ATTACHMENT BEHAVIOUR AND LEARNING: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PUPIL, THE TEACHER AND THE TASK

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk

ATTACHMENT BEHAVIOUR AND LEARNING: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PUPIL, THE TEACHER AND THE TASK Heather Geddes Two 8 year old boys were referred because of exclusion from school. They were excluded for aggressive behaviour and both were underachieving. It became apparent after some time that there was a major difference between the boys. Sam's family had moved about a lot and he had failed to acquire the basics of learning. He had a genuine interest in stories, his mother read to him a lot, but he did not know the sounds of letters and every word he tried to read was a guess though cleverly informed by all the clues in the text. His energy was directed at avoiding the task, subverting attention and in particular in denying any difficulties. Every task seemed to be associated with feelings of failure and hopelessness and ultimately with the affect of anger and rage. After some time the connection between his anger and frustrations about learning came together and were expressed directly on the work in hand.

His unwanted behaviour seemed to be a defence against the humiliation of not knowing how to read and feeling stupid. I concluded that Sam had genuine difficulties, which required a predominantly remedial response as well as a therapeutic response and I assumed that as his difficulties in reading and writing words diminished, his behaviour would modify. It was my judgment that his behaviour was a product of deficiencies in his learning skills, which had by now become deeply entrenched and all learning had become imbued with anger. He hated school and did not want to return.

On the other hand, with the other boy Les, as soon as the session began and I put the task on the table, he began to tell me what he thought we should be doing, trying to assert his ideas of what to do over mine. No matter what I chose to begin the session with, his response was, 'But we could do this ... ', or 'You said yesterday that we would read first'.... or 'I think it would be better if ... '. When his idea of what to do was denied he would become very hostile. It was as if his energy was consumed by 'who was in charge' and not by what he was asked to do. It was my role as the one 'in charge', which seemed to be the trigger for the unwanted behaviour. The focus seemed to be on how he felt about not being in control of me rather than about learning and how he felt appeared to involve hostility towards me, the person who was directing the task.

Both boys were excluded for the same reasons yet to me they represented completely differing responses and needs.

Sam had a genuine learning difficulty requiring a sensitive educational response, an outcome of the failure of the system to identify and remediate his educational needs. On the other hand, Les demonstrated difficulties in response to the teacher that affected his capacities to learn - an inter-personal problem.

The nature of the inter-personal response can vary. In another situation, in a class group of Year 8 children in an EBD residential school, there was a boy who was excluded from his school for aggressive and hostile behaviour and not doing as he was told. Barry was very distant becoming restless and aggressive if he was approached too closely or sat next to.

He denied any need for help and worked completely autonomously - he was very comfortable working from SMP maths books. If the maths task was too difficult or he got stuck with it, he moved on to the next page or book. If the task was set by the teacher, he said it was 'shit' and tore it up and proceeded to do what he wanted to do. He was rarely offensive personally but often with the task. The teacher seemed to be a person he could not approach directly, could not ask for help or support and could not be directly angry with. He seemed to have a built-in proximity organiser - a sign on his forehead saying 'Keep your distance'. Like Les, this boy also seemed to have a difficulty in relating to the teacher rather than an educational problem but the response to the adult was distinctly different.

Mike, another child who was referred, had been known to me in a therapy group when he was younger. He had changed from a sad and pathetic child who was vague and unaware of anything that was happening in any meaningful way,

1

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk into a very challenging 10 year old who seemed permanently on the edge of a dangerous outburst. He could not stand to be in a room alone with me and tried constantly to climb out of the window. He did not engage with me or in any tasks or activities and ranged about the little medical room, opening cupboards and taking out forbidden things as if he was looking for something that he couldn't have. He too seemed to have difficulty in making a relationship with the teacher.

These brief scenarios about boys referred for similar reasons, aggressive behaviour in the classroom and underachieving are explored here using the model of Attachment Theory. The exploration is informed from three principal sources: · the theoretical basis developed by Bowlby · the empirical research carried out by Ainsworth and others, which has extended and tested Bowlby's hypothesis, and · a research investigation, recently completed (Geddes 1998, unpublished), which investigated children's behaviour in the learning situation in the light of attachment theory.

Bowlby recognised the importance of the infant/mother relationship. His hypothesis concerned the effects of separation and loss on infant development and the nature of the infant/mother attachment relationship with implications for feelings such as separation anxiety, fear and anger (Bowlby 1973). He considered the goal-seeking behaviour of the infant and he postulated that the aim was to obtain proximity to mother and to achieve security in her presence. The core concept of attachment theory is that human infants are biologically predisposed at birth to seek and make strong emotional bonds with another. Bowlby stated in his paper to the British Psychoanalytical Society in 1958: 'There is in infants an inbuilt need to be in touch with and to cling to a human being. In this sense there is a need for an object independent of food ..., which is as primary as the need for food and warmth'.

In Bowlby's terms, a person who has experienced a secure attachment 'is likely to possess a representational model of attachment figure(s) as being available, responsive, and helpful and a complementary model of himself as ... a potentially lovable and valuable person' (Bowlby 1980 p.242) and is likely to 'approach the world with confidence and, when faced with potentially alarming situations, is likely to tackle them effectively or to seek help in doing so' (Bowlby 1973 p.208). Infants whose needs have not been adequately met in this respect see the world as 'comfortless and unpredictable and they respond either by shrinking from it or doing battle with it' (Bowlby 1973 p.208). These words remind me strongly of some children in the classroom.

Bowlby wrote prolifically and his three great volumes on 'Attachment, Separation and Loss' (1969, 1973 and 1980) explore and describe in great detail his theories on the meaning and implications of attachment, separation and loss for human development. Bowlby relates the concepts of attachment to biological concepts and ethological research, but also holding onto aspects of the psychoanalytic background. Attachment Theory combines the intra-psychic with the inter-personal, each informing the other. His psychoanalytic experience lends depth to the theory and enables an investigation of the complex emotional experience of attachment and separation. He identifies and discusses affect associated with separation, feelings of anxiety, fear and anger.

The strong empirical base in attachment research was established primarily by Mary Ainsworth. From her observations of infants and mothers she concluded (Ainsworth 1982) that children demonstrate a range of behaviours that achieve attachment - defined as 'attachment behaviour'. This concurred with Bowlby's belief in the proximity seeking of the infant when activated by internal conditions such as hunger, cold or pain and by external conditions which are frightening, causing the infant to seek contact with an attachment figure. The aim of attachment behaviour is proximity or contact with the associated affect of feeling secure and safe. Ainsworth was struck by the extent to which from 2 months onwards and increasingly through the first year, the infant is not passive but actively seeks interaction. Ainsworth was concerned to measure the nature of the attachment bond between infant and attachment-figure and Ainsworth and Wittig (1969) devised a procedure for studying the interplay between the early infant's attachment behaviour and exploratory behaviour in conditions of low and high stress. This was known as the Strange Situation Procedure. In their experimental situation, Ainsworth and Wittig noted differing patterns of response to mother at reunion. The strange situation experiment captured early differences in behavioural organisation and from the results it was possible to identify quantifiably different patterns of attachment behaviour.

The Attachment Patterns identified by the Strange Situation Procedure were Secure and Insecure/Anxious Attachment Patterns. Further Insecure patterns were described as: · Anxious/Avoidant · Anxious/ Resistant Ambivalent · Anxious/Disorganised Disorientated

2

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk Follow-up studies of children categorised by the Strange Situation procedure found patterns of secure attachment behaviour to be consistent beyond infancy. As children get older, the maintenance of proximity to the attachment figure becomes increasingly an internalised and symbolic process. This has been linked to the capacity of the child to make symbolic representations of the absent figure, with increasing age, represented by such terms as, 'keeping in touch'. The way in which the attachment/behavioural system becomes internally organised itself constitutes the bond or attachment to that figure.

More recent work has concerned the nature of adult attachments and the links between the manner and quality of adult relationships and infant attachment experience using the Adult Attachment Interview. It would appear that attachment experience has long-term implications, into adulthood (Grossman et al.1988) and provides a model with which to 'conceptualise how maternal handling becomes internalised as infant psychology' (Holmes 1993 p.116) and reaches into adulthood.

Attachment Theory was the theoretical framework of the investigation, which is referred to here. The sample investigated originated from data concerning children and their families, where the children were underachieving at school and whose problems were associated with emotional and behavioural difficulties. It was possible to identify a sample of cases which represented Insecure/Avoidant attachment behaviour and a sample of cases which represented Insecure/Resistant/Ambivalent attachment behaviour and to bring together clinical case work and classroom observations. It was possible to recognise distinct patterns of response in the learning situation, linked to attachment experience with implication for the relationship with the teacher and for the meaning of the task and which brings further insights into the struggle that these children experience in the learning situation as they may either shrink from the world or do battle with it (Bowlby 1973 p.208). The two patterns of attachment which it was possible to investigate, Avoidant and Resistant, will be examined in detail bringing together experimental observation made by Ainsworth and others, interpretation of the unconscious processes involved in the attachment experience from the work of Bowlby, Hopkins, Holmes and others, as well as observations from the learning situation derived from the research investigation, to compile profiles of behaviour in the learning situation in relation to attachment experience. Mention will also be made of the Insecure/Disorganised Disorientated attachment group identified by Main and Solomon (1982) though this group was not identified in the research material and the comments derive from more generalised experience.

Features of the Insecure/Anxious/Avoidant attachment experience The Ainsworth study found that the mothers of this group of babies displayed the 'rejection syndrome', associated with the mother's anger, her emotional inexpressiveness and her rejection of physical contact with the infant. The mothers were less sensitive in all contexts and the infants avoided contact, proximity or even interaction with their mothers when reunited after separation.

Children of this group are most striking for their apparent absence of fear, distress, or anger. The conflict expressed by the Avoidant group babies is complex. Like all infants they want close bodily contact at times of distress when the attachment system is activated at high intensity but they have also come to avoid closeness with their mother because of rebuffs. They have a classic approach-avoidance conflict, as described by Hopkins (1987): 'The situation is irresolvable because rejection by an established attachment figure activates simultaneous and contradictory impulses both to withdraw and to approach. The infant cannot approach because of the parent's rejection and cannot withdraw because of its own attachment needs. The situation is self-perpetuating because rebuff heightens alarm and hence heightens attachment, leading to increased rebuff, increased alarm, and increased heightening of attachment....In other words by repelling the infant the mother simultaneously attracts him'.

Hopkins goes on to describe the clinical implications for these children - rejection having a profound effect. They experience an acute conflict between the 'desire for and the dread of physical acceptance, and a self representation of being in some ways untouchable or repellent' (p.21). This is affirmed by Bowlby (1973), who describes the 'unwanted child' as 'likely not only to feel unwanted by his parents but to believe he is essentially unwantable' (p.204). They tend to have a fear of dependency and neediness and to adopt self-reliance as a defence. In his discussion of 'fear' in relation to separation, Bowlby (1973) comments that when a child is afraid of some external object or situation, what he is really afraid of is the absence of someone he loves (p.171). The child of this avoidant pattern whose defence is fearlessness, tends to deny the absence of or the need for, the loved one.

Bowlby (1973) also associated separations with the arousal of anxiety and anger. Anxiety results from trying to maintain the appropriate proximity and anger is aroused by the 'absence' of the attachment figure. In the follow-up studies of this attachment group, such children are described as carrying 'an underlying anger that he or she has not learned to express directly'. Sroufe (1983) also noted that the avoidant child demonstrated an underlying anger that he has not learned to direct

3

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk at the source (p.52). Such feelings tend to be directed at objects accompanied by more subtle non-compliance. A Kleinian interpretation would be that the child is unable to associate strong negative feelings with the primary object. Instead, unwanted strong feelings are split off and projected into an outside source, preserving the belief in the love of the primary object (Holmes 1993). Holmes sums up the source and affect associated with avoidant attachment: 'It seems possible that because these parents have not been able to deal with ... their own distress they cannot cope with pain and anger in their infants and so the cycle is perpetuated. The infant is faced with parents who, due to their own internal conflicts or ego weakness, cannot hold .... the child's negative feelings or distress or fear of disintegration. The child is therefore forced to resort to primitive defence mechanisms in order to keep affect within manageable limits. Aggressive feelings may be repressed or split off as in the avoidant child who does not react to the mother's absence but then shows overt aggression towards toys or siblings' (Holmes 1993 p.117).

The meaning of avoidance as a function of attachment behaviour was explored by Main and Weston (1982) who suggested that paradoxically avoidance may function to permit the partners to maintain proximity. The psychological interpretation was that avoidance may be a way of moderating the bearable level of attention between the attachment couple with the infant employing avoidance as an alternative to anger felt towards the mother, anger which would otherwise be psychologically intolerable. This moderating function is somewhat like the observations that Stern (1985) described between the very young infant and the mother, with the infant averting its gaze as a way of regulating the level of stimulation given by mother. This suggests that avoidance is a way of preserving organisation which otherwise might result in the child being overwhelmed by extreme anger or distress. The avoidant adaptation can range from a self-contained and emotionally distant personality approved of in many situations (the British 'stiff upper lip') to the severely schizoid or autistic.

Data concerning the avoidant sample in the investigation, combined with observations and interactions in the learning situation revealed a pattern of response to the teacher and the task, which mirrored strongly this attachment responsiveness. This is demonstrated by referring back to Barry, the Year 8 boy in the E.B.D. school classroom.

Barry tended to approach the sessions or lessons with apparent unconcern, a fearlessness that denied any anxiety about entering the social group or anticipation of the lesson - a tendency to be 'cool'. He got on with his work quite independently, taking out the S.M.P. maths books and getting on with it as if the teacher was not there. If difficulties were encountered, he moved on to another self-chosen task or, if the task was set by the teacher, it was said to be rubbish, boring, stupid, 'shit' and perhaps torn up and thrown away. Disruptive behaviour might then develop aimed at disrupting the class so that what the teacher was then likely to do was become engaged in controlling and sanctioning the group. Any attempt to intervene at the source of the difficulty, when the pupil first encountered the challenge of the task, was difficult because the teacher was kept at a distance both physically and by manipulation of the group. Any approach by the teacher was carefully monitored by Barry. It wasn't possible to sit beside the pupil and to engage in a mutual process of help and assistance because this caused him to become very agitated and to move away. Individual attention was shunned. The work that did when tasks were completed was limited by a lack of expressiveness. Verbal exchange was about information sharing rather than the development of mutual thinking. Written work was limited to concise reporting of events and drawings were copied from other sources. It was as if the exploration of words and ideas was dangerous. A particular example demonstrates the danger of the use of words when Barry was making a Christmas card for his mother and he wrote inside, 'I love you not'.

I commented about what his mother might think about the card and he changed the 'not' into a drawing of a box wrapped up with a bow, disguising the hostility as a present.

'I love you

With attachment patterns in mind it was possible to see Barry's difficulties and provocative behaviour differently. It was possible, using the kind of thinking described in the profile above, to see Barry as a boy whose defence against anxiety was to assume fearlessness and that his 'cool' manner was an aspect of his defences triggered by anxiety in the learning situation and the presence of a 'caring' teacher. The task is significant here as the task embodies the challenges of learning and in a sense may be like the fears in the outside world that Bowlby described as evoking the need for attachment. For Barry a

4

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk secure-enough attachment base had perhaps not been available and it is possible that for Barry the presence of the caring teacher was a tantalising reminder of the absence of the support he had needed in the past. The teacher is 'dangerous', a source of potential pain and so the task or the 'object' of learning becomes a safer focus. Hostility felt towards the teacher became directed at the task - feelings directed at objects (Sroufe 1983 p.49).

With this in mind it was possible to design and prepare the task so that it was achievable to Barry and his need to be autonomous yet to keep him in mind from a safe distance. It was possible to organise class activities with built in choices that allowed Barry to participate in the overall task whilst still appearing to set his own agenda. It was possible to notice and to comment whilst respecting his need to control his proximity with the teacher. Gradually some helpful change took place.

Barry was less tense and abrasive and rubbished the task less. The neatness of his work improved as if some aspects of his anxiety were diminishing.

Barry's particular difficulties in learning appeared to be linked to his experience of an attachment that had left him embattled with the world and unable to ask for or to engage with a helping relationship. It was possible to effect change in this embattled position by starting with some understanding of his position, the affect associated with external challenge and the possible meaning of the behaviour that supported it. From there, it was possible to remain the teacher but to work more effectively with Barry primarily by focusing attention not on him but on the task so that he could achieve more success, greater self esteem and some sense of a relationship that could be relied upon to think about him. The role of the task was very significant in working with Barry and strongly reminded me of comments made recently by Beaumont about the 'paternal function' of the task in educational therapy and the task as the emotional safety barrier between the pupil and the teacher.

Awareness of this attachment pattern helped me to be sensitive to the pupil's attachment behaviour triggered by close proximity with a caring teacher and to the significance of the task in creating a safe 'learning space' within which support could be experienced through the structure of the task rather than by association with the teacher. This response through the task enabled some experience of a different kind of relationship, a reduction of anxiety, a more hopeful and positive sense of self and greater educational success.

Features of Insecure Anxious/Resistant/Ambivalent attachment behaviour In the Strange Situation Procedure, Ainsworth observed that the children demonstrating this category of attachment were anxious even in pre-separation episodes and all were upset at separation. At reunion they wanted contact but resisted it as if finding 'little security in the mother's return or presence' (Main and Weston 1982 p.39) and demonstrating an ambivalence towards her, wanting her attention and presence but at the same time appearing to resist it as well. The behaviour of the mothers of these babies was diverse but they were not rejecting. They were highly insensitive, in keeping with the notion that the relationship was meeting their needs rather than the needs of the child. They seemed to enjoy bodily contact but more as an expression of their own needs that those of the baby. They preferred kissing to cuddling. The children of this group can seem to want constant and clinging contact and reassurance and yet to resist it. Barrett and Trevitt (1991) describe this pattern as 'overprotection' describing parents who are unable to separate from their infants and whose infants serve the purpose of reassuring the adult. They may also be referred to as 'enmeshed'. The mother can appear to be highly tuned to the needs and feelings of her child but the relationship may be expressing her own needs rather than those of the child.

Hopkins (1990) uses Balint's (1959) description of this behaviour and quotes: the 'real aim (of the infant's behaviour) is not to cling but to be held without even needing to express the wish for it' and physical contact is necessary in order to keep 'in touch' (p.22). Ainsworth (1982) offered an interpretation of this behaviour: 'The conflict of the these babies is a simple one - between wanting close bodily contact and angry because their mothers do not pick them up when they want to be held or hold them for as long as they want. Because their mothers are insensitive to their signals, these babies lack confidence in their (mother's) responsiveness. Thus when the attachment system is highly activated, these babies are doubly upset because they have learned to expect to be frustrated rather than comforted' (Ainsworth 1982 p.18).

Clinging may be the attachment behaviour aimed at holding the mother close. In the light of Bowlby's comments about 'fear' (1973 p.107) the infants may be responding to fear of absence of the loved one by making sure they do not go away by holding onto them. Such children have demonstrated two distinct types of response in the pre-school situation; they can be either impulsive and tense or helpless and fearful. In terms of anger, Sroufe (1983) observed that the resistant infants directed their anger at the mother.

In observations in the learning situation this pattern can be seen in children who desperately seek the attention of the teacher, clammering for attention or wanting to be next to her all the time. These children seem to be very anxious whatever

5

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk the task and find it impossible to get started unless they have the teacher's undivided attention. Any deviation from this undivided attention seems to evoke outbursts of hostility and anger that disrupt the teaching and learning process so that very little progress is made.

Les is one of the pupils I referred to earlier. He was an amiable talkative boy. He had well developed verbal skills, which were used to control and manipulate the situation and to hold onto my attention. Whatever I had planned to begin with and no matter how well our routine was established, Les was ready to suggest something else. I experienced this as an expression of his anxiety about the unreliable adult who cannot be relied upon to be responsive. His 'holding on' was accompanied by some hostility, the affect associated with the unreliability of the adult. If he lost control of the attention of the teacher then he might lose her presence - perhaps representing a mortal dread. Taking control of the teacher was a way of 'clinging'.

The task represented an intrusion into this relationship and a threat to it.

Once Les was reassured about the continuing presence of the teacher he worked very willingly providing each step was small and achievable and massively supported. The challenge to the teacher was to survive the hostility that accompanied learning. The greatest challenge to Les was to ask him to write or to draw and in particular to make up a story. Eventually he did manage a squiggle, which he turned into a circle with a shape inside that he turned into 'me'.

This became the basis for a story about two characters, 'me' and 'mo', about whom he wrote (spelling corrected): 'One day mo me were looking at each other and he ate her up, he did not like her. Because she bossed him around' I experienced this as his preoccupation with the struggle to separate himself from the 'other' but accompanied by anxiety associated with the fear of separation.

I found that working with Len and others like him in other situations was very challenging. I experienced the relationship, in the counter-transference as very intrusive and found Les very difficult to 'think about' as if my thoughts could not be kept separate from his and as if he was able to get under my skin and inside of me. However, awareness of this category of attachment behaviour alerted me to the possible meaning of these intrusive feelings and of the constant demands of the child who dare not allow the attachment figure to 'go away'. The task threatened to intrude into the primary dependent relationship and evoked tremendous anxiety accompanied by anger and hostility. Organisation of the task needed to take into account the need for continuous reassurance and support with very gradual progress towards independent thought or action.

Disorganised/Disorientated Attachment Behaviour This is the smallest group identified in the original Strange Situation sample (Main and Solomon 1982) and demonstrates an infrequent pattern. It is a difficult pattern to identify as it is found in conjunction with behaviour patterns characteristic of one of the other categories of attachment behaviour. I was not able to identify examples of this pattern with any confidence in the sample of cases that I studied because of this. Whereas the avoidant or ambivalent infants have developed consistent patterns of response, Main suggested these infants do not have consistent strategies for dealing with stress. Typical disorientated behaviour in the Strange Situation Procedure primarily demonstrated expressions of apprehension and confusion with the infants sometimes becoming 'frozen', suggestive of inner conflict.

Within this category of attachment are children who may mimic secure attachment, which may represent a more extreme insecurity- a form of hyper-vigilance to mother or to other factors in the environment, which Moore (1995) interprets as a highly organised response to a high risk environment. This pattern has been found among children of mothers with major depressive disorders and Engeland and Sroufe (1981b) found many abused and neglected infants fitted the pattern. Parents may be frightened or frightening, some may have been abusive, other parents are suffering from unresolved grief and mourning or drug related problems resulting in periods of major pre-occupation. Hopkins (1990) observes that: 'As these infants grow up they are liable to cope with their helplessness by becoming very controlling of their parents, either in a caregiving or a punitive way'. The hyper-vigilance described by Moore may be the outcome of the profound uncertainty they experience in their environment and reflect the need to be constantly alert and so always noticing what is happening and unable to focus on any task.

6

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk Generalised comments about his group in the learning situation are difficult to make because they may be children who find engagement in the learning process very difficult. I am aware of children who appear to fit this pattern; a dazed and disconnected girl who had been abused and lived in various foster homes and Mike, the boy mentioned earlier who seemed to find any association with the teacher or the task impossible but who sought to find 'lost' objects in cupboard and whose mother was involved with drug use and was highly unreliable This connection with objects rather than people has been commented on by teachers and the interpretation of this behaviour is open to speculation. They represent a very challenging and disturbing group whose restlessness, hyper-vigilance and disconnection may suggest characteristics in common with children thought to have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Perhaps the need for safety is the priority for these children and a prerequisite for the learning process to begin.

Implications of attachment theory in the learning situation Saltzberger-Wittenberg et al.(1983) suggest that children form important relationships with teachers which are 'imbued with meaning'. Ainsworth et al (1978) considered attachment and cognition as intertwined. They proposed that the infant developed 'working models' and 'cognitive maps', which were the inner representation of the attachment figure, the self and the environment, which became increasingly complex with experience. Attachment research data indicates that 'children with a history of anxious attachment are less ego-resilient (have lower self esteem), and are more dependent, show more negative affect and negative behavioural signs, show less positive affective engagement with others and are less popular with peers. In general they are emotionally less healthy than children with a history of secure attachment' (Sroufe1983 p.64).

Barrett and Trevitt (1991) present many case examples of children demonstrating patterns of response in the learning situation, which they suggest could be linked to attachment behaviour. In the school setting Barrett and Trevitt see the teacher, especially for anxious children as the 'specific attachment person' applicable when describing the role of a teacher who can represent a 'secure base' in the often confusing and demanding world of school. They describe the child's early experiences with mother as the first experience of interactional learning which 'enabled them to have an expectation that other adults could be approached and would be responsive to their needs' (p.54) or not.

Johnson (1992) and Williams et al (1994) suggest that attachment experience has implications for those seeking to assist children in the learning process. Johnson suggests that knowledge of attachment behaviour assists in the identification of children at risk in schools. 'That attachment theory does in fact make distinct classifications of behavioural organisations that may affect a child's ability to adapt in the school setting and inhibit cognitive learning is of extreme importance in identification of children at risk' (p. 181). Williams et al (1994) see such knowledge as a tool in helping to untangle the complex behavioural problems that can confuse learning issues which was found to be true when teaching the challenging children who have been described here.

It is suggested here that attachment behaviour is triggered in the learning situation when the pupil encounters anxiety. Perhaps school and learning itself constitute a 'strange situation procedure' with the teacher-pupil relationship and the challenge embodied in the task, playing significant roles. Evidence suggests that distinct patterns of response to the teacher and to the task can be identified which are linked to attachment experience and that these patterns are identifiable in the mainstream and special classroom. Awareness of attachment behaviour can help the teacher to organise an appropriate response within their role as teacher, that avoids triggering unwanted attachment behaviour and can help to establish a more hopeful learning relationship.

REFERENCES AINSWORTH, M.D.SALTER,O. and WITTIG B.A.(1969) 'Attachment and exploratory behaviour of one-year-olds in strange situation', in B.M.Foss (Ed) Determinants of Infant behaviour, Vol.4 London: Methuen AINSWORTH, M.D.S.,BLEHAR, M.,WATERS, E. AND WALL, S. (1978) Patterns of Attachment - a Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale N.J.: Erlbaum.

AINSWORTH, M.D.S. (1982) 'Attachment - Retrospect and Prospect' in C.M.Parkes and J.Stevenson-Hinde (Eds) The Place of Attachment in Human Behaviour.

London: Routledge.

BALINT, M. (1959) Thrills and Regression, London: Hogarth Press.

7

This document was downloaded from The Caspari Foundation website at www.caspari.org.uk BARRETT, M. AND TREVITT, J. (1991) Attachment Behaviour and the Schoolchild, London: Routledge.

BEAUMONT, M. (1999) ‘Children, Learning and the Meaning of Time’ in the journal Educational Therapy and Therapeutic Teaching.

BOWLBY, J. (1969) Attachment and Loss. vol. 1, Attachment London: Penguin.

BOWLBY, J. (1973) Attachment and Loss. vol.2 Separation: Anxiety and Anger London: Hogarth Press.

BOWLBY, J. (1980) Attachment and Loss. vol.3 Loss: Sadness and Depression, London: Hogarth Press.

ENGELAND, B. and SROUFE, L.A. (1981b) 'Developmental sequelae of maltreatment in infancy' in Rizley, R. and Cicchetti, D, (Eds) Developmental Perspectives in Child Maltreatment pp77 - 92, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

GEDDES, H. (1998 unpublished) 'Attachment and Learning: an investigation into links between Attachment Experience, Reported Life Events, Behaviour Causing Concern at Referral and Difficulties in the Learning Situation' (submitted as Ph.D thesis to Roehampton Institute, University of Surrey).

GROSSMAN, K.E. and GROSSMAN, K. (1991) 'Attachment quality as an organiser of emotional and behavioural responses in a longitudinal perspective' in Parkes C.M.,Stevenson-Hinde J. and Marris P. (Eds) Attachment Across the Life Cycle London: Routledge.

HOLMES, J. (1993) John Bowlby and Attachment Theory London: Routledge.

HOPKINS, J. (1987) 'Failure of the Holding Relationship: Some Effects of Physical Rejection on the Child's Attachment and on His Inner Experience' Journal of Child Psychotherapy Vol.13 no.1 HOPKINS, J. (1990) 'The Observed Infant of Attachment' in Journal of the Institute for Self Analysis Vol 4 no.1 JOHNSON, L. (1992) 'Educational Applications of Attachment Theory' in The Irish Journal of Psychology, 1992, 13, 2, 176183.

MAIN, M. and SOLOMON, J. (1982) 'Discovery of an Insecure-Disorganised/Disorientated Attachment Pattern' in Parkes, C. M. and Stevenson-Hinde, J. (Eds) The Place of Attachment in Human Behaviour London: Routledge.

MAIN, M. and WESTON, D. (1982)'Avoidance of the Attachment Figure in Infancy: Descriptions and Interpretations' in Parkes C.M. and Stevenson-Hinde J.(Eds) The Place of Attachment in Human Behaviour London: Routledge.

MOORE, M.S. (1995) Lecture at the 9th International Educational Therapy Conference, Athens.

RADKE-YARROW, M. (1991) 'Attachment patterns in children of depressed mothers' in Parkes, C.M., Stevenson-Hinde, J. and Marris, P. (Eds) Attachment Across the Life Cycle London: Routledge.

SALTZBERGER-WITTENBERG, I., HENRY, G. and OSBORNE, E. (1983) The Emotional Experience of Learning and Teaching London: Routledge Kegan Paul Ltd. SROUFE, L.A. (1983) 'Infant-Caregiver Attachment Patterns of Adaptation in Preschool: The Roots of Maladaptation and Competence' in Permutter (Ed) Minisotta Symposium of Child Psychology Vol.16 pp.41-81 STERN, D.N. (1985) The Interpersonal World of the Infant London: Basic Books WILLIAMS, L.M.,O'CALLAGHAN J. and COWIE H. (1994) 'Therapeutic issues in educational psychology: can attachment theory inform practice?' Educational and Child Psychology Vol.12 no.4 p.95.

8