A note on the term “special education professional”
99% of teachers trained in special education are trained in so called “high incidence disabilities” which really means disabilities that hide in general ed classrooms. Despite the incidence rate, this doesn’t include autism

This training focuses almost exclusively on strategies for students who are working at it near grade level and need accommodations or minor modifications to the curriculum to succeed on standard assessments/benchmarks.

They might get a class about autism because it’s in demand, but that will be a class on ABA and PBIS, not AAC, sensory supports, or anything about understanding how autistics understand the world differently.

(They think they get the last part: they read Thinking in Pictures by Tenple Grandin or watch the movie. - the number of clueless folks that have gushed about that to me... but moving on..)

There is NO training on AAC, either supporting users or teaching language development. Even those of us who are trained to work with students labeled severe/profound ID (my certification) have to get it ourselves.

There is a huge pressure to meet annual score metrics for students with disabilities. So most special education teachers are over-focused on academic benchmarks. And as mentioned, they often have little training or support to recognize, understand, or support non-academic factors

But for most special education teachers, specialized training is reading training for dyslexia, or it’s administering achievement testing.

This is why I’m never surprised when I hear stories on here or in the news about clueless special education professionals. Because 99% of them graduate with a degree in high incidence disabilities that doesn’t prepare them to teach autistic kids.

And the 1% who share my degree? Most aren’t trained to teach content. And there is still a lack of knowledge in best practices especially around AAC and language development.