Journal of In-Service Education

ISSN: 0305-7631 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjie18

Communication for Special Educational Needs: A

multi‐disciplinary approach

Eileen Francis , Maggie Gillon & Kathy McKay

To cite this article: Eileen Francis , Maggie Gillon & Kathy McKay (1986) Communication for
Special Educational Needs: A multi‐disciplinary approach, Journal of In-Service Education, 12:3,
133-139, DOI: 10.1080/0305763860120302

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/0305763860120302

Published online: 12 Sep 2006.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 104

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjie20
 Communication for Special Educational Needs:
A multi-disciplinary approach
Eileen Francis, Moray House College of Education
Maggie Gillon, St Crispin School and
Kathy McKay, Gogarburn
Introduction
During the 1983-84 session the headteacher and
assistant headteacher of Gogarburn Hospital
School committed themselves to a review of the
curriculum and to increased school-based staff
development. A lecturer in speech therapy from
Moray House College of Education was invited to
(a) enable staff to look at and evaluate commer-
cially produced language programmes in the hope
of finding among them one which could be used
throughout the school and (b) to foster an increased
awareness in all staff, whether professionally
trained or not, of the paramount importance of
communication skills between educator and pupil.
In common with COSPEN (1984) it was felt that
lecturer and staff must make time to consult, to
plan and prepare, and to evaluate the shared
enterprise.
After having had the opportunity during two
school-based in-service training sessons to assess
the programmes available, it was evident that the
need in the school with its population of severely
and profoundly handicapped young people was not
for one more checklist, but for a total communica-
tion plan, relevant throughout the whole school,
and encompassing the many different levels of
development and communication skills of the
pupils.
The Headteacher's Perspective
Because of the location of the school within a
hospital campus and the prior involvement of NHS
Speech therapists with the pupils, the promoted
staff were sensitive to the need for the lecturer's
role to be entirely in the area of staff training and
therefore non-threatening to the Health Board
professionals.
It was suggested that a way forward might be
for the lecturer to spend time in the classroom
situation as consultant, observing staff and pupils
communicating during their normal daily routine.
While the promoted staff accepted this role
readily, they were aware that it might appear
threatening to their own staff and decided that ini-
tially the consultant should observe the procedure
in one of the senior classes where the Assistant
Headteacher, who had had previous contact with
the consultant and had initiated her involvement,
was class teacher. Her willing acceptance of the
consultant led perhaps to the other members of the
team — a nursery nurse and an auxiliary — accept-
ing her presence. This policy of including staff who
professed an interest and willingness to be involved
in the project was to govern the subsequent order
of class observations.
After an initial observation session the consul-
tant provided written suggestions for improving
skills and after subsequent visits prepared further
papers on communication analysis and an outline
model for group management of a listening skills
task to be used in the classroom. These papers
were the catalyst for discussion and reflection on
current practice among all the staff.
Following this joint series of observations a
meeting was arranged with promoted staff to dis-
cuss how best to set about preparing a communica-
tion plan appropriate to all pupils. The consultant
produced a model which took into account the lan-
guage and communication needs of the school and
the promoted staff presented a model which was
basically similar. From these two models a final
draft was prepared and presented for discussion at
the next staff meeting.
At the same staff meeting, following a sugges-
tion from the consultant, the team from the AHT's
classroom described to their colleagues what had
occurred during and following the visits of the con-
sultant and it was noted that there was a positive
response by the whole team to the scheme.
The project continued with the consultant
observing a second class group, where the team
— a teacher and a nursery nurse — were aware of
her role and were willing participants. The pupils
in this class were more able to communicate,
although or some this was through the alternative
communication system of Makaton.
The focus in this group was on developing a com-
municative style for the staff which would en-
133
 courage pupils response. The same format applied
as before. After a period of observation the con-
sultant reported back with written documentation
of strategies which could be applied in the
classroom setting — in this case, research findings
on linguistic interaction with particular reference to
the framing of questions.
Finally the consultant observed the communica-
tion strategies in a class where the pupils are pro-
foundly mentally handicapped and have very little
language, but do respond to non-verbal inter-
actions, and where staff attempt to communicate
through Makaton. Here it was particularly noted by
the consultant in her report that the appropriacy of
the communication system in this class was worth
documenting for other staff members.
As a follow-up to the three sets of observations,
a further staff meeting was held at which was
presented a videorecording demonstrating the team
approach advocated by the consultant for the
ATH's class. The consultant summarized the find-
ings of the project and staff were invited to
comment.
In conclusion interviews with individual members
of staff were audiorecorded to provide futher feed-
back on the project.
To facilitate the response of the staff three ques-
tions were framed by the promoted staff for the ten
minute audiorecording:
1. How useful/interesting did you find the discus-
sions with the consultant?
2. How easy was it to participate in the
discussions?
3. How relevant was the feedback on the obser-
vation of the communication system of your
class?
The Consultant's Perspective
Agency-based In-service training as Consultancy
The notion of the communication consultancy of-
fered to Gogarbum Hospital School is described
more fully in documentation published by the
Discussion Development Group (Francis 1985).
The principles of consultancy established in this
secondary education project have been applied to
the special education setting.
The approach is based on the premise that what
each individual learns in a consultancy contact is
unique and that this learning is best described as
the building of a responsive system rather than the
structuring of a replicable model. The system is
geared to the definition of appropriate questions
rather than the giving of definitive answers and the
fact that the consultant comes from a background
of particular experiences and disciplines which can-
134 "•
not be reproduced for others may be a positive
rather than a negative attribute of the multi-
disciplinary effort.
The aim, therefore, when working with the
Gogarburn staff was to meet, to offer a perspec-
tive on the theme of mutual concern, to listen to
the response, to share in a meeting of minds so that
ideas might be formulated and finally to capture the
findings of this negotiation in written form for future
use.
The expectation was that these transactions
would provide experiential learning in the process
of self-analysis which could be applied by each
teacher and care-assistant in her classroom.
The conceptual framework for this style of con-
sultancy can be found in Schon's (1983) Reflec-
tive Practitioner and in an article by McGivern &
Fineman (1983) which give a specification for ef-
fective consultancy.
The effective consultant demonstrates
(i) high levels of interaction between teacher and
consultant
(ii) a high level of interpersonal skill
(iii) a pre-occupation with how things are done
rather than what is done
(iv) the need for trust
(v) action dependent on the characteristics and
needs of the situation
(vi) a humanistic and pragmatic value base
(vii) limited consultant power
(viii) the achievement of interdependence between
the parties.
Gogarburn Hospital School offers an open-
system to its visitors, greeting them warmly and
providing a matrix of formal and informal contacts
in one to one, small staff group and large staff
group meetings which ensures the high quality of
the interpersonal relationships within the school.
Trust between the assistant headteacher and the
consultant had been established over a long period
dating from an initial contact on a lecturer/trainee
basis in the department of Social Education at
Moray House. Respect for the competency and
skills of the promoted staff and appreciation that
this project was embedded in a network of other
educational developments in the school ensured
that action was appropriate to the school context.
The experience of observing the staff at first hand
dealing with very difficult pupils and working situa-
tions had the effect of de-skilling the observer on
many occasions and certainly limited any feelings
of consultant power. While many consultants often
accept the role of 'hero-innovator', the fact that the
teacher/consultant team was multi-disciplinary,
embodying strands from the disciplines of nursing,
education and speech therapy meant that there
was an equal distribution of skills and competen-
cies to bring to bear on the situation. These multi-
disciplinary strengths promoted the inter-depen-
dence of the team and this has culminated in the
writing of this paper as a validation of the differing
perspectives on the communication task.
The Project
It became clear through discussions with the pro-
moted staff that the system which existed for the
description and assessment of communication dis-
abilities and the provision of intervention pro-
grammes at each class level was appropriate. What
did appear to require reflective study was
(i) the communication system by which the pro-
grammes were implemented
and
(ii) the process issues which underpinned the
curriculum.
Teachers are traditionally highly able in the struc-
ture and implementation of curriculum content and
until recently have somewhat neglected reflection
on the process of teaching and learning. We are
now seeing a surge of development in the area of
process innovation and dissemination with training
in communication, interpersonal relations and coun-
selling becoming increasingly sought after in
courses at pre-service and post qualifying levels.
It seemed particularly appropriate therefore that
the project should focus on the classroom to
complement the initiatives of the promoted staff
in the design of their new curriculum and their
structuring of new observation and evaluation pro-
cedures to monitor the progress of pupils
throughout the school.
The primary task was the need to establish the
notion of a holistic model of communication which
placed pupils, teachers and care-assistants in
dynamic relationship within a system stressing dif-
ferent aspects of verbal, vocal and non-vocal
aspects of communication, and which took account
of the effect of the physical setting and group com-
position on the interactions of the class group.
Three classes were observed during 1984-85
providing data which in consultation with the staff
involved offered the opportunity of reflection on
three differing aspects of the classroom com-
munication system.
The themes which emerged were
(1) Class work as a group event — the role of the
teachers and care-assistants in structuring the
communication process of the class group.
(2) The effects of teacher questioning on pupil
interaction.
(3) The effect of staff's use of vocal and non-vocal
communication strategies on a group of non-
speaking pupils.
1 . Classroom Communication as a Group Event
Context
Teachers and pupils rarely see themselves as oc-
cupying the same group space. Teachers perceive
themselves as having leadership functions which
involve them in initiating events, controlling inter-
actions where necessary, and taking responsibility
for the structure and progression of the day's acti-
vities: this is the leadership region of the group.
The pupils belong to the membership region of
the group. They respond to the teachers' initiatives,
have their inappropriate behaviour shaped by her
and appropriate behaviour reinforced. They follow
the teachers' leadership through the structure of
the day's activities.
The work of the first term was to examine the
reality of these perceptions and to offer discussion
papers which provided differing perceptions of
management of the class group with the aim of
enhancing classroom communication.
Concepts
The work of Bramley (1979) on process shapers
in small groups and that of Francis (1985) on its
application to educational settings, together with
the earlier work of Wirz and Francis described in
Fraser and Grieve (1981:1 54) on the development
of communication programmes in settings for
pupils with severe and profound learning dis-
abilities, provided the conceptual framework for
work with this class group.
Case study: framing the questions
We framed the following questions as the work
progressed: —
In relation to staff
(i) How are the activities of the language pro-
gramme administered?
(ii) What are the roles which staff adopt during
each activity?
(iii) How are these roles decided?
(iv) What are the constituent elements of each
role?
In relation to pupils
(i) How can we describe the communication
system operating between pupils?
(ii) What communication potential is there to
build on?
(a) with staff
(b) with peers
135
(iii) Can we build a sociogram of the class des-
cribing e.g. potential pairings, potential rein-
forcement of each other's communication,
which will help the language intervention
programme?
(iv) What are the most rewarding activities in the
class?
(v) What are the least rewarding activities?
In relation to the group environment
(i) Can we create a flow diagram of individual
and group events throughout the day?
(ii) Is it possible to gradually reduce the prompt-
ing by staff as one activity flows into another?
(iii) Can pupils be given more opportunity to in-
itiate activities for themselves as the pattern
of the group event becomes more familiar to
them?
(iv) When a new activity begins can the pupils be
enabled to initiate the process of that activity?
(v) Can staff reduce the amount of initiating they
do and increase listening and responding?
(vi) Can staff increase the wait-time between
interventions?
In relation to perceiving the communication system
(i) How do the pupils learn the meaning of the
various language activities offered to them
throughout the school day?
(ii) What are the instructions given to the
students throughout the day and how do they
individually respond?
(iii) What is the reason for the lack of response?
(iv) If we restructured the instruction would that
be helpful?
(v) How do we interpret different responses from
the one we expect?
(vi) Is it possible to write dialogues which predict
certain types of response between a member
of staff and a pupil?
(vii) Are there differences in response between
different staff and students?
(viii) Could we look at an activity such as story-
telling (Old Woman and the Pig) or music-
making and analyse the semantic develop-
ment which could be part of the activity?
Reflection
These questions were extracted from the com-
mentary papers which were prepared following
each consultancy visit. As this was the first class
group to be observed many questions were gene-
136
rated. It was hoped that these questions could pro-
vide the basis for other classes studying their own
group communication system.
It was hoped that attention to these questions
might develop the awareness and insight of staff
in relation to the impact of the physical setting and
group composition on the language and communi-
cation of the class group. Also, that staff would
become more aware of the primary task of each
activity and the most appropriate leadership roles
which would enhance the management of the task.
Finally, it was hoped that staff might use this
awareness and insight to reflect on their own prac-
tice so that under-currents, the hidden curriculum,
whatever terminology one might use, could be iden-
tified, and a more permeable boundary between the
leadership and membership regions of the group
achieved.
2. The Effects of Questioning on Pupil Interaction.
Context
When the pupil with a severe profound learning
disability begins to respond to the linguistic inter-
ventions of the teacher, we observed that there
was a corresponding increase in the number of
questions the teacher addressed to the pupil. There
may also be a potential increase in anxiety in the
interaction as the teacher tries to formulate the
most appropriate question and the pupil tries to gain
language processing time in order to frame his/her
response. The stress of the moment may mean that
inappropriate questions may be produced and
pupils become discouraged in their attempts to
respond.
Concepts
The Woods' (1985) work on linguistic inter-
action, in particular their observations on teacher
power as a constituent of questioning behaviour
and its deleterious effect on the development of
language and communication in pupils with severe
and profound disabilities, provided the conceptual
framework for the theme addressed by the second
teacher. Dillon's (1984) contribution to the
literature on questioning, his analysis of alternatives
to questioning together with Sigel's (1979) taxo-
nomy of questioning were also useful contributions
to this classroom study.
Case-study: framing the questions
We were aware that these researchers had
tested a variety of hypotheses in relation to class-
room questioning and had provided documentation
of their findings. It was suggested that we test
some of the hypotheses in the Gogarburn setting
and report on the findings to the In-Service train-
ing group. The questions were posed as follows: —
It is said that
(a) Parallel play
(b) Co-operative play
(c) Teacher statements/reflection in action
(d) Minimal encouragers — verbal and
non-verbal
(e) Teacher questions when the answer is
unknown
promote language development.
(j) Are these strategies effective in the Gogarburn
setting?
(ii) Can we become sensitive to the use of
(a) directive leadership
(b) closed questioning
(c) open questioning where the teacher knows
the answer (and study the constraint that this
imposes on language development?)
(Hi) Could we mount an experiment with two pupils
to boost the use of
(a) statements which describe what is
happening
(b) encouragers such as 'good' 'well done',
head nods and smiling
(c) silent parallel play
(d) co-operative play including reflective
statements on the action?
(iv) What are our observations on this experiment?
(v) How helpful is Sigel's taxonomy?
(vi) Is role reversal, where the pupil asks the ques-
tions and the teacher is the respondent, a feasi-
ble strategy for this group?
Reflection
These questions seemed challenging when
studied in the classroom context as they appeared
to focus on fundamental issues relating to the
teacher's role as compared with the other caring
roles of care-assistant or therapist. Do teachers ex-
perience difficulty when asked to address their own
communicaiton style in this way? What is the
nature of the resistance that is experienced?
3. The Effect of Staff's Use of Vocal & Non-Vocal
Communication Strategies in a Group of Non-
Speaking Pupils
Context
The study of the two previous class groups had
demonstrated how the primary task of developing
an enabling communication system is frequently
submerged by an overlay of secondary tasks asso-
ciated with the administration of a 'language pro-
gramme' and the construction of behavioural
strategies to stimulate language development. The
third group, where all the pupils were non-speaking,
freed the teacher and care assistants from the task
of providing a 'language programme' so that the
focus was on enabling communication between
staff and pupils.
Case-study
What occurred in this class had developed in
response to the social context rather than being im-
posed upon it. The positive observations of the con-
sultant on the appropriacy of this communication
system were structured as follows to communicate
the findings to the staff group, and eventually to
the in-service training group in the school:
(i) the use of statements far outweighed the use
of questions,
(ii) staff responded to individuals in the context of
group needs
(iii) reinforcement of babbling together with the
reflecting back of non-verbal behaviour was
observed
(iv) staff modelled behaviour for each other e.g.
teacher/care-assistant
(v) there was regular use of explanation of what
was going to happen and what was happening
(iv) human relationships were responded to and
natural groupings between pupils reinforced as
they emerged
(vii) There was effective use of eye contact within
the group
(viii)staff communicated non-verbally to each other.
Reflection
The primary task of the staff group appeared to
be focused on enhancing attention control, extin-
guishing inappropriate behaviour, reinforcing appro-
priate behaviour and on sensory development. It
was suggested to the staff group that they could
(a) build on the notion of 'implementer' and
'monitor' roles explored by the first class group to
enhance group tasks and (b) develop the idea of
the 'hand class' which explored the theme of touch
through song, rhythm and turn-taking activities in-
volving the whole group, as a model for a 'voice
class' to explore awareness of differing voice
qualities, the use of intonation, rhythm and timing
in speech.
137
 Conclusions
The Headteacher
In the initial stages the implications of the pro-
ject were especially important for the promoted
staff who after the first consultation, realised that
their expectation of evaluating and selecting com-
mercially based language programmes was inap-
propriate and that what was needed for the school
was a structured communication programme and
increased awareness of communicative develop-
ment and use throughout the school curriculum.
It was appreciated that the strategy of placing
a consultant in a classroom, where she assumed
an observational role, was one which might prove
threatening to staff members. The favourable res-
ponse of the majority of staff to this strategy would
encourage the use of consultants on other occa-
sions and with other disciplines.
The second aim of fostering an awareness of the
importance of communication skills was as suc-
cessful as anticipated. It would be unrealistic to ex-
pect everyone to gain equally from contact with a
consultant. For the majority, she provided a forum
for new ideas, an opportunity to reflect on current
practice, to evaluate strategies presently employed
and to consider how these could be improved in
future. The promoted staff consider that the pro-
ject enabled all staff, trained and untrained, to be
more reflective educationists.
The Consultant
Reference to the audio feedback of the teacher
interviews indicates that the consultancy could
have been more effective in three areas:
(i) the level of interaction with staff
(ii) the language used in these interactions
(iii) awareness of 'consultant power' in the valida-
tion of 'good' practice.
The first criterion of this particular style of con-
sultancy was the encouragement of high levels of
interaction between teacher and consultant. High
levels of interaction were certainly achieved be-
tween the promoted staff and the consultant but
it was felt that class responsiblities constrained the
unpromoted staff from meeting as frequently as
they would have wished with the consultant for
feedback and discussion. A supplementary criterion
might define equal levels of interaction with all
participants as being of importance to the success
of a project.
' Concern was also expressed about the language
model used by the consultant which was often
perceived as highly complex and specialised. Exten-
138
sive experience in working with special educa-
tionists has made this consultant aware of the dif-
ficulties in communicating across disciplinary boun-
daries and the need for research on the pragmatics
of inter-disciplinary communication. Observations
on this project appear to indicate that even when
sepcialised vocabulary is consciously avoided that
the embedding of implicit assumptions, for
example, about the conceptual framework which
underpins an understanding of the communication
process, raises the anxiety of listeners.
The third issue which was raised is potentially
even more problematical. A project such as this in-
evitably highlight examples of effective and appro-
priate practice with the social context, which the
consultant feels the need to share with members
of the staff group. The effect of such sharing may
however be perceived as encouraging rivalry be-
tween staff or the encouragement of one viewpoint
in contradiction to another.
This finding validates the opinion of the consul-
tant that a project which focuses on group pro-
cesses and communication systems at a conscious
level requires considerable discussion and support
of the unconscious process dynamics of the parti-
cipants. It is suggested that the holistic approach
being developed in a variety of pragmatic studies
is incomplete if research is addressed only to
behavioural and cognitive elements at the con-
scious level, and that the study of psychodynamic
systems is of importance in communication
research.
References
Bramley, W. (1979) Group Tutoring: Concepts & Case
Studies. Routledge, Kegan Paul.
Dillon, J.T. (1982) The Multidisciplinary Study of Question-
ing. Journal of Educational Psychology 74:147-62.
Francis, E. (1985) Learning to Discuss. Scottish Curriculum
Development Service, Edinburgh
Francis, E. (1985) The Application of Group Analysis to
Classroom Discussion. (Presented to the American Educa-
tional Research Association: Chicago).
Frazer, W. & Grieve (1981) Communicating with Normal &
Retarded Children. Wright, Bristol.
McGivern & Fineman (1983) Research & Consultancy:
towards a conceptual synthesis. Journal of Management
Studies 20:4.
Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books,
New York.
Scottish Central Committee & Special Educational Needs
(1984) (COSPEN) Learning Together: issues in designing
a school curriculum for pupils with severe mental han-
dicap. Scottish Curriculum Development Service,
Glasgow.
 Sigel, I. & Saunders, R. (1979) An Inquiry into Inquiry: Ques-
tion Asking as an Instructional Model in L Katz (ed.) Cur-
rent topics in early childhood education Vol II. Ablex
Publishing Corporation: pp. 196-193, New Jersey.
Wood, D. & H. (1985) Questioning vs. Student Initiative in
Classroom Discussion. AERA presentation.
Using Personal Construct Methods In INSET
Brahm Norwich
Introduction
This paper describes the use of a personal construct
approach in a one term in-service course (OTIS)
based at the London University Institute of Educa-
tion. Although there has been recent interest in Per-
sonal Construct Theory in education (Pope and
Keen, 1981; Diamond, 1982), there have been few
published accounts in the in-service field (Beard and
Thomas, 1985). Before'outlining the rationale of
the construct approach used some of the back-
ground and aims of the course will be discussed.
This one term course began in September 1983
with about 20 teachers per term, as part of the Cir-
cular 3/83 Grant Scheme, which had as one of its
priority areas, special needs in the ordinary school.
The course is project based and school focused in
its approach. Teachers who are seconded are re-
quired, in conjunction with the head and staff of
the school, the LEA Adviser and Course tutor to
select a feasible point of entry into the school
system and then plan an appropriate intervention.
This could be at the level of a group of children in
one or more classes or it could be on a different
scale, attempting to alter policies, organisation and
roles of staff for that school, e.g. the use of
teachers from special needs departments as sup-
port teachers in the ordinary school. The problem
Acknowledgement
We wish to acknowledge the interest and coopera-
tion of Ruth Hendry and Elizabeth Bell, in the work
of the project. The contributions of all staff at
Gogarburn Hospital School to discussions was
greatly valued.
Correspondence:
Eileen Francis
Department of Speech
Moray House College of Education
Holyrood Road
Edinburgh EH8 8AQ
solving nature of the projects, the need for careful
consultancy and joint planning lead the teachers to
frame questions and then look for answers. Some
possible answers are provided within the core of
the course lectures, seminars and workshops, and
often, most importantly, from the interaction with
other course members.
The original rationale for the construct exercise
with course members was to offer seconded
teachers an opportunity to make sense of and
possibly gain some insight into their ways of con-
struing themselves and others in relation to
teaching children with special educational needs in
theordinary school. At the same time it was hoped
to identify some of the common constructs used
by teachers at the start of the course. Any changes
in personal construing could also be identified over
the period of the one term course.
The initial pilot work was conducted by an MA
student (Ferguson, 1984) with the second group
of OTIS teachers. This study involved all 20
teachers in the group and looked at their percep-
tions of 1) children with a variety of special needs
and 2) teachers and themselves in relation to teach-
ing children with special needs. The aim of this
study was to represent these perceptions in a visual
139