Reference Guide to Publications
2002
Nind, Melanie; Kellett, Mary
Responding to learners with severe learning difficulties and stereotyped behaviour: challenges for an inclusive era Journal Article
In: European Journal of Special Needs Education, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 265-82, 2002, ISSN: 0885-6250.
@article{Nind2002b,
title = {Responding to learners with severe learning difficulties and stereotyped behaviour: challenges for an inclusive era},
author = {Melanie Nind and Mary Kellett},
url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08856250210162167?needAccess=true},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210162167},
issn = {0885-6250},
year = {2002},
date = {2002-10-15},
journal = {European Journal of Special Needs Education},
volume = {17},
number = {3},
pages = {265-82},
abstract = {Traditionally, professionals working with individuals with severe learning difficulties who demonstrate stereotyped behaviours, such as rocking and hand-flapping, have viewed such behaviours as undesirable, inappropriate and in need of reduction or elimination. This perspective is influenced by notions of readying those individuals for mixed settings, educating, training or modifying them to help gain their acceptance. Intensive Interaction is an alternative approach for working with individuals with complex difficulties that responds positively to them and their stereotyped behaviours, sometimes using these as a point of connection. Intensive Interaction sets out to enhance social and communication abilities and not to reduce stereotyped behaviours. However, findings from two studies of Intensive Interaction that show some reduction in stereotyped behaviours are reported and discussed. The authors consider the way in which more inclusive thinking connects with changes in thinking about stereotyped behaviour and the individuals who engage in them.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Traditionally, professionals working with individuals with severe learning difficulties who demonstrate stereotyped behaviours, such as rocking and hand-flapping, have viewed such behaviours as undesirable, inappropriate and in need of reduction or elimination. This perspective is influenced by notions of readying those individuals for mixed settings, educating, training or modifying them to help gain their acceptance. Intensive Interaction is an alternative approach for working with individuals with complex difficulties that responds positively to them and their stereotyped behaviours, sometimes using these as a point of connection. Intensive Interaction sets out to enhance social and communication abilities and not to reduce stereotyped behaviours. However, findings from two studies of Intensive Interaction that show some reduction in stereotyped behaviours are reported and discussed. The authors consider the way in which more inclusive thinking connects with changes in thinking about stereotyped behaviour and the individuals who engage in them.
2001
Elgie, Sarah; Maguire, Nick
Intensive interaction with a woman with profound and multiple disabilities: a case study Journal Article
In: Tizard Learning Disability Review, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 18-24, 2001, ISSN: 1359-5474.
@article{Elgie2001,
title = {Intensive interaction with a woman with profound and multiple disabilities: a case study},
author = {Sarah Elgie and Nick Maguire},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1108/13595474200100024},
issn = {1359-5474},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-07-01},
journal = {Tizard Learning Disability Review},
volume = {6},
number = {3},
pages = {18-24},
abstract = {The Participant: This study reports on the use of Intensive Interaction with a remote and withdrawn 39-year-old woman, Anna, who engaged in serious self-injurious behaviour (SIB). Anna was a blind woman with profound learning disabilities who had lived all her life within the care system. She was ‘extremely emotionally and socially isolated’ and had ‘effectively cut herself off from the outside world’. She was reported as having no verbal skills and ‘used very limited non-verbal communication’.
Anna had engaged in serious self-injurious behaviour since childhood ‘to the extent that her face and eyes had become extremely disfigured’. To protect her from damaging her face and eyes further she wore plastic arm splints for 25 minutes in every hour.
Prior to the intervention, baseline measures of Anna’s self-injurious behaviours were collated for six months prior to the start of Intensive Interaction. When Anna’s splints were removed she immediately started to self-injure, by eye gouging or pressing her fingers under her collarbone. During the intervention Anna was seen three times a week in her room for 16 weeks by both therapists (a psychologist and an assistant psychologist, named as the authors above), and this was carried out whilst her arms were splinted. The sessions of Intensive Interaction contained physical contact (esp. hand holding), vocal commentary with intonation and sensitively timed vocal imitation. These sessions lasted up to 25 minutes.
The Results: There was ‘an obvious increase in the amount of hand contact’ spontaneous initiated by Anna after the Intensive Interaction began. This was in contrast to her behaviour prior to the Intensive Interaction intervention when no spontaneous reaching out by Anna had been observed, despite the fact that Anna had been receiving the same amount of individual time with a therapist in the six months before the intervention (when the first author was unsuccessfully attempting to engage her in a behavioural program involving reward and tactile stimulation). This new behaviour was seen to be ‘an exciting and striking response to Intensive Interaction’.
The results also showed that Anna made more vocalisations during the Intensive Interaction sessions than when she was alone. According to the authors, ‘the decrease in vocalisation when Anna was alone suggests that Anna’s noises were attempts to communicate with and respond to the therapists’ interactions in a dialogue type fashion’.
However, also included in the findings was the assertion that ‘there was no appreciable change’ in the presentation of the Anna’s SIB (self-injurious behaviour) over time; this was indicated by the authors as being ‘expected at this early stage of intervention, given that she had used self-injurious forms of stimulation for most of her life’.
Some Discussion: Generally, the authors concluded that this study provided further evidence of the effectiveness of Intensive Interaction in ‘the development of social and communicative skills’. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The Participant: This study reports on the use of Intensive Interaction with a remote and withdrawn 39-year-old woman, Anna, who engaged in serious self-injurious behaviour (SIB). Anna was a blind woman with profound learning disabilities who had lived all her life within the care system. She was ‘extremely emotionally and socially isolated’ and had ‘effectively cut herself off from the outside world’. She was reported as having no verbal skills and ‘used very limited non-verbal communication’.
Anna had engaged in serious self-injurious behaviour since childhood ‘to the extent that her face and eyes had become extremely disfigured’. To protect her from damaging her face and eyes further she wore plastic arm splints for 25 minutes in every hour.
Prior to the intervention, baseline measures of Anna’s self-injurious behaviours were collated for six months prior to the start of Intensive Interaction. When Anna’s splints were removed she immediately started to self-injure, by eye gouging or pressing her fingers under her collarbone. During the intervention Anna was seen three times a week in her room for 16 weeks by both therapists (a psychologist and an assistant psychologist, named as the authors above), and this was carried out whilst her arms were splinted. The sessions of Intensive Interaction contained physical contact (esp. hand holding), vocal commentary with intonation and sensitively timed vocal imitation. These sessions lasted up to 25 minutes.
The Results: There was ‘an obvious increase in the amount of hand contact’ spontaneous initiated by Anna after the Intensive Interaction began. This was in contrast to her behaviour prior to the Intensive Interaction intervention when no spontaneous reaching out by Anna had been observed, despite the fact that Anna had been receiving the same amount of individual time with a therapist in the six months before the intervention (when the first author was unsuccessfully attempting to engage her in a behavioural program involving reward and tactile stimulation). This new behaviour was seen to be ‘an exciting and striking response to Intensive Interaction’.
The results also showed that Anna made more vocalisations during the Intensive Interaction sessions than when she was alone. According to the authors, ‘the decrease in vocalisation when Anna was alone suggests that Anna’s noises were attempts to communicate with and respond to the therapists’ interactions in a dialogue type fashion’.
However, also included in the findings was the assertion that ‘there was no appreciable change’ in the presentation of the Anna’s SIB (self-injurious behaviour) over time; this was indicated by the authors as being ‘expected at this early stage of intervention, given that she had used self-injurious forms of stimulation for most of her life’.
Some Discussion: Generally, the authors concluded that this study provided further evidence of the effectiveness of Intensive Interaction in ‘the development of social and communicative skills’.
Anna had engaged in serious self-injurious behaviour since childhood ‘to the extent that her face and eyes had become extremely disfigured’. To protect her from damaging her face and eyes further she wore plastic arm splints for 25 minutes in every hour.
Prior to the intervention, baseline measures of Anna’s self-injurious behaviours were collated for six months prior to the start of Intensive Interaction. When Anna’s splints were removed she immediately started to self-injure, by eye gouging or pressing her fingers under her collarbone. During the intervention Anna was seen three times a week in her room for 16 weeks by both therapists (a psychologist and an assistant psychologist, named as the authors above), and this was carried out whilst her arms were splinted. The sessions of Intensive Interaction contained physical contact (esp. hand holding), vocal commentary with intonation and sensitively timed vocal imitation. These sessions lasted up to 25 minutes.
The Results: There was ‘an obvious increase in the amount of hand contact’ spontaneous initiated by Anna after the Intensive Interaction began. This was in contrast to her behaviour prior to the Intensive Interaction intervention when no spontaneous reaching out by Anna had been observed, despite the fact that Anna had been receiving the same amount of individual time with a therapist in the six months before the intervention (when the first author was unsuccessfully attempting to engage her in a behavioural program involving reward and tactile stimulation). This new behaviour was seen to be ‘an exciting and striking response to Intensive Interaction’.
The results also showed that Anna made more vocalisations during the Intensive Interaction sessions than when she was alone. According to the authors, ‘the decrease in vocalisation when Anna was alone suggests that Anna’s noises were attempts to communicate with and respond to the therapists’ interactions in a dialogue type fashion’.
However, also included in the findings was the assertion that ‘there was no appreciable change’ in the presentation of the Anna’s SIB (self-injurious behaviour) over time; this was indicated by the authors as being ‘expected at this early stage of intervention, given that she had used self-injurious forms of stimulation for most of her life’.
Some Discussion: Generally, the authors concluded that this study provided further evidence of the effectiveness of Intensive Interaction in ‘the development of social and communicative skills’.
Samuel, Judith
Intensive Interaction in context Journal Article
In: Tizard Learning Disability Review, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 25-30, 2001, ISSN: 1359-5474.
@article{Samuel2001,
title = {Intensive Interaction in context},
author = {Judith Samuel},
url = {https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13595474200100025/full/html},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1108/13595474200100025},
issn = {1359-5474},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-07-01},
journal = {Tizard Learning Disability Review},
volume = {6},
number = {3},
pages = {25-30},
abstract = {Initially called ‘augmented mothering’, intensive interaction was pioneered by a clinical psychologist (Ephraim, 1982) working in an institutional setting. Interest spread to a nearby school at Harperbury Hospital (Nind & Hewett, 1988). Here the applications of programmes for teaching discrimination and self-help skills and reduction of problem behaviours were not making an impact , and staff were concerned to find alternative ways to meet fundamental learning needs. Intensive interaction became the term that stuck for the new approach (Nind & Hewett, 1994) with the most recent definition being;
‘The specific interactive approach…to facilitating the development of social and communication abilities in people with SLD based on the model of care-giver infant interaction’(Nind & Hewett, 2001 pvi).
In their single case experimental study with Anna, Elgie and Maguire describe the model behind intensive interaction and outline what can impede the quality of interaction between people with profound learning disability (PLD) and their carers.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Initially called ‘augmented mothering’, intensive interaction was pioneered by a clinical psychologist (Ephraim, 1982) working in an institutional setting. Interest spread to a nearby school at Harperbury Hospital (Nind & Hewett, 1988). Here the applications of programmes for teaching discrimination and self-help skills and reduction of problem behaviours were not making an impact , and staff were concerned to find alternative ways to meet fundamental learning needs. Intensive interaction became the term that stuck for the new approach (Nind & Hewett, 1994) with the most recent definition being;
‘The specific interactive approach…to facilitating the development of social and communication abilities in people with SLD based on the model of care-giver infant interaction’(Nind & Hewett, 2001 pvi).
In their single case experimental study with Anna, Elgie and Maguire describe the model behind intensive interaction and outline what can impede the quality of interaction between people with profound learning disability (PLD) and their carers.
‘The specific interactive approach…to facilitating the development of social and communication abilities in people with SLD based on the model of care-giver infant interaction’(Nind & Hewett, 2001 pvi).
In their single case experimental study with Anna, Elgie and Maguire describe the model behind intensive interaction and outline what can impede the quality of interaction between people with profound learning disability (PLD) and their carers.
Nind, Melanie; Kellett, Mary; Hopkins, Vicky
Teachers’ talk styles: communicating with learners with severe and complex learning difficulties Journal Article
In: Child Language and Therapy, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 143-159, 2001, ISSN: 0265-6590.
@article{Nind2001,
title = {Teachers’ talk styles: communicating with learners with severe and complex learning difficulties},
author = {Melanie Nind and Mary Kellett and Vicky Hopkins},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/026565900101700204},
doi = {10.1177/026565900101700204},
issn = {0265-6590},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-06-01},
urldate = {2001-06-01},
journal = {Child Language and Therapy},
volume = {17},
number = {2},
pages = {143-159},
abstract = {Some Background: the authors of this paper argue that the communication difficulties experienced by those with severe or profound learning disabilities have been typically attributed entirely to the learning disabled person, and therefore interventions are usually aimed at enhancing their communicative abilities. In this paper, Intensive Interaction is conceptualised as ‘transactional’ in nature, and as such difficulties are seen as arising from both sides of the communication process.
The authors note that research studies indicate that parents of disabled children tend to adopt a more directive approach to communication, whereas in contrast, mothers of typically developing children adopt a less directive style of interaction labelled ‘Motherese’, which uses slow, simple language with an exaggerated use of pitch. It is suggested that ‘Motherese’ is designed to maximise the engagement level and understanding of the child. ‘Motherese’ is also noted to employ vocalisations in unison with the child, use imitations of vocal pitch, rhythm and duration and promote the use of turn-taking, techniques similar to those used in Intensive Interaction.
The Method: This study examined the interactive talk of teachers engaging in Intensive Interaction, and the degree to which ‘Motherese’ was used to engage their learners. 4 teachers were each asked to submit 2 video clips of them practising Intensive Interaction with a partner. These videos were rated for evidence of ‘Motherese’, with the authors also identifying if some particular features of ‘Motherese’ were more common than others.
The Results: the results showed that in all of the 8 videos ‘Motherese’ was demonstrated, although the amount used varied considerably between participants. No particular feature of ‘Motherese’ was found to be evident in all of the videos, suggesting that the use of the Motherese style is individual to each interactor.
The teachers who were identified as most successfully engaging their interactive partners were noted to employ a wide range of elements of ‘Motherese’ in their interactive repertoires (although these elements were not used on every occasion). ‘Contingent Vocalisation’ or ‘joining-in’ was identified as a core feature of ‘Motherese’, and it was indicated as being more naturally used than other aspects.
Some Discussion: This research found ‘Motherese’ to be an important component in the more successful interactions observed between teachers and learners with severe or complex learning difficulties. From this the authors concluded that the differentiated interactive styles highlighted were evidence that the teachers were influenced by their interactive partners, and modified their own interactive approaches accordingly. The authors believe that such a finding implies that the source of any identified communicative difficulty does not lie entirely with the learning disabled person. Instead they identify a shared or ‘transactional’ model as a more accurate representation of the communication difficulties experienced by people with severe or profound learning disabilities.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Some Background: the authors of this paper argue that the communication difficulties experienced by those with severe or profound learning disabilities have been typically attributed entirely to the learning disabled person, and therefore interventions are usually aimed at enhancing their communicative abilities. In this paper, Intensive Interaction is conceptualised as ‘transactional’ in nature, and as such difficulties are seen as arising from both sides of the communication process.
The authors note that research studies indicate that parents of disabled children tend to adopt a more directive approach to communication, whereas in contrast, mothers of typically developing children adopt a less directive style of interaction labelled ‘Motherese’, which uses slow, simple language with an exaggerated use of pitch. It is suggested that ‘Motherese’ is designed to maximise the engagement level and understanding of the child. ‘Motherese’ is also noted to employ vocalisations in unison with the child, use imitations of vocal pitch, rhythm and duration and promote the use of turn-taking, techniques similar to those used in Intensive Interaction.
The Method: This study examined the interactive talk of teachers engaging in Intensive Interaction, and the degree to which ‘Motherese’ was used to engage their learners. 4 teachers were each asked to submit 2 video clips of them practising Intensive Interaction with a partner. These videos were rated for evidence of ‘Motherese’, with the authors also identifying if some particular features of ‘Motherese’ were more common than others.
The Results: the results showed that in all of the 8 videos ‘Motherese’ was demonstrated, although the amount used varied considerably between participants. No particular feature of ‘Motherese’ was found to be evident in all of the videos, suggesting that the use of the Motherese style is individual to each interactor.
The teachers who were identified as most successfully engaging their interactive partners were noted to employ a wide range of elements of ‘Motherese’ in their interactive repertoires (although these elements were not used on every occasion). ‘Contingent Vocalisation’ or ‘joining-in’ was identified as a core feature of ‘Motherese’, and it was indicated as being more naturally used than other aspects.
Some Discussion: This research found ‘Motherese’ to be an important component in the more successful interactions observed between teachers and learners with severe or complex learning difficulties. From this the authors concluded that the differentiated interactive styles highlighted were evidence that the teachers were influenced by their interactive partners, and modified their own interactive approaches accordingly. The authors believe that such a finding implies that the source of any identified communicative difficulty does not lie entirely with the learning disabled person. Instead they identify a shared or ‘transactional’ model as a more accurate representation of the communication difficulties experienced by people with severe or profound learning disabilities.
The authors note that research studies indicate that parents of disabled children tend to adopt a more directive approach to communication, whereas in contrast, mothers of typically developing children adopt a less directive style of interaction labelled ‘Motherese’, which uses slow, simple language with an exaggerated use of pitch. It is suggested that ‘Motherese’ is designed to maximise the engagement level and understanding of the child. ‘Motherese’ is also noted to employ vocalisations in unison with the child, use imitations of vocal pitch, rhythm and duration and promote the use of turn-taking, techniques similar to those used in Intensive Interaction.
The Method: This study examined the interactive talk of teachers engaging in Intensive Interaction, and the degree to which ‘Motherese’ was used to engage their learners. 4 teachers were each asked to submit 2 video clips of them practising Intensive Interaction with a partner. These videos were rated for evidence of ‘Motherese’, with the authors also identifying if some particular features of ‘Motherese’ were more common than others.
The Results: the results showed that in all of the 8 videos ‘Motherese’ was demonstrated, although the amount used varied considerably between participants. No particular feature of ‘Motherese’ was found to be evident in all of the videos, suggesting that the use of the Motherese style is individual to each interactor.
The teachers who were identified as most successfully engaging their interactive partners were noted to employ a wide range of elements of ‘Motherese’ in their interactive repertoires (although these elements were not used on every occasion). ‘Contingent Vocalisation’ or ‘joining-in’ was identified as a core feature of ‘Motherese’, and it was indicated as being more naturally used than other aspects.
Some Discussion: This research found ‘Motherese’ to be an important component in the more successful interactions observed between teachers and learners with severe or complex learning difficulties. From this the authors concluded that the differentiated interactive styles highlighted were evidence that the teachers were influenced by their interactive partners, and modified their own interactive approaches accordingly. The authors believe that such a finding implies that the source of any identified communicative difficulty does not lie entirely with the learning disabled person. Instead they identify a shared or ‘transactional’ model as a more accurate representation of the communication difficulties experienced by people with severe or profound learning disabilities.
Cameron, L; Bell, D
Enhanced Interaction Training Journal Article
In: Working with People who have a Learning Disability, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 8-15, 2001.
@article{Cameron2001,
title = {Enhanced Interaction Training},
author = {L Cameron and D Bell},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-01-01},
journal = {Working with People who have a Learning Disability},
volume = {18},
number = {3},
pages = {8-15},
abstract = {This article focused on a multidisciplinary intervention to introduce staff to Intensive Interaction and support them in using it with their own clients.
An Introduction: It has been estimated that 50% of people with learning disabilities have significant communication problems (Scottish Executive Review of Services, 2000). However, the diagnosis of a communication problem often masks the other (i.e. the learning disability), and staff working with learning disabled people are typically poor at communicating within their client’s level of understanding (Bradshaw, 2001). It is suggested by Bott et al (1997) that a person’s level of communication difficulties is also highly related to the frequency of their challenging behaviour.
The Initial Clinical Approach: A young man with a severe communication disorder, severe learning disability and serious challenging behaviour was referred to the authors. He communicated only through vocalisations and a few repetitive words. The authors observed and assessed the client in his normal environment and found staff to be over-estimating his level of verbal comprehension and also the level of intent behind his actions. His attempts to communicate non-verbally were not being observed or responded to. The authors designed a programme aimed at improving staff observation and non-verbal communication. They used sensory objects to promote Intensive Interaction with the client.
The Intensive Interaction sessions resulted in increased eye contact, increased initiation of communication, more frequent vocalisations, and repetitive words said with a more communicative context. There was no challenging behaviour within the sessions. The staff, however, did not accept the progress. They were happy that the client could now express pleasure through clapping, but thought that it would be seen negatively in public. The authors felt that in order for this approach to be clinically effective it would require further commitment from staff.
The Revised Clinical Approach: It was decided that the carer attitude to the client, to the possibility of progress, and to the demands that would result from changing the client’s communicative behaviour would need to be addressed. The authors then saw a non-verbal young woman with self-injurious behaviour. There were six sessions of Intensive Interaction in the client’s home where one author would interact with the client whilst the staff member watched. These sessions were video-recorded and reviewed. The staff member then gradually took over the interactive role.
The Results: Due to the Intensive Interaction intervention, the client made significant communicative changes and the staff member showed an improved ability to match their communication to the client. The improvements included increased responsiveness to non-verbal cues, reduced use of verbal language and an increase in the time given for a response. These gains lasted for over a year.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article focused on a multidisciplinary intervention to introduce staff to Intensive Interaction and support them in using it with their own clients.
An Introduction: It has been estimated that 50% of people with learning disabilities have significant communication problems (Scottish Executive Review of Services, 2000). However, the diagnosis of a communication problem often masks the other (i.e. the learning disability), and staff working with learning disabled people are typically poor at communicating within their client’s level of understanding (Bradshaw, 2001). It is suggested by Bott et al (1997) that a person’s level of communication difficulties is also highly related to the frequency of their challenging behaviour.
The Initial Clinical Approach: A young man with a severe communication disorder, severe learning disability and serious challenging behaviour was referred to the authors. He communicated only through vocalisations and a few repetitive words. The authors observed and assessed the client in his normal environment and found staff to be over-estimating his level of verbal comprehension and also the level of intent behind his actions. His attempts to communicate non-verbally were not being observed or responded to. The authors designed a programme aimed at improving staff observation and non-verbal communication. They used sensory objects to promote Intensive Interaction with the client.
The Intensive Interaction sessions resulted in increased eye contact, increased initiation of communication, more frequent vocalisations, and repetitive words said with a more communicative context. There was no challenging behaviour within the sessions. The staff, however, did not accept the progress. They were happy that the client could now express pleasure through clapping, but thought that it would be seen negatively in public. The authors felt that in order for this approach to be clinically effective it would require further commitment from staff.
The Revised Clinical Approach: It was decided that the carer attitude to the client, to the possibility of progress, and to the demands that would result from changing the client’s communicative behaviour would need to be addressed. The authors then saw a non-verbal young woman with self-injurious behaviour. There were six sessions of Intensive Interaction in the client’s home where one author would interact with the client whilst the staff member watched. These sessions were video-recorded and reviewed. The staff member then gradually took over the interactive role.
The Results: Due to the Intensive Interaction intervention, the client made significant communicative changes and the staff member showed an improved ability to match their communication to the client. The improvements included increased responsiveness to non-verbal cues, reduced use of verbal language and an increase in the time given for a response. These gains lasted for over a year.
An Introduction: It has been estimated that 50% of people with learning disabilities have significant communication problems (Scottish Executive Review of Services, 2000). However, the diagnosis of a communication problem often masks the other (i.e. the learning disability), and staff working with learning disabled people are typically poor at communicating within their client’s level of understanding (Bradshaw, 2001). It is suggested by Bott et al (1997) that a person’s level of communication difficulties is also highly related to the frequency of their challenging behaviour.
The Initial Clinical Approach: A young man with a severe communication disorder, severe learning disability and serious challenging behaviour was referred to the authors. He communicated only through vocalisations and a few repetitive words. The authors observed and assessed the client in his normal environment and found staff to be over-estimating his level of verbal comprehension and also the level of intent behind his actions. His attempts to communicate non-verbally were not being observed or responded to. The authors designed a programme aimed at improving staff observation and non-verbal communication. They used sensory objects to promote Intensive Interaction with the client.
The Intensive Interaction sessions resulted in increased eye contact, increased initiation of communication, more frequent vocalisations, and repetitive words said with a more communicative context. There was no challenging behaviour within the sessions. The staff, however, did not accept the progress. They were happy that the client could now express pleasure through clapping, but thought that it would be seen negatively in public. The authors felt that in order for this approach to be clinically effective it would require further commitment from staff.
The Revised Clinical Approach: It was decided that the carer attitude to the client, to the possibility of progress, and to the demands that would result from changing the client’s communicative behaviour would need to be addressed. The authors then saw a non-verbal young woman with self-injurious behaviour. There were six sessions of Intensive Interaction in the client’s home where one author would interact with the client whilst the staff member watched. These sessions were video-recorded and reviewed. The staff member then gradually took over the interactive role.
The Results: Due to the Intensive Interaction intervention, the client made significant communicative changes and the staff member showed an improved ability to match their communication to the client. The improvements included increased responsiveness to non-verbal cues, reduced use of verbal language and an increase in the time given for a response. These gains lasted for over a year.
Kennedy, Adrian
Intensive interaction Journal Article
In: Learning Disability Practice, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 14-17, 2001, ISSN: 7748-1461.
@article{Kennedy2001,
title = {Intensive interaction},
author = {Adrian Kennedy },
doi = {doi: 10.7748/ldp2001.09.4.3.14.c1461},
issn = {7748-1461},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-01-01},
journal = {Learning Disability Practice},
volume = {4},
number = {3},
pages = {14-17},
abstract = {Adrian Kennedy describes how intensive interaction can teach us a new way of communicating with people with profound learning disabilities
The term ‘intensive interaction’ refers to an approach to working with people with learning disabilities that was first used in an educational setting but is relevant to a wide range of services. This article examines how the approach was used in a residential care home.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Adrian Kennedy describes how intensive interaction can teach us a new way of communicating with people with profound learning disabilities
The term ‘intensive interaction’ refers to an approach to working with people with learning disabilities that was first used in an educational setting but is relevant to a wide range of services. This article examines how the approach was used in a residential care home.
The term ‘intensive interaction’ refers to an approach to working with people with learning disabilities that was first used in an educational setting but is relevant to a wide range of services. This article examines how the approach was used in a residential care home.
Samuel, Judith
Intensive Interaction Journal Article
In: Clinical Psychology Forum, vol. 148, pp. 22-5, 2001.
@article{Samuel2001b,
title = {Intensive Interaction},
author = {Judith Samuel},
year = {2001},
date = {2001-01-01},
journal = {Clinical Psychology Forum},
volume = {148},
pages = {22-5},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
2000
Kellett, Mary
In: Support for Learning, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 165- 171, 2000, ISSN: 1467-9604.
@article{Kellett2000,
title = {Sam’s Story: evaluating intensive interaction in terms of its effect on the social and communicative ability of a young child with severe learning difficulties},
author = {Mary Kellett},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.00170},
doi = {10.1111/1467-9604.00170},
issn = {1467-9604},
year = {2000},
date = {2000-11-01},
urldate = {2003-01-07},
journal = {Support for Learning},
volume = {15},
number = {4},
pages = {165- 171},
abstract = {This research paper concerns a single case study that was part of a larger, more comprehensive longitudinal study of the use of Intensive Interaction in the early education of children with severe learning disabilities.
Participant: Sam was a five year old boy at a community special school, and he was half way through his reception class year. His communication abilities were judged to be ‘at the very early pre-verbal stage’ and he was indicated by the school staff as living ‘in a world of his own’. He did not use any symbolic language or formal signs, made no eye contact with other people and appeared not to observe, nor respond to, other peoples’ facial signalling. He often engaged in self-stimulatory behaviour such as ‘finger play and repetitive jiggling’.
Method & Findings: Using a ‘multiple-baseline interrupted time series methodology’ combined with weekly systematic video-recorded observation over a period of one academic year, the author shows just how much progress Sam made after the initiation of daily 10 minute sessions of Intensive Interaction. Also employed for data generation were two published assessment measures; Kiernan and Reid’s Pre-Verbal Communication Schedule, and an adaptation of Brazelton’s Cuddliness Scale.
From this research the major claims made for Sam’s observed responses to the Intensive Interaction intervention included:
• ‘Huge steps’ forward for Sam in ‘Looking at or towards a partner’s face’
• ‘Modest progress’ in the incidence of ‘social physical contact’
• Sam’s ability to ‘attend to a joint focus or activity with the teacher… developed dramatically’
• ‘Clearly evident’ progression for Sam in the incidence of ‘eye contact’
• Sam’s vocalisations ‘changed considerably’ and he ‘began to use his vocalising ability to respond contingently and to initiate contact’
• A highly significant increase in the time Sam spent ‘engaged in social interaction’
Discussion: In conclusion, the author cautions against generalising too much from the findings of this single case study. However, with this study the author shows how slow progress can be made visible for one of her participating pupils in a non-comparative or judgemental way. Furthermore, although the paper carries a serious academic message, and delivers vitally important evidential backing for the use of Intensive Interaction, it does so in such an optimistic and engaging way that it would be difficult not to be uplifted and personally moved by reading it.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This research paper concerns a single case study that was part of a larger, more comprehensive longitudinal study of the use of Intensive Interaction in the early education of children with severe learning disabilities.
Participant: Sam was a five year old boy at a community special school, and he was half way through his reception class year. His communication abilities were judged to be ‘at the very early pre-verbal stage’ and he was indicated by the school staff as living ‘in a world of his own’. He did not use any symbolic language or formal signs, made no eye contact with other people and appeared not to observe, nor respond to, other peoples’ facial signalling. He often engaged in self-stimulatory behaviour such as ‘finger play and repetitive jiggling’.
Method & Findings: Using a ‘multiple-baseline interrupted time series methodology’ combined with weekly systematic video-recorded observation over a period of one academic year, the author shows just how much progress Sam made after the initiation of daily 10 minute sessions of Intensive Interaction. Also employed for data generation were two published assessment measures; Kiernan and Reid’s Pre-Verbal Communication Schedule, and an adaptation of Brazelton’s Cuddliness Scale.
From this research the major claims made for Sam’s observed responses to the Intensive Interaction intervention included:
• ‘Huge steps’ forward for Sam in ‘Looking at or towards a partner’s face’
• ‘Modest progress’ in the incidence of ‘social physical contact’
• Sam’s ability to ‘attend to a joint focus or activity with the teacher… developed dramatically’
• ‘Clearly evident’ progression for Sam in the incidence of ‘eye contact’
• Sam’s vocalisations ‘changed considerably’ and he ‘began to use his vocalising ability to respond contingently and to initiate contact’
• A highly significant increase in the time Sam spent ‘engaged in social interaction’
Discussion: In conclusion, the author cautions against generalising too much from the findings of this single case study. However, with this study the author shows how slow progress can be made visible for one of her participating pupils in a non-comparative or judgemental way. Furthermore, although the paper carries a serious academic message, and delivers vitally important evidential backing for the use of Intensive Interaction, it does so in such an optimistic and engaging way that it would be difficult not to be uplifted and personally moved by reading it.
Participant: Sam was a five year old boy at a community special school, and he was half way through his reception class year. His communication abilities were judged to be ‘at the very early pre-verbal stage’ and he was indicated by the school staff as living ‘in a world of his own’. He did not use any symbolic language or formal signs, made no eye contact with other people and appeared not to observe, nor respond to, other peoples’ facial signalling. He often engaged in self-stimulatory behaviour such as ‘finger play and repetitive jiggling’.
Method & Findings: Using a ‘multiple-baseline interrupted time series methodology’ combined with weekly systematic video-recorded observation over a period of one academic year, the author shows just how much progress Sam made after the initiation of daily 10 minute sessions of Intensive Interaction. Also employed for data generation were two published assessment measures; Kiernan and Reid’s Pre-Verbal Communication Schedule, and an adaptation of Brazelton’s Cuddliness Scale.
From this research the major claims made for Sam’s observed responses to the Intensive Interaction intervention included:
• ‘Huge steps’ forward for Sam in ‘Looking at or towards a partner’s face’
• ‘Modest progress’ in the incidence of ‘social physical contact’
• Sam’s ability to ‘attend to a joint focus or activity with the teacher… developed dramatically’
• ‘Clearly evident’ progression for Sam in the incidence of ‘eye contact’
• Sam’s vocalisations ‘changed considerably’ and he ‘began to use his vocalising ability to respond contingently and to initiate contact’
• A highly significant increase in the time Sam spent ‘engaged in social interaction’
Discussion: In conclusion, the author cautions against generalising too much from the findings of this single case study. However, with this study the author shows how slow progress can be made visible for one of her participating pupils in a non-comparative or judgemental way. Furthermore, although the paper carries a serious academic message, and delivers vitally important evidential backing for the use of Intensive Interaction, it does so in such an optimistic and engaging way that it would be difficult not to be uplifted and personally moved by reading it.
Nind, Melanie
Teachers’ understanding of interactive approaches in special education Journal Article
In: International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 183-199, 2000.
@article{Nind2000,
title = {Teachers’ understanding of interactive approaches in special education},
author = {Melanie Nind},
url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/713671111},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/713671111},
year = {2000},
date = {2000-07-21},
journal = {International Journal of Disability, Development and Education},
volume = {47},
number = {2},
pages = {183-199},
abstract = {This paper considers the adoption of interactive approaches in the history of special education and addresses teachers’ use and conceptualisation of interactive approaches. Teachers in special schools and units in the United Kingdom were asked whether they used interactive approaches and, if so, what this meant in their context. Interactive approaches were reported to be used by two-thirds of the sample and what this meant to the 58 respondents, from different areas of special education, varied considerably. Their responses are compared with the central elements of interactive approaches in the literature. Areas of consensus are discussed and a relative lack of emphasis on process amongst the teachers is identified.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This paper considers the adoption of interactive approaches in the history of special education and addresses teachers’ use and conceptualisation of interactive approaches. Teachers in special schools and units in the United Kingdom were asked whether they used interactive approaches and, if so, what this meant in their context. Interactive approaches were reported to be used by two-thirds of the sample and what this meant to the 58 respondents, from different areas of special education, varied considerably. Their responses are compared with the central elements of interactive approaches in the literature. Areas of consensus are discussed and a relative lack of emphasis on process amongst the teachers is identified.
Nind, Melanie; Powell, Stuart
Intensive Interaction and autism: some theoretical concerns Journal Article
In: Children and Society, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 98-109, 2000, ISSN: 1099-0860.
@article{Nind2000b,
title = {Intensive Interaction and autism: some theoretical concerns},
author = {Melanie Nind and Stuart Powell },
url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229753063_Intensive_interaction_and_autism_Some_theoretical_concerns},
doi = { https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2000.tb00158.x},
issn = {1099-0860},
year = {2000},
date = {2000-03-10},
journal = {Children and Society},
volume = {14},
number = {2},
pages = {98-109},
abstract = {The authors consider the possible application of intensive interaction to children with autism. Intensive interaction is briefly described, and the question asked whether children with autism (and developmental delay) can gain from this exemplar of naturalistic, interactive approaches to facilitating sociability and communication. A theoretical approach is taken to unravel the difficulties faced by children with autism in developing sociability and communication, and the way in which intensive interaction functions. Five areas of possible mismatch between the particular difficulties/needs of these children and the method are identified and interrogated. The authors conclude that children with autism can be enabled to learn about interaction and communication through this naturalistic and supportive process. The need for empirical evidence to substantiate this position is highlighted. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The authors consider the possible application of intensive interaction to children with autism. Intensive interaction is briefly described, and the question asked whether children with autism (and developmental delay) can gain from this exemplar of naturalistic, interactive approaches to facilitating sociability and communication. A theoretical approach is taken to unravel the difficulties faced by children with autism in developing sociability and communication, and the way in which intensive interaction functions. Five areas of possible mismatch between the particular difficulties/needs of these children and the method are identified and interrogated. The authors conclude that children with autism can be enabled to learn about interaction and communication through this naturalistic and supportive process. The need for empirical evidence to substantiate this position is highlighted.
1999
Nind, Melanie
Intensive Interaction and autism: a useful approach? Journal Article
In: British Journal of Special Education, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 96–102, 1999, ISSN: 1467-8527.
@article{Nind1999,
title = {Intensive Interaction and autism: a useful approach?},
author = {Melanie Nind },
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8527.t01-1-00114},
issn = {1467-8527},
year = {1999},
date = {1999-06-01},
urldate = {2003-01-06},
journal = {British Journal of Special Education},
volume = {26},
number = {2},
pages = {96–102},
abstract = {This article addressed the potential usefulness of Intensive Interaction (I.I.) for pupils whose learning disabilities are compounded by autism. It begins with a general outline of I.I., describing it as an approach to ‘communication’ suitable for children and young people with the most severe learning disabilities, who have not readily made relationships, established informal communication or who are unable to access the set curriculum.
Nind points out that there had been no focus on I.I. as an approach to meeting the specific difficulties and needs of learners with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). She states that the need to address the relevance of I.I. for those individuals with a learning disability and autism as a separate group has arisen for two reasons: firstly the nature of the autistic condition - personal relatedness with others has been seen as a central impairment in the autistic condition; and secondly, much of the literature on autism emphasises an innate inability to learn from natural interactive processes.
Nind briefly discusses the range of intervention processes used with people with autism spectrum disorders, differentiating between ‘special’ and ‘naturalistic’ approaches. Whilst the challenging nature of many individuals with autism has encouraged a focus on ‘special’ intervention processes, such as TEACCH and Lovaas therapies, there are those who have recognised the benefits of a non-directive interactive style. The article goes on to say that naturalistic approaches do not dominate in the current climate however, where the focus remains on direct training and behavioural intervention. Nind recognises that not all practitioners in the field have shared the implicit assumption that those with learning disabilities and autism are part of the target group for I.I.
To argue the case for I.I. she draws on both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The premise that underlies I.I. is that learning to communicate is not like learning a basic skill, which can be task analysed, with constituent sub-skills taught separately in a structured programme. Becoming an intentional communicator involves learning about oneself and others, learning that we can have an effect on others and that we can share meaning (Harding, 1982). To be effective communicators, we have to want to communicate and have a concept of what communication is all about. Nind argues that the best and possibly only model we have which addresses the development of the desire to communicate with others is in caregiver-infant interaction. The only teaching approach based on this model is I.I.
The empirical evidence cited by Nind looked at the usefulness and appropriateness of I.I. for learners with autism. In this paper Nind considers a single case study, a series of narrative case studies and lastly questionnaire and interview data from teachers using I.I. The case study looked at an adult (Kris), who was diagnosed with autism at the age of four. I.I. was used with him over a 12-month period when he was 28, and any developments measured. Nind notes that there were specific new developments noticed in Kris, which she associates with the introduction of I.I. These included a greater interest in watching people and moulding and relaxing when cuddled.
The narrative case studies presented provide weak empirical evidence in that there were no structured observations, but they do complement the study of Kris with their rich descriptions and reflections. This section describes the attempts of staff and parents to use I.I. with two boys, both of whom are diagnosed with autism. Both accounts discuss how I.I. was introduced, and the resulting developments from using this approach. Such developments included giving sustained attention, initiating contact and allowing others to share in activities.
The last body of evidence that Nind looked at was a study that aimed to identify examples of good practice of I.I. This study provided data looking at the views of practitioners using this approach. Questionnaires were sent to a number of special schools and units in England, looking at the usefulness of using the approach. Results from these questionnaires identified benefits of using I.I. for both pupils and staff. Benefits for pupils included self-motivation, improved communication and the development of relationships. Benefits for staff included improved observation abilities and feeling more positive about the children. Follow-up interviews conducted with seven teachers offered rich observations to support the questionnaire data. Nind notes an interesting pattern that emerged from the findings. Staff did not seem to be concerned about the debate as to whether an interactive approach would make it harder for those with autism to learn. Instead, the decision to use I.I. was based on an assessment of the individual child and the perception of their needs, regardless of whether they had autism or a learning disability.
Finally Nind observes that despite the current emphasis in Special Education on the National Curriculum, interactive approaches continue to develop and be important both in the general field of learning disabilities and concerning individuals on the autistic spectrum. The article concludes that there is every reason for I.I. to be adopted as a useful and effective strategy for working with individuals whose learning disabilities are compounded by autism.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article addressed the potential usefulness of Intensive Interaction (I.I.) for pupils whose learning disabilities are compounded by autism. It begins with a general outline of I.I., describing it as an approach to ‘communication’ suitable for children and young people with the most severe learning disabilities, who have not readily made relationships, established informal communication or who are unable to access the set curriculum.
Nind points out that there had been no focus on I.I. as an approach to meeting the specific difficulties and needs of learners with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). She states that the need to address the relevance of I.I. for those individuals with a learning disability and autism as a separate group has arisen for two reasons: firstly the nature of the autistic condition - personal relatedness with others has been seen as a central impairment in the autistic condition; and secondly, much of the literature on autism emphasises an innate inability to learn from natural interactive processes.
Nind briefly discusses the range of intervention processes used with people with autism spectrum disorders, differentiating between ‘special’ and ‘naturalistic’ approaches. Whilst the challenging nature of many individuals with autism has encouraged a focus on ‘special’ intervention processes, such as TEACCH and Lovaas therapies, there are those who have recognised the benefits of a non-directive interactive style. The article goes on to say that naturalistic approaches do not dominate in the current climate however, where the focus remains on direct training and behavioural intervention. Nind recognises that not all practitioners in the field have shared the implicit assumption that those with learning disabilities and autism are part of the target group for I.I.
To argue the case for I.I. she draws on both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The premise that underlies I.I. is that learning to communicate is not like learning a basic skill, which can be task analysed, with constituent sub-skills taught separately in a structured programme. Becoming an intentional communicator involves learning about oneself and others, learning that we can have an effect on others and that we can share meaning (Harding, 1982). To be effective communicators, we have to want to communicate and have a concept of what communication is all about. Nind argues that the best and possibly only model we have which addresses the development of the desire to communicate with others is in caregiver-infant interaction. The only teaching approach based on this model is I.I.
The empirical evidence cited by Nind looked at the usefulness and appropriateness of I.I. for learners with autism. In this paper Nind considers a single case study, a series of narrative case studies and lastly questionnaire and interview data from teachers using I.I. The case study looked at an adult (Kris), who was diagnosed with autism at the age of four. I.I. was used with him over a 12-month period when he was 28, and any developments measured. Nind notes that there were specific new developments noticed in Kris, which she associates with the introduction of I.I. These included a greater interest in watching people and moulding and relaxing when cuddled.
The narrative case studies presented provide weak empirical evidence in that there were no structured observations, but they do complement the study of Kris with their rich descriptions and reflections. This section describes the attempts of staff and parents to use I.I. with two boys, both of whom are diagnosed with autism. Both accounts discuss how I.I. was introduced, and the resulting developments from using this approach. Such developments included giving sustained attention, initiating contact and allowing others to share in activities.
The last body of evidence that Nind looked at was a study that aimed to identify examples of good practice of I.I. This study provided data looking at the views of practitioners using this approach. Questionnaires were sent to a number of special schools and units in England, looking at the usefulness of using the approach. Results from these questionnaires identified benefits of using I.I. for both pupils and staff. Benefits for pupils included self-motivation, improved communication and the development of relationships. Benefits for staff included improved observation abilities and feeling more positive about the children. Follow-up interviews conducted with seven teachers offered rich observations to support the questionnaire data. Nind notes an interesting pattern that emerged from the findings. Staff did not seem to be concerned about the debate as to whether an interactive approach would make it harder for those with autism to learn. Instead, the decision to use I.I. was based on an assessment of the individual child and the perception of their needs, regardless of whether they had autism or a learning disability.
Finally Nind observes that despite the current emphasis in Special Education on the National Curriculum, interactive approaches continue to develop and be important both in the general field of learning disabilities and concerning individuals on the autistic spectrum. The article concludes that there is every reason for I.I. to be adopted as a useful and effective strategy for working with individuals whose learning disabilities are compounded by autism.
Nind points out that there had been no focus on I.I. as an approach to meeting the specific difficulties and needs of learners with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). She states that the need to address the relevance of I.I. for those individuals with a learning disability and autism as a separate group has arisen for two reasons: firstly the nature of the autistic condition - personal relatedness with others has been seen as a central impairment in the autistic condition; and secondly, much of the literature on autism emphasises an innate inability to learn from natural interactive processes.
Nind briefly discusses the range of intervention processes used with people with autism spectrum disorders, differentiating between ‘special’ and ‘naturalistic’ approaches. Whilst the challenging nature of many individuals with autism has encouraged a focus on ‘special’ intervention processes, such as TEACCH and Lovaas therapies, there are those who have recognised the benefits of a non-directive interactive style. The article goes on to say that naturalistic approaches do not dominate in the current climate however, where the focus remains on direct training and behavioural intervention. Nind recognises that not all practitioners in the field have shared the implicit assumption that those with learning disabilities and autism are part of the target group for I.I.
To argue the case for I.I. she draws on both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The premise that underlies I.I. is that learning to communicate is not like learning a basic skill, which can be task analysed, with constituent sub-skills taught separately in a structured programme. Becoming an intentional communicator involves learning about oneself and others, learning that we can have an effect on others and that we can share meaning (Harding, 1982). To be effective communicators, we have to want to communicate and have a concept of what communication is all about. Nind argues that the best and possibly only model we have which addresses the development of the desire to communicate with others is in caregiver-infant interaction. The only teaching approach based on this model is I.I.
The empirical evidence cited by Nind looked at the usefulness and appropriateness of I.I. for learners with autism. In this paper Nind considers a single case study, a series of narrative case studies and lastly questionnaire and interview data from teachers using I.I. The case study looked at an adult (Kris), who was diagnosed with autism at the age of four. I.I. was used with him over a 12-month period when he was 28, and any developments measured. Nind notes that there were specific new developments noticed in Kris, which she associates with the introduction of I.I. These included a greater interest in watching people and moulding and relaxing when cuddled.
The narrative case studies presented provide weak empirical evidence in that there were no structured observations, but they do complement the study of Kris with their rich descriptions and reflections. This section describes the attempts of staff and parents to use I.I. with two boys, both of whom are diagnosed with autism. Both accounts discuss how I.I. was introduced, and the resulting developments from using this approach. Such developments included giving sustained attention, initiating contact and allowing others to share in activities.
The last body of evidence that Nind looked at was a study that aimed to identify examples of good practice of I.I. This study provided data looking at the views of practitioners using this approach. Questionnaires were sent to a number of special schools and units in England, looking at the usefulness of using the approach. Results from these questionnaires identified benefits of using I.I. for both pupils and staff. Benefits for pupils included self-motivation, improved communication and the development of relationships. Benefits for staff included improved observation abilities and feeling more positive about the children. Follow-up interviews conducted with seven teachers offered rich observations to support the questionnaire data. Nind notes an interesting pattern that emerged from the findings. Staff did not seem to be concerned about the debate as to whether an interactive approach would make it harder for those with autism to learn. Instead, the decision to use I.I. was based on an assessment of the individual child and the perception of their needs, regardless of whether they had autism or a learning disability.
Finally Nind observes that despite the current emphasis in Special Education on the National Curriculum, interactive approaches continue to develop and be important both in the general field of learning disabilities and concerning individuals on the autistic spectrum. The article concludes that there is every reason for I.I. to be adopted as a useful and effective strategy for working with individuals whose learning disabilities are compounded by autism.
1998
Lovell, D; Jones, S; Ephraim, G
The Effect of Intensive Interaction on the Sociability of a Man with Severe Intellectual Disabilities Journal Article
In: International Journal of Practical Approaches to Disability, vol. 22, no. 2/3, pp. 3-8, 1998.
@article{Lovell1998,
title = {The Effect of Intensive Interaction on the Sociability of a Man with Severe Intellectual Disabilities},
author = {D Lovell and S Jones and G Ephraim
},
year = {1998},
date = {1998-01-01},
journal = { International Journal of Practical Approaches to Disability},
volume = {22},
number = {2/3},
pages = {3-8},
abstract = {The Participant: This research was conducted to investigate whether a withdrawn, 53-year-old pre-verbal man (W.) with severe intellectual disabilities showed an increase in sociable behaviour in two differing conditions. In one, a clinical psychologist engaged in Intensive Interaction with the client; in the second, the same psychologist remained close to the client but did not interact with him (‘proximity sessions’). The research was conducted in a long stay hospital for people with severe/profound intellectual disabilities.
The Results: before the interventions, the client (W.) would hum to himself and sing without words. He spent most of his time sitting alone in a corner and did not initiate any physical contact. However, there was much more physical contact in the Intensive Interaction sessions, and in one session he squeezed the psychologist's hands as part of a game for 90% of the time. He also did make physical contact on a number of occasions during the proximity sessions. Before the interventions W. spent no more than 10% of any session looking at another person - in some proximity sessions there was an increased occurrence in looking behaviour; however, during the Intensive Interaction sessions more than 10% of every session was spent looking at somebody, and over 70% on two occasions.
During the course of the intervention, vocalisation (humming or wordless singing) appeared to increase in both the Intensive Interaction and the proximity sessions over the levels recorded previously. Also no episodes of joint attention were recorded prior to the interventions. There was one recorded instance of joint attention in the proximity sessions. Episodes of joint attention were, however, observed during the Intensive Interaction sessions, recording over 70% on two occasions. No smiling or laughing was recorded prior to the interventions. However, W. was noticed to smile and laugh during two proximity sessions, and more often during Intensive Interaction sessions.
W.'s tendency to look at a toy in his hand remained relatively stable prior to, and over the period including both the proximity sessions and the Intensive Interaction sessions. W. covered his face with his clothes for 25 to 50% of the time prior to the interventions. This behaviour was only briefly evident on one of the 17 intervention sessions (during a proximity session). There were no occurrences in the Intensive Interaction sessions.
Some Discussion: the results of this research indicated that during the Intensive Interaction sessions W. tended to initiate more physical contact; spend more time looking at people; demonstrate more joint attention, and smile/laugh and vocalise more than he did prior to the interventions. He showed no examples of covering his face during the Intensive Interaction sessions, although this had been a frequent behaviour previously. The increase in sociability appeared to generalise to the proximity sessions, although the changes were significantly less marked than during Intensive Interaction.
The nursing staff who regularly worked with W. also commented that during the interaction period W. appeared happier and more willing to interact than he had been before. His increased sociability also seemed to generalise from the Intensive Interaction setting to other contexts.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The Participant: This research was conducted to investigate whether a withdrawn, 53-year-old pre-verbal man (W.) with severe intellectual disabilities showed an increase in sociable behaviour in two differing conditions. In one, a clinical psychologist engaged in Intensive Interaction with the client; in the second, the same psychologist remained close to the client but did not interact with him (‘proximity sessions’). The research was conducted in a long stay hospital for people with severe/profound intellectual disabilities.
The Results: before the interventions, the client (W.) would hum to himself and sing without words. He spent most of his time sitting alone in a corner and did not initiate any physical contact. However, there was much more physical contact in the Intensive Interaction sessions, and in one session he squeezed the psychologist's hands as part of a game for 90% of the time. He also did make physical contact on a number of occasions during the proximity sessions. Before the interventions W. spent no more than 10% of any session looking at another person - in some proximity sessions there was an increased occurrence in looking behaviour; however, during the Intensive Interaction sessions more than 10% of every session was spent looking at somebody, and over 70% on two occasions.
During the course of the intervention, vocalisation (humming or wordless singing) appeared to increase in both the Intensive Interaction and the proximity sessions over the levels recorded previously. Also no episodes of joint attention were recorded prior to the interventions. There was one recorded instance of joint attention in the proximity sessions. Episodes of joint attention were, however, observed during the Intensive Interaction sessions, recording over 70% on two occasions. No smiling or laughing was recorded prior to the interventions. However, W. was noticed to smile and laugh during two proximity sessions, and more often during Intensive Interaction sessions.
W.'s tendency to look at a toy in his hand remained relatively stable prior to, and over the period including both the proximity sessions and the Intensive Interaction sessions. W. covered his face with his clothes for 25 to 50% of the time prior to the interventions. This behaviour was only briefly evident on one of the 17 intervention sessions (during a proximity session). There were no occurrences in the Intensive Interaction sessions.
Some Discussion: the results of this research indicated that during the Intensive Interaction sessions W. tended to initiate more physical contact; spend more time looking at people; demonstrate more joint attention, and smile/laugh and vocalise more than he did prior to the interventions. He showed no examples of covering his face during the Intensive Interaction sessions, although this had been a frequent behaviour previously. The increase in sociability appeared to generalise to the proximity sessions, although the changes were significantly less marked than during Intensive Interaction.
The nursing staff who regularly worked with W. also commented that during the interaction period W. appeared happier and more willing to interact than he had been before. His increased sociability also seemed to generalise from the Intensive Interaction setting to other contexts.
The Results: before the interventions, the client (W.) would hum to himself and sing without words. He spent most of his time sitting alone in a corner and did not initiate any physical contact. However, there was much more physical contact in the Intensive Interaction sessions, and in one session he squeezed the psychologist's hands as part of a game for 90% of the time. He also did make physical contact on a number of occasions during the proximity sessions. Before the interventions W. spent no more than 10% of any session looking at another person - in some proximity sessions there was an increased occurrence in looking behaviour; however, during the Intensive Interaction sessions more than 10% of every session was spent looking at somebody, and over 70% on two occasions.
During the course of the intervention, vocalisation (humming or wordless singing) appeared to increase in both the Intensive Interaction and the proximity sessions over the levels recorded previously. Also no episodes of joint attention were recorded prior to the interventions. There was one recorded instance of joint attention in the proximity sessions. Episodes of joint attention were, however, observed during the Intensive Interaction sessions, recording over 70% on two occasions. No smiling or laughing was recorded prior to the interventions. However, W. was noticed to smile and laugh during two proximity sessions, and more often during Intensive Interaction sessions.
W.'s tendency to look at a toy in his hand remained relatively stable prior to, and over the period including both the proximity sessions and the Intensive Interaction sessions. W. covered his face with his clothes for 25 to 50% of the time prior to the interventions. This behaviour was only briefly evident on one of the 17 intervention sessions (during a proximity session). There were no occurrences in the Intensive Interaction sessions.
Some Discussion: the results of this research indicated that during the Intensive Interaction sessions W. tended to initiate more physical contact; spend more time looking at people; demonstrate more joint attention, and smile/laugh and vocalise more than he did prior to the interventions. He showed no examples of covering his face during the Intensive Interaction sessions, although this had been a frequent behaviour previously. The increase in sociability appeared to generalise to the proximity sessions, although the changes were significantly less marked than during Intensive Interaction.
The nursing staff who regularly worked with W. also commented that during the interaction period W. appeared happier and more willing to interact than he had been before. His increased sociability also seemed to generalise from the Intensive Interaction setting to other contexts.
Jones, R; Williams, H
Reducing Stereotyped Behaviour: an experimental analysis of Intensive Interaction Journal Article
In: International Journal of Practical Approaches to Disability, vol. 22, no. 2/3, pp. 21-25, 1998.
@article{Jones1998,
title = {Reducing Stereotyped Behaviour: an experimental analysis of Intensive Interaction},
author = {R Jones and H Williams
},
year = {1998},
date = {1998-01-01},
journal = {International Journal of Practical Approaches to Disability},
volume = {22},
number = {2/3},
pages = {21-25},
abstract = {This research study investigated the effects of an Intensive Interaction intervention in comparison to the effects of a proximity-only intervention. The focus of the study was on the decrease of stereotyped behaviour as opposed to any effects on social behaviour.
Stereotyped behaviour, such as body rocking, hand gazing and head swaying, is frequently reported in people with severe and profound learning disabilities. Previous studies demonstrated that naturally occurring interactions with staff could reduce stereotyped behaviour (Brusca et al, 1989; Lovell et al 1998; Ephraim, 1982).
The Participant: The participant, Larry, was a 35-year-old man with a severe intellectual disability. He lived in a residential hospital setting, did not use expressive language and had limited eyesight. Larry’s stereotyped behaviour consisted of flapping both of his hands at high frequency.
Method & Findings: The researchers conducted two single subject experiments.
The first experiment used a proximity-only treatment in order to compare the Intensive Interaction intervention with the effects of an alternative intervention. Larry was observed in his normal environment during a baseline period in order to gain evidence on the normal levels of incidence of his stereotyped behaviour. At the intervention phase staff were asked to sit near Larry (i.e. proximity-only sessions) or sit near him and imitate his left hand stereotyped behaviour (i.e. Intensive Interaction). The results of this experiment suggested that Larry’s stereotyped behaviour was ‘consistently slightly lower in the interaction conditions’ than in the proximity only sessions (and when compared to his baseline behaviour).
In the second experiment again a member of staff sat near Larry, or sat near and copied his hand flapping with both his hands. From this experiment, it appeared that ‘interaction had a reductive effect’ on Larry’s hand-flapping when compared to both his baseline behaviour, and when engaged in the proximity only sessions.
Some Discussion: Overall, despite the positive and seemingly supportive evidence listed above, the effects were small and so not viewed by the authors as unambiguously demonstrating that Intensive Interaction is an effective intervention for reducing stereotypic behaviour. However, the authors stress that stereotyped behaviour is very difficult to reduce, and many other studies have also been unable to provide evidence of effective reduction whilst using a variety of other interventions. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This research study investigated the effects of an Intensive Interaction intervention in comparison to the effects of a proximity-only intervention. The focus of the study was on the decrease of stereotyped behaviour as opposed to any effects on social behaviour.
Stereotyped behaviour, such as body rocking, hand gazing and head swaying, is frequently reported in people with severe and profound learning disabilities. Previous studies demonstrated that naturally occurring interactions with staff could reduce stereotyped behaviour (Brusca et al, 1989; Lovell et al 1998; Ephraim, 1982).
The Participant: The participant, Larry, was a 35-year-old man with a severe intellectual disability. He lived in a residential hospital setting, did not use expressive language and had limited eyesight. Larry’s stereotyped behaviour consisted of flapping both of his hands at high frequency.
Method & Findings: The researchers conducted two single subject experiments.
The first experiment used a proximity-only treatment in order to compare the Intensive Interaction intervention with the effects of an alternative intervention. Larry was observed in his normal environment during a baseline period in order to gain evidence on the normal levels of incidence of his stereotyped behaviour. At the intervention phase staff were asked to sit near Larry (i.e. proximity-only sessions) or sit near him and imitate his left hand stereotyped behaviour (i.e. Intensive Interaction). The results of this experiment suggested that Larry’s stereotyped behaviour was ‘consistently slightly lower in the interaction conditions’ than in the proximity only sessions (and when compared to his baseline behaviour).
In the second experiment again a member of staff sat near Larry, or sat near and copied his hand flapping with both his hands. From this experiment, it appeared that ‘interaction had a reductive effect’ on Larry’s hand-flapping when compared to both his baseline behaviour, and when engaged in the proximity only sessions.
Some Discussion: Overall, despite the positive and seemingly supportive evidence listed above, the effects were small and so not viewed by the authors as unambiguously demonstrating that Intensive Interaction is an effective intervention for reducing stereotypic behaviour. However, the authors stress that stereotyped behaviour is very difficult to reduce, and many other studies have also been unable to provide evidence of effective reduction whilst using a variety of other interventions.
Stereotyped behaviour, such as body rocking, hand gazing and head swaying, is frequently reported in people with severe and profound learning disabilities. Previous studies demonstrated that naturally occurring interactions with staff could reduce stereotyped behaviour (Brusca et al, 1989; Lovell et al 1998; Ephraim, 1982).
The Participant: The participant, Larry, was a 35-year-old man with a severe intellectual disability. He lived in a residential hospital setting, did not use expressive language and had limited eyesight. Larry’s stereotyped behaviour consisted of flapping both of his hands at high frequency.
Method & Findings: The researchers conducted two single subject experiments.
The first experiment used a proximity-only treatment in order to compare the Intensive Interaction intervention with the effects of an alternative intervention. Larry was observed in his normal environment during a baseline period in order to gain evidence on the normal levels of incidence of his stereotyped behaviour. At the intervention phase staff were asked to sit near Larry (i.e. proximity-only sessions) or sit near him and imitate his left hand stereotyped behaviour (i.e. Intensive Interaction). The results of this experiment suggested that Larry’s stereotyped behaviour was ‘consistently slightly lower in the interaction conditions’ than in the proximity only sessions (and when compared to his baseline behaviour).
In the second experiment again a member of staff sat near Larry, or sat near and copied his hand flapping with both his hands. From this experiment, it appeared that ‘interaction had a reductive effect’ on Larry’s hand-flapping when compared to both his baseline behaviour, and when engaged in the proximity only sessions.
Some Discussion: Overall, despite the positive and seemingly supportive evidence listed above, the effects were small and so not viewed by the authors as unambiguously demonstrating that Intensive Interaction is an effective intervention for reducing stereotypic behaviour. However, the authors stress that stereotyped behaviour is very difficult to reduce, and many other studies have also been unable to provide evidence of effective reduction whilst using a variety of other interventions.
1997
Watson, Judith; Fisher, Anne
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Intensive Interaction Teaching with Pupils with Profound and Complex Learning Disabilities Journal Article
In: British Journal of Special Education, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 80-87, 1997, ISSN: 1467-8527.
@article{Watson1997,
title = {Evaluating the Effectiveness of Intensive Interaction Teaching with Pupils with Profound and Complex Learning Disabilities},
author = {Judith Watson and Anne Fisher},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8527.00020},
doi = {10.1111/1467-8527.00020},
issn = {1467-8527},
year = {1997},
date = {1997-06-01},
urldate = {2003-01-06},
journal = {British Journal of Special Education},
volume = {24},
number = {2},
pages = {80-87},
abstract = {This research evaluated two teaching methods, including the use of Intensive Interaction, and was carried out in a Scottish school for pupils with very severe learning difficulties and multiple impairments. Six staff-pupil pairs were studied over nine months, with the study attempting to observe any changes in the pupils’ behaviour. The question under research was whether Intensive Interaction experiences are especially facilitatory in comparison with other school experiences.
The Participants: The participants were pupils with very severe learning difficulties and often multiple impairments, aged between 10 and 19 years.
Research Study 1 - Methods & Findings: Intensive Interaction sessions were videotaped at six week intervals on up to six separate occasions for each staff-pupil pair (the same staff member worked with each pupil over the whole period). The use of the Pre-verbal Communication Schedule (PVCS) enabled the researchers to assess the pupils’ typical communicative behaviour during the classroom activities. From the PVCS assessments and the data from the videotapes, the authors claimed that there were some ‘striking’ examples of social or communicative behaviours evidenced during sessions of Intensive Interaction that were not observed during ‘other classroom activities’.
Research Study 2 - Methods & Findings: In this study the teacher used two distinct teaching methods, Intensive Interaction and teacher-directed group activities. During the teacher-directed group time the children took part in ‘music and movement activities, with specified goals planned and controlled by the teacher’. The researcher gathered evidence using recording sheets and video recording. From the analysis of their findings, the authors claimed that Intensive Interaction was ‘a more rewarding social experience’ for the pupils, and one ‘in which they showed initiative and control’ over the nine-month period, and pupils tended to be ‘passive recipients’ of the teacher-directed group activities. During the Intensive Interaction sessions all the pupils ‘demonstrated higher levels of active participation and enjoyment’.
Discussion: The findings from both studies imply that Intensive Interaction not only adds to the quality of life of the pupils, but also that they learn to apply new skills. In the Intensive Interaction sessions the pupils were found to show ‘greater levels of engagement and initiated communications more effectively than during other class activities where they played a more passive, responsive role’.
The authors therefore claim that ‘more emphasis should be placed on physical contact and handling, and on a more playful approach to the curriculum’. The authors also assert that ‘the importance of such experiences, which enable more meaningful involvement in their [the pupil’s] social world, cannot be overstated’.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This research evaluated two teaching methods, including the use of Intensive Interaction, and was carried out in a Scottish school for pupils with very severe learning difficulties and multiple impairments. Six staff-pupil pairs were studied over nine months, with the study attempting to observe any changes in the pupils’ behaviour. The question under research was whether Intensive Interaction experiences are especially facilitatory in comparison with other school experiences.
The Participants: The participants were pupils with very severe learning difficulties and often multiple impairments, aged between 10 and 19 years.
Research Study 1 - Methods & Findings: Intensive Interaction sessions were videotaped at six week intervals on up to six separate occasions for each staff-pupil pair (the same staff member worked with each pupil over the whole period). The use of the Pre-verbal Communication Schedule (PVCS) enabled the researchers to assess the pupils’ typical communicative behaviour during the classroom activities. From the PVCS assessments and the data from the videotapes, the authors claimed that there were some ‘striking’ examples of social or communicative behaviours evidenced during sessions of Intensive Interaction that were not observed during ‘other classroom activities’.
Research Study 2 - Methods & Findings: In this study the teacher used two distinct teaching methods, Intensive Interaction and teacher-directed group activities. During the teacher-directed group time the children took part in ‘music and movement activities, with specified goals planned and controlled by the teacher’. The researcher gathered evidence using recording sheets and video recording. From the analysis of their findings, the authors claimed that Intensive Interaction was ‘a more rewarding social experience’ for the pupils, and one ‘in which they showed initiative and control’ over the nine-month period, and pupils tended to be ‘passive recipients’ of the teacher-directed group activities. During the Intensive Interaction sessions all the pupils ‘demonstrated higher levels of active participation and enjoyment’.
Discussion: The findings from both studies imply that Intensive Interaction not only adds to the quality of life of the pupils, but also that they learn to apply new skills. In the Intensive Interaction sessions the pupils were found to show ‘greater levels of engagement and initiated communications more effectively than during other class activities where they played a more passive, responsive role’.
The authors therefore claim that ‘more emphasis should be placed on physical contact and handling, and on a more playful approach to the curriculum’. The authors also assert that ‘the importance of such experiences, which enable more meaningful involvement in their [the pupil’s] social world, cannot be overstated’.
The Participants: The participants were pupils with very severe learning difficulties and often multiple impairments, aged between 10 and 19 years.
Research Study 1 - Methods & Findings: Intensive Interaction sessions were videotaped at six week intervals on up to six separate occasions for each staff-pupil pair (the same staff member worked with each pupil over the whole period). The use of the Pre-verbal Communication Schedule (PVCS) enabled the researchers to assess the pupils’ typical communicative behaviour during the classroom activities. From the PVCS assessments and the data from the videotapes, the authors claimed that there were some ‘striking’ examples of social or communicative behaviours evidenced during sessions of Intensive Interaction that were not observed during ‘other classroom activities’.
Research Study 2 - Methods & Findings: In this study the teacher used two distinct teaching methods, Intensive Interaction and teacher-directed group activities. During the teacher-directed group time the children took part in ‘music and movement activities, with specified goals planned and controlled by the teacher’. The researcher gathered evidence using recording sheets and video recording. From the analysis of their findings, the authors claimed that Intensive Interaction was ‘a more rewarding social experience’ for the pupils, and one ‘in which they showed initiative and control’ over the nine-month period, and pupils tended to be ‘passive recipients’ of the teacher-directed group activities. During the Intensive Interaction sessions all the pupils ‘demonstrated higher levels of active participation and enjoyment’.
Discussion: The findings from both studies imply that Intensive Interaction not only adds to the quality of life of the pupils, but also that they learn to apply new skills. In the Intensive Interaction sessions the pupils were found to show ‘greater levels of engagement and initiated communications more effectively than during other class activities where they played a more passive, responsive role’.
The authors therefore claim that ‘more emphasis should be placed on physical contact and handling, and on a more playful approach to the curriculum’. The authors also assert that ‘the importance of such experiences, which enable more meaningful involvement in their [the pupil’s] social world, cannot be overstated’.
1996
Nind, Melanie
In: European Journal of Special Educational Needs, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 48-66, 1996, ISSN: 0885-6259.
@article{Nind1996,
title = {Efficacy of Intensive Interaction: Developing sociability and communication in people with severe and complex learning difficulties using an approach based on caregiver- infant interaction},
author = {Melanie Nind},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0885625960110104},
doi = {10.1080/0885625960110104},
issn = {0885-6259},
year = {1996},
date = {1996-01-01},
urldate = {2006-07-09},
journal = {European Journal of Special Educational Needs},
volume = {11},
number = {1},
pages = {48-66},
abstract = {Intensive Interaction was developed as a teaching approach for students who experienced severe difficulties in learning and in relating to others. The approach recognizes the pre-verbal nature of the learners and addresses their need to develop the very beginnings of sociability and communication. Intensive Interaction is based on the process of caregiver-infant interaction in which the first stages of sociability and communication develop. This paper summarizes the first major study of Intensive Interaction which investigated whether it could similarly facilitate this fundamental social and communication development in the target group of people with severe developmental disabilities who demonstrated ritualistic behaviours. A multiple baseline across subjects interrupted time-series design was employed and the six subjects were all residents of a long-stay hospital. The measures included real-time observation schedules, video analysis, Kiernan and Reid's Pre-Verbal Communication Schedule and an adaptation of Brazelton's Cuddliness Scale. Results showed improved pre-communication and informal communication abilities, ‘cuddliness’ and ability to maintain and initiate social contact, and a trend towards reduction in ritualistic behaviour.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Intensive Interaction was developed as a teaching approach for students who experienced severe difficulties in learning and in relating to others. The approach recognizes the pre-verbal nature of the learners and addresses their need to develop the very beginnings of sociability and communication. Intensive Interaction is based on the process of caregiver-infant interaction in which the first stages of sociability and communication develop. This paper summarizes the first major study of Intensive Interaction which investigated whether it could similarly facilitate this fundamental social and communication development in the target group of people with severe developmental disabilities who demonstrated ritualistic behaviours. A multiple baseline across subjects interrupted time-series design was employed and the six subjects were all residents of a long-stay hospital. The measures included real-time observation schedules, video analysis, Kiernan and Reid's Pre-Verbal Communication Schedule and an adaptation of Brazelton's Cuddliness Scale. Results showed improved pre-communication and informal communication abilities, ‘cuddliness’ and ability to maintain and initiate social contact, and a trend towards reduction in ritualistic behaviour.
1991
Watson, Judith; Knight, Christine
An Evaluation of Intensive Interactive Teaching with Pupils with Very Severe Learning Difficulties Journal Article
In: Child Language Teaching and Therapy, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 310-25, 1991, ISSN: 0265-6590.
@article{Watson1991,
title = {An Evaluation of Intensive Interactive Teaching with Pupils with Very Severe Learning Difficulties},
author = {Judith Watson and Christine Knight},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/026565909100700306},
doi = {10.1177/026565909100700306},
issn = {0265-6590},
year = {1991},
date = {1991-10-01},
urldate = {1991-10-01},
journal = {Child Language Teaching and Therapy},
volume = {7},
number = {3},
pages = {310-25},
abstract = {This article describes an exploration of Intensive Interaction by staff at a school for pupils with severe learning difficulties, in Edinburgh. In this one-year study, the researchers attempted to analyse the skills used in infant-parent interaction and apply them to their educational situation via Intensive Interaction.
Participants: Six pupils with severe learning difficulties were studied over the school year. They were chosen to represent a range of age and ability. Some pupils exhibited specific idiosyncratic behaviour related to their special needs, physical condition and history, which were not shown by others. Six members of staff consistently worked on interaction with a given pupil over this period of time.
Method: Staff were asked to behave as naturally as possible, and to introduce a toy or object that they felt would be interesting to the child at some point when they felt it was appropriate to do so. The beginning of the session was signalled by taking off the pupils' shoes and leading them into the soft play area. The entire session was filmed, with the researcher holding the camera and trying to be as inconspicuous as possible. The only interruption was due to extraneous noises from other pupils in the class.
Directly after each session staff completed an interaction recording form. This involved outlining the sequence of events, identifying the best and worst parts of the session and commenting on how they felt the session had gone. Additionally, summaries of each session and detailed descriptions of short extracts were made from the videotapes.
Sessions were usually terminated when the staff member decided that the pupil had had enough, on the basis of yawns or decreased responsiveness. Each of the six members of staff were interviewed individually after the videotaping of the study had ended.
Findings: From this study it appeared that interaction was very important for the pupils, and staff emphasised the fact that ‘it builds a good relationship' and ‘there is confidence and trust that is built up'. Staff also talked about other positive effects of Intensive Interaction, which included positive outcomes for the other pupils in the class; staff being more relaxed and more willing to wait for a pupil’s responses; and improvements in staffs’ observation skills.
In general, it was claimed that staff developed high levels of expertise, and that the interactive experiences ‘had benefited their pupils and improved their own working practice’. Staff also claimed that the positive effects of the interactive experiences ‘also extended to other pupils in the class’ as the staff had become ‘more relaxed, more tolerant, and more willing to wait for responses’.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This article describes an exploration of Intensive Interaction by staff at a school for pupils with severe learning difficulties, in Edinburgh. In this one-year study, the researchers attempted to analyse the skills used in infant-parent interaction and apply them to their educational situation via Intensive Interaction.
Participants: Six pupils with severe learning difficulties were studied over the school year. They were chosen to represent a range of age and ability. Some pupils exhibited specific idiosyncratic behaviour related to their special needs, physical condition and history, which were not shown by others. Six members of staff consistently worked on interaction with a given pupil over this period of time.
Method: Staff were asked to behave as naturally as possible, and to introduce a toy or object that they felt would be interesting to the child at some point when they felt it was appropriate to do so. The beginning of the session was signalled by taking off the pupils' shoes and leading them into the soft play area. The entire session was filmed, with the researcher holding the camera and trying to be as inconspicuous as possible. The only interruption was due to extraneous noises from other pupils in the class.
Directly after each session staff completed an interaction recording form. This involved outlining the sequence of events, identifying the best and worst parts of the session and commenting on how they felt the session had gone. Additionally, summaries of each session and detailed descriptions of short extracts were made from the videotapes.
Sessions were usually terminated when the staff member decided that the pupil had had enough, on the basis of yawns or decreased responsiveness. Each of the six members of staff were interviewed individually after the videotaping of the study had ended.
Findings: From this study it appeared that interaction was very important for the pupils, and staff emphasised the fact that ‘it builds a good relationship' and ‘there is confidence and trust that is built up'. Staff also talked about other positive effects of Intensive Interaction, which included positive outcomes for the other pupils in the class; staff being more relaxed and more willing to wait for a pupil’s responses; and improvements in staffs’ observation skills.
In general, it was claimed that staff developed high levels of expertise, and that the interactive experiences ‘had benefited their pupils and improved their own working practice’. Staff also claimed that the positive effects of the interactive experiences ‘also extended to other pupils in the class’ as the staff had become ‘more relaxed, more tolerant, and more willing to wait for responses’.
Participants: Six pupils with severe learning difficulties were studied over the school year. They were chosen to represent a range of age and ability. Some pupils exhibited specific idiosyncratic behaviour related to their special needs, physical condition and history, which were not shown by others. Six members of staff consistently worked on interaction with a given pupil over this period of time.
Method: Staff were asked to behave as naturally as possible, and to introduce a toy or object that they felt would be interesting to the child at some point when they felt it was appropriate to do so. The beginning of the session was signalled by taking off the pupils' shoes and leading them into the soft play area. The entire session was filmed, with the researcher holding the camera and trying to be as inconspicuous as possible. The only interruption was due to extraneous noises from other pupils in the class.
Directly after each session staff completed an interaction recording form. This involved outlining the sequence of events, identifying the best and worst parts of the session and commenting on how they felt the session had gone. Additionally, summaries of each session and detailed descriptions of short extracts were made from the videotapes.
Sessions were usually terminated when the staff member decided that the pupil had had enough, on the basis of yawns or decreased responsiveness. Each of the six members of staff were interviewed individually after the videotaping of the study had ended.
Findings: From this study it appeared that interaction was very important for the pupils, and staff emphasised the fact that ‘it builds a good relationship' and ‘there is confidence and trust that is built up'. Staff also talked about other positive effects of Intensive Interaction, which included positive outcomes for the other pupils in the class; staff being more relaxed and more willing to wait for a pupil’s responses; and improvements in staffs’ observation skills.
In general, it was claimed that staff developed high levels of expertise, and that the interactive experiences ‘had benefited their pupils and improved their own working practice’. Staff also claimed that the positive effects of the interactive experiences ‘also extended to other pupils in the class’ as the staff had become ‘more relaxed, more tolerant, and more willing to wait for responses’.
1988
Nind, Melanie; Hewett, Dave
Interaction as Curriculum Journal Article
In: British Journal of Special Education, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 55-57, 1988, ISSN: 1467-8578.
@article{Nind1988,
title = {Interaction as Curriculum},
author = {Melanie Nind and Dave Hewett},
url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229810400_Interaction_as_Curriculum},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8578.1988.tb00314.x},
issn = {1467-8578},
year = {1988},
date = {1988-06-01},
journal = {British Journal of Special Education},
volume = {15},
number = {2},
pages = {55-57},
abstract = {New ways of stimulating a response from ‘difficult to reach’ pupils with complex needs are often sought, less often found. Melanie Nind and Dave Hewett describe their interactive approach which is based on ‘mothering’ skills and is in contrast with objectives-based methods. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
New ways of stimulating a response from ‘difficult to reach’ pupils with complex needs are often sought, less often found. Melanie Nind and Dave Hewett describe their interactive approach which is based on ‘mothering’ skills and is in contrast with objectives-based methods.