Attwood (2007) states that learners with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) only start to feel different when they are in a more formal school environment and extra pressure is put on them to achieve. This feeling of awareness of difference becomes apparent where social interactions and independent problem-solving are expected. Numerous studies have identified weak central coherence (WCC) and global information processing (GIP) as two consistent character trait challenges amongst learners with ASD (Frith 1989; Happé & Frith 2006; Pina, Flavia & Patizia 2013). The reason why this study focussed on WCC and GIP challenges was that, according to Happé and Frith (2006:2), the notion of WCC and GIP could address both the strengths and the challenges. When a task requires an individual to extract global meaning from many details, it may pose a challenge to an individual with ASD. Being able to pick out finite details from busy surroundings could be advantageous for these individuals with ASD. Having a fixated and narrow focus of attention may lead to a sense of supremacy rather than a challenge (Happé & Frith 2006).

In South Africa, it was only after inclusive education (IE) became part of the school system (National Department of Education [NDoE] 2001) that teachers started to accommodate and accept learners with ASD and recognise the unique way that these learners perceive and interact within their classroom environment. Although South African teachers are willing to accommodate learners with ASD in their private or government mainstream classes, they often are not adequately trained to accommodate these learners (Equal Education Law Centre [EELC] 2016). They have limited understanding of the unique combination of character traits that these learners possess (Stofile, Green & Soudien 2018). They state that it is unsurprising that teachers find it difficult to modify their curricula and classroom environments to address these learners’ unique learning needs. Creating awareness and understanding amongst teachers of learners with ASD character traits will enable them to make modifications to the curriculum, classroom environments and teaching styles so as to integrate these learners and to allow them to experience optimal learning. It is therefore important for teachers to become cognisant of their learners’ difficulties, unique combination of ASD character traits each one possesses and the effect it has on their academic performance. Learners with ASD in school environments must not be viewed as exhibiting a collection of isolated symptoms, but as learners with syndrome-specific strengths and challenges (Happé & Frith 2006).

Frith (1989), when talking about central cohesion, uses the analogy of trees. She believes that a person with a strong central coherence when looking at a forest of trees would see the forest. A person with WCC would see individual trees. Frith believes that individuals on the autism spectrum have a detail-focussed cognitive style because they ‘… cannot see the wood from the trees’, meaning that they are unable to develop a general understanding of a situation because they are too focussed on the finer details. Jolliffe and Baron-Cohen (1997), O’Riordan et al. (2001) and Baron-Cohen et al. (2009) agree with Frith (1989) when they state that this excellent attention to detail is only seen in individuals with ASD, yet some lack the cognition to perceive global, cohesive concepts. This results in learners perceiving the world as fragmented, disorganised and as a collection of unrelated details.

When a task requires an individual to extract global meaning from many details, it may pose a problem to an individual with ASD (Happé & Frith 2006). Being able to pick out extreme detail from surrounding masses could, in some instances, be advantageous for individuals with ASD. Some learners with ASD may experience ‘savant skills’, which account for advanced abilities to memorise extreme detail, such as in Mathematics, Arts and Music and Electronics (Dawson & Heaton 2013; Happé & Booth 2008; Happé & Frith 2006; Mottron et al. 2013; Wallace 2008).

Whilst there are potential advantages to WCC processing styles (e.g. attention to detail and a narrow focus on attention), Koldewyn et al. (2013) state that there are disadvantages in a world set up for a GIP style of interaction within one’s environment (Behrmann et al. 2006; Happé & Frith1996). Global information processing means ‘… the ability to integrate piecemeal information into a coherent whole; to grasp the “gist” of a situation’ (Happé & Frith 2006:78). They argue that experiencing GIP challenges often results in individuals with ASD being unable to ‘see the big picture’, and becoming overly focussed on details, at the expense of a global perspective. This behaviour, according to Happé et al. (2006), can negatively affect an individual’s ability to integrate environmental stimuli into a coherent whole.

According to Knott and Dunlop (2007), without an adequate GIP style, individuals with ASD find it difficult to see connections and generalise from one area to another. This challenge occurs, according to Filippello, Marino and Oliva (2013:3), because individuals with ASD process information ‘… piece by piece, and the information thus obtained is isolated and fragmented’. When learners with ASD focus upon one specific detail only, they can display behaviours of ‘… an insistence of sameness of routine, difficulty with categorising and generalising information across environments or audiences’ (Brooks 2016:9).

Both the behavioural responses and social adaptation of learners with ASD are influenced by WCC and GIP processing styles. Lawson (2011) indicates that these learners may or may not understand what comes next, not be able to complete a sequence of events, fail to see others’ points of view and not adhere to new routines and changes.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) (APA 2013:50) criteria for ASD include a fuller description of these WCC and GIP challenges: ‘… insistence on sameness, inflexible adherence to routines, or ritualised patterns of verbal or non-verbal behaviour … highly restricted, fixated interests that are abnormal in intensity or focus’. During an investigation into global and local processing in learners with autism, Koldewyn et al. (2013:09) agree that if given a choice, learners with ASD were ‘… less likely to report global information than their typical developing peers’. They argue, however, that when explicitly instructed to report global information, they performed similarly to learners who were not on the autism spectrum. Because WCC and GIP do not explain all aspects of ASD, Syriopoulou Deli, Varveris and Geronta (2016:114) suggest that individuals with ASD should be considered as a group of learners with a variety of behavioural and social strengths and challenges. This leads to theorists developing a general profile of learners with ASD and may help in better understanding their daily challenges. The latest research on WCC and GIP show that individuals with ASD can process global information as well as typically developed individuals if instructed to do so, but might need more time and show a preference, or advantage and interference from the local level (Booth & Happé 2018; Spaniol 2018).

The aim of this article was to understand the role of WCC and GIP in three learners, clinically diagnosed with ASD, during teacher–learner verbal interactions in different inclusive classrooms. The three 9-year-old participants were in Grade 3 and were experiencing problems with their teachers’ instructions, where they were expected to interact using more problem-solving skills. There is a lack of appropriate national and international research conducted in this small niche area; hence, this research can be seen as a pioneer project which will open up similar fields of research for later inquiry.

Three qualitative case studies were conducted within a critical interpretive research paradigm. This collective case study approach allowed the non-participant researcher to immerse herself, from a distance, in the verbal responses of the three learners to familiarise herself with their social worlds, and to look for possible patterns in their lived worlds (De Vos et al. 2011). This approach generated a rich narrative, forming a deeper understanding of the WCC and GIP challenges that the three Grade 3 learners were experiencing when they received task instructions from their teachers.

The criteria for selecting the sample included learners who had been clinically diagnosed with ASD by an independent educational psychologist. The three learners with ASD had recently transitioned into a more formal Grade 3 classroom environment and were either in a mainstream or special school; their parents gave their consent for this study. Eventually, there were three 9-year-old conveniently selected learners. One male participant attended a government inclusive mainstream school (School R – pseudonym) and two participants (one female and one male) attended the same private school (School P): both schools were located in the Western Cape. The three classroom teachers of the learners formed part of the sample and, in some cases, as explained in Table 1, their support staff members were involved in the observations.

All the teachers involved in this study mentioned that they had no formal experience with learners with ASD, but all had done their own personal research on how to help these learners in their classrooms. Their personal research helped them to appreciate with understanding the importance of implementing strategies that would assist these learners to adapt to new changes, helping the learners find a starting point in an exercise or making sure they knew what was expected of them; for example, not to use idiomatic language or jargon, if possible, and to be sensitive to learners’ sensory overload. They were all supported by their principals, with whom they had regular meetings, including the facilitator who had knowledge of how to help the learner she was assigned to.

The researcher collected data by using an extensively pre-planned observation schedule (Appendix 1), making detailed notes of the classroom environments, settings and learner behaviours, which she felt could have a bearing on the observed learners’ responses to their teachers’ task instructions (Fox & Bayat 2007). The observations were pre-arranged and approved by the principals and teachers and were conducted in the classrooms from 08:00 h to 14:30 h, and in one session with the classroom facilitator who was assisting the learner. The researcher adopted a non-participant observation approach in which she was a passive observer at all times. Learner T was observed for 5 days, and Learners L and E were each observed for 4 days until data saturation. Two other observation sessions were conducted when the learners were with the librarian and the Physical Education (PE) staff member. In all the observation sessions, the researcher focussed on how the learners reacted to the teacher–learner task instructions, she observed their environment, their interactions within the classroom and their behavioural responses. The teachers’ responses to the learners with ASD were also noted. A few disadvantages of using observations for data collection tools were experienced by the researcher. For her to remain a non-participant observer, as unobtrusive as possible (de Vos et al. 2011:3182), and to ensure that she had no influence on the outcome of the learners’ behaviour and social interactions (Moon et al. 2016), she either sat on a chair in the doorway of the classroom or observed the learners from a window in the corridor.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted 3 months after the observations and were used to explore the teachers’ own understandings, experiences, beliefs and motives, in their own words: how they supported and assisted the learners with ASD in their classrooms. Three interviews were conducted with the teachers in their individual classrooms. Similar probing questions were used to encourage teachers to elaborate upon their answers and enabled them to stay focussed on the topic (Babbie 2013; Hammell, Carpenter & Dyck 2005). Examples of main and probing questions are included in Appendix 2. Individual, audio-taped interviews were conducted, which permitted face-to-face discussions between the researcher and the teachers (Edwards & Holland 2013). This procedure had the advantage of providing social cues: voice and intonation, which could be recorded, whilst body language could be noted on the interview schedule. This nuance added a more in-depth interpretation of the dialogue between the researcher and the teacher (Opdenakker2006).

As this was not a comparative study, each of the three learners’ and teachers’ observation results (13 in total) and the three audio-recorded interviews were transcribed, sent back to the teachers to check for accuracy and inductively analysed. After reading all the observation data numerous times, the researcher attempted to interpret the learners’ behaviours and reactions to teacher–learner task instructions by looking for similarities and differences and colour coding them (Henning, Van Rensburg & Smith 2007). Three themes emerged within the categories of WCC and GIP: predicting what comes next, not adhering to others’ points of view and not adhering to new routine and changes. When analysing the interviews, the researcher identified one theme within the categories of WCC and GIP, implementing secure and structured routines.

To achieve objectivity and trustworthiness in this study, both the observation schedule and interview schedules were pre-tested before the main data were collected. A school principal and an independent educational psychologist offered critical feedback, such as word and sentence clarity and improvements of the structure of the schedule, to allow for more detailed comments about the teachers, additional staff and the participants’ reactions to instructions. These suggestions were included in the final schedules with more confidence so as to gain the most trustworthy data (Yin 2009). By using data source triangulation, the researcher was able to compare information collected from the three observations and three interviews (Denzin 2006). All the transcriptions were given back to the teachers to check for accuracy; this member checking ensured credibility and confirmed that the researcher had data that were true and an accurate reflection of the participants’ contributions (Babbie & Mouton 2007). This enabled the researcher to explain more fully the richness and complexity of the processes by which the three participants with ASD made sense of their worlds and interacted socially and behaviourally within their classroom environment (Cohen, Manion & Morrison 2008).

Ethical clearance was obtained from the university where the researcher was registered (EFEC 6–9/2014), and the Western Cape Education Department provided a letter giving the researcher permission to conduct research in the two schools. Permission was obtained from the two principals, and the three class teachers, a class facilitator, the librarian and the PE teacher gave informed consent. Because the three learners were very young, informed consent letters were obtained from two mothers and one father. The three learners were identified as Learner T, L and E and the teachers were identified as Teachers SM, GR and CJ to maintain anonymity. All participants were assured that strict confidentiality procedures would be adhered to regarding the observation of their children. Assurance was given that their children’s identity would not be revealed in the study, and that during the non-participatory observation process their children would not be aware that they were being observed.

This section presents the results for each learner, providing examples of their social cognitive WCC and GIP challenges. Each table provides the sequence of observation events. Three examples from the data have been selected where the learners showed WCC and GIP challenges including an inability to: (1) understand how to complete a task, (2) see another person’s point of view during discussions and (3) adhere to new routine and changes during teacher–learner task instructions. After each table there is an interpretation and discussion focussing on the influence of social cognitive and social functioning challenges.

The aim of this research project was to describe three case studies of teacher–ASD learner verbal interactions during teacher–learner task instructions in different inclusive classrooms. All three Grade 3 teachers were aware of their learners’ WCC and GIP challenges. These challenges were manifested in the following behaviours: atypical, and fixated behaviour that caught their individual attention, with an inability to view relevant detail as a whole. They were persistently pre-occupied with one part of the information and showed a pronounced tendency to focus narrowly upon minute details that attracted them. They were unable to integrate information, often ignoring the teachers’ instructions. They found it difficult to adhere to new, unfamiliar routines and changes, and struggled to comprehend the general classroom discussions, and would persevere in their concern with smaller details. This obsessive self-concerned behaviour was manifested in their overall inability to appreciate the global perspective of a situation. These tendencies often led to social isolation.

In their own ways, the three teachers and support staff acknowledged the importance of developing the confidence of their learners with ASD, and to cope with their WCC and GIP challenges. These learners with ASD required more structure and thoughtful planning in order for them to adapt to change and understand the social and behavioural implications of their learning environments.

Only three learners with ASD in Grade 3 were selected as participants. In some cases, suitable learners were identified; however, the parents were not prepared to grant permission for observations. At the time of the data collection, these learners were attending an inclusive mainstream school and a private school. Learners in Grade 3 manifest with language and cognitive abilities of typical learners yet are only diagnosed as atypical when teacher-led instruction challenges of WCC and GIP become obvious. This study used qualitative analyses of three observations only and three interviews. Because this research project was restricted in its scope and applicability to a small range of Grade 3 learners with ASD, it cannot be applicable in any way to all learners with ASD. The study would have greater transferability if more participants and schools were included.

During this research, many teachers reported that they found support structures to be inadequate, which rendered them ill-equipped to adapt their curriculum, and to assist them with teacher–learner instruction tasks when teaching learners with ASD in their South African schools. It is recommended that curriculum differentiation, classroom management and giving instructions should allow for the unique needs of learners with ASD. Although, the teachers observed in this project had no formal training in working with learners with ASD, they developed their own pedagogical approaches to assist them with teacher–learner instruction tasks and would be well suited to head up teams of support to assist teachers in government and private schools during in-service training or workshops. Further research is required in terms of the larger theoretical issues, which are prompted by this initial empirical research.