The goal of the Murdoch Early Intervention Program (MEIP) was to replicate the intensive early intervention program designed by Lovaas for children with severe developmental disability and autism. This paper describes the objectives, methods, and the results as of 24 months. Although MEIP differs from Lovaas's model in several respects, and the children have been generally less capable at the outset, results are interpreted tentatively as being as predicted. Four of 9 experimental children have shown signs of approaching normal levels of functioning whereas 1 of 5 control children has made significant progress. Improvements in the remainder of the children are rated as moderate to minimal. These preliminary results are presented to encourage others working with children with autism and other difficult-to-teach children to publish their methods and results. The small number of children in any one locality, and the high cost of controlled studies indicates the necessity for accumulating findings across service providers.Lovaas (1987) reported that approximately half the children who had participated in an intensive early intervention program achieved levels of performance that fell within the normal range on a variety of measures by the time they reached primary school. None of the children in his control group made comparable gains. McEachin, Smith, and Lovaas (1993) followed up these children as adolescents and found that 8 of the 9 "good outcome" children were indistinguishable from a sample of randomly selected peers. That is, they displayed no significant autistic symptomatology.Given the poor prognosis associated with autism, these results are extraordinary and have been the subject of considerable discussion

The clinical presentation of EDs differs among children and adolescents, with eating pathology and behavioral symptoms less prominent among children. Frontline health professionals require knowledge of these differences to assist with early detection, diagnosis, and prognosis.

No abstract

SUMMARY.The parents of 40 children in two grade 1 classrooms were randomly assigned to receive brief training in one of four instructional methods for helping their child to read or to hear their children read at home. The tutoring methods were Hearing Reading, Paired Reading, Pause, Prompt, Praise, and Direct Instruction. The results showed that the use of the additional instructional strategies included in the Direct Instruction and Paired Reading tutoring methods led to faster progress by the children receiving them than by children whose parents simply heard them read. Some theoretical and practical implications of the study are discussed.

No abstract