Exploring Educators' Perceptions of Supporting Children with Autism in Schools: An Ecological Analysis through the SPELL Framework

This study explores educators' perceptions of supporting children with autism in schools through ecological analysis informed by three theoretical frameworks: the social model of disability, Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory, and the SPELL framework (Structure, Positive approaches and expectations, Empathy, Low arousal, Links). Using qualitative methodology, the study conducts semi-structured interviews with six educators across three schools in England. This study aimed to: 1. Explore how educators develop knowledge about supporting children with autism. 2. Identify what practices educators implement and how contextual factors shape implementation. 3. Examine how educators perceive the effectiveness of their approaches and what shapes these perceptions. An initial literature review establishes key principles, purposes, and evidence associated with autism education, including the SPELL framework (Structure, Positive approaches and expectations, Empathy, Low arousal, Links), the social model of disability and ecological systems theory. This enables the researcher to evaluate whether educators' knowledge and practice aligned with evidence-based principles and to identify factors shaping any divergence. A qualitative methodology is designed to gather insights into educators' perceptions. Semi-structured interviews are conducted with six educators across three schools: two mainstream primary schools and one special school. Thematic analysis of interviews revealed three critical patterns. First, educators demonstrated knowledge aligned with SPELL principles despite no formal framework training, suggesting evidence-based approaches develop through experiential learning within practice contexts. However, alignment and divergence are identified. Second, practice is constrained by ecological conditions more than by knowledge. Educators across settings possesses similar knowledge yet report different implementation experiences. These differences reflected structural variations rather than individual capability. Third, perceived outcomes reflect ecological constraints rather than objective strategy assessment. Positive perceptions merged at microsystem level interventions that require no further external resources, whilst negative perceptions focused on systemic barriers preventing implementation of approaches educators believe would work. The analysis of these findings results in the Ecological Relational Framework, which positions educators' perceptions as ecologically structured experiences emerging from interactions between individual capacities, immediate practice contexts, relational networks, and systemic structures. This framework collaborates with ecological systems theory which providing nested structure, the social model of disability which offering critical orientation and SPELL that representing microsystem level practical guidance. The results of this study complement existing research by shifting focus from individual educator deficits to ecological conditions shaping professional knowledge, practice, and perception. Future research might usefully centre perspectives of children with autism themselves on educational support, adopt longitudinal designs examining how ecological contexts shape practice over time, and investigate what enables effective practice across diverse contexts. In addition, future research might explore the effectiveness of the Ecological Relational Framework in order to inform professional development, policy, and practice improvement for children with autism.