
40/54 54/54
0/27 27/27
55/135 125/135
Subject #6
2 min. 5 sec. 10 min. 9 sec.
34/54 50/54
2/27 27/27
65/135 85/135