Research to practice: an evaluation of Gentle Teaching behaviour descriptions

  Gentle Teaching (GT) is a non‐aversive approach to challenging behaviour. It adopts techniques of ignore‐redirect‐reward and environmental structuring in order to manage challenging behaviour. The central tenent of such an approach is the concept of human presence as a rewarding experience. The approach requires carers to initiate and establish new interaction patterns based on unconditional regard (value) for the individual, regardless of his or her behaviour (McGee & Gonzalez, 1990). Early work on GT has had the tone of religious evangelism, with authors making claims and counter‐claims over the benefits of the approach. In 1990, McGee and Gonzalez introduced an interactional observation coding system in order to identify behaviours of carer and client in an interaction as an attempt to enable behaviours to be quantified. Ten children (seven boys, three girls) with severe learning difficulties were videotaped with teachers and a speech and language therapist in a variety of individual and group activities. The children's age range was 13;2–16;10 (mean 15;5). Nine of the children had been identified as exhibiting challenging behaviours, whereas the tenth was included in order to maintain familiarity with the group. Thirteen hours and 24 minutes of tape were edited into two‐minute segments and a total of 63 clips were randomly selected for analysis. The clips were transcribed orthographically and behaviours of the children and staff were coded by use of the McGee and Gonzalez (1990) coding system. The chi‐squared test was used to analyse goodness of fit for each category of behaviour identified in the coding. Significant differences were noted between speech and language therapists' and teachers' interactions with the children, with the speech and language therapists being more likely to ‘assist warmly’ in group work. Children were more likely than predicted to exhibit positive behaviours (for example, ‘value reciprocation’) in individual sessions. Codes for challenging behaviours were very little in evidence, although they occurred to a greater than predicted level with teachers. The codes for adverse carer reactions, such as ‘assist demandingly’ or ‘restraint and punishment’ were also little used. The categories devised by McGee and Gonzalez (1990) are of value, although they fail to account for the complexities of group interaction. This approach to coding and analysing behaviour can reorientate the carers' approach by focusing on their own role in an interaction. It has potential as a research measure and, if used in conjunction with computerised event recording, could become accessible as a therapeutic tool.