Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Citation: Parker, R., Rose, J. and Gilbert, L. (2016) Attachment Aware Schools: An alternative to behaviourism in supporting children’s behaviour? In Lees, H. and Noddings, N. (Eds) The Palgrave International Handbook of Alternative Education. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

Chapter 29

Attachment Aware Schools: An Alternative to Behaviourism in Supporting Children’s Behaviour? by Richard Parker, Janet Rose & Louise Gilbert

In England, a meeting took place in 2014 with the major initial teacher education

organisations, discussing how to improve trainee teachers’ understanding of

attachment, and how it related to behaviour issues. A senior Department for

Education official explained how the government was working to improve teacher

authority, with no-notice detentions, increased rights to conduct searches and

protection against unfounded complaints. A colleague from a teaching school—

who happened to have a military background—quietly asked: “What about

relationships? Isn’t that what discipline is about?”

Introduction

The behaviourist paradigm is strongly engrained in English schools and much of the

educational world (Harold & Corcoran, 2013; Hart, 2010). Current government policies

(Department for Education, 2014a, 2014b, 2014c) and a school inspectorate system (Ofsted,

2014a) that explicitly endorse behaviourist principles have combined to reinforce a traditional

view that children’s behaviour should be managed through a system of sanctions and rewards

in order to improve their classroom performance and promote pro-social behaviour. It is fair

to say that such a system can work … for most of the children, for most of the time. But what

happens when it does not work?

Harold and Corcoran’s (2013) and Hart’s (2010) review of behaviourist critique

reveal how the reductionist nature of the behaviourist model belies the complexities of

behavioural difficulties and the dynamic interplay of socio-cultural, genetic and contextual

factors that may affect a child’s behaviour. It reflects an inflexible, “one size fits all”

perspective that does not take into consideration the holistic, constructivist nature of human

learning or the power of intrinsic motivation. Nor do such approaches embrace more post-

modern perspectives of human agency and the “child’s voice,” since they encourage

441

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

passivity, control and obedience rather than empowerment, autonomy and self-regulation. In

drawing attention to the prevailing behaviourist and “zero-tolerance” discourses, Harold and

Corcoran (2013) proffer an alternative discourse and practice that rests upon “relational

action.” Such an ethos and model are likely to reflect more inclusive practices and are more

restorative, reparational and rights-based. Links can be made here to Shaughnessey’s (2012)

call for the need to re-focus attention on humanist approaches which acknowledge the

complexity of children’s behaviour and focus on internal factors, rather than external control.

In this chapter, we explore one such humanist alternative for supporting children’s behaviour

and well-being—attachment awareness and attachment-based strategies.

Background—The relevance of attachment theory to educational practice

The theory of attachment was first proposed by the psychiatrist John Bowlby, who described

it as a “lasting psychological connectedness between human beings” (1988). He considered

that children needed to develop a secure attachment with their main caregiver in their early

years via sufficiently consistent, responsive, sensitive, appropriate, predictable care. Secure

attachments support mental processes that enable the child to regulate emotions, reduce fear,

attune to others, have self-understanding and insight, empathy for others and appropriate

moral reasoning (Schore, 2001; Sroufe & Siegel, 2011). Bowlby called these mental

representations “the internal working model.” Insecure attachments, on the other hand, can

develop if early interactions are more negative, more inconsistent, more insensitive,

unresponsive, inappropriate and/or unpredictable and can have unfortunate consequences. If a

child cannot rely on an adult to respond to their needs in times of stress, they are unable to

learn how to soothe themselves, manage their emotions and engage in reciprocal relationships

(Sroufe & Siegel, 2011). They do not necessarily develop a view of themselves and others as

trustworthy, safe, dependable and deserving of care (Bowlby, 1988).

A child’s initial dependence on others for protection provides the experiences and

skills to help them cope with frustrations, develop self-confidence and pro-social

relationships—all qualities necessary to promote positive engagement with learning. Since

Pianta’s (1992) pioneering work linking attachment theory to teacher-child relationships,

research has inextricably linked attachment to school readiness and school success (Bergin &

Bergin, 2009; Commodari, 2013; Geddes, 2006). Indeed, Riley considers that the application

of attachment principles to the dyadic teacher-pupil relationship “offers teachers new ways to

inform and improve their practice” going on to advocate that “the adult attachment model of

reciprocal care-giving and care-seeking is a more appropriate lens through which to view the

442

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

teacher-student relationship” (Riley, 2009, p. 626). Riley and Kennedy and Kennedy (2004)

all cite the evidence which shows how children will form “bonds” with significant adults

outside the family, such as teachers, who can become “attachment figures” to pupils. Close

and supportive relationships with teachers have demonstrated the potential to mitigate the risk

of negative outcomes for children who may otherwise have difficulty succeeding in school

(Driscoll & Pianta, 2010).

Indeed, Davis (2003) highlights various studies which have shown how the quality of

teacher–child relationships shape classroom experiences and influence children’s social and

cognitive development, and the literature on attachment is able to offer new insights into the

nature of such relationships and their consequences on learning and behaviour (Verschueren

& Koomen, 2012). For example, Bergin and Bergin point to the evidence of how pupils’

attachment styles to caregivers can parallel the attachment relationship between teacher and

child and how “secure teacher–student relationships predict greater knowledge, higher test

scores, greater academic motivation, and fewer retentions or special education referrals than

insecure teacher–student relationships” (Bergin & Bergin, 2009, p. 154). They suggest a need

to acknowledge and forge “attachment-like” relationships between pupil and educator within

the realms of professional boundaries.

The consideration of attachment theory for the relational dyad between teacher and

pupil can be extended to the wider school community. Secure attachment to the school

(referred to as school bonding in the literature), encompasses a “sense of belonging” to the

school and the community within it (Bergin & Bergin, 2009). Smith (2006) discusses how

“attachment to school” affects the degree of commitment to and engagement with schooling

felt by pupils. Strong or Secure attachments reflect a sense of value and purpose in school

whilst weak or insecure attachment to school reflect scepticism, indifference and/or hostility

towards school.

Drawing on the literature, Rose, Gilbert & Smith (2012) suggest that educators need

to understand the process of attachment for several reasons. Firstly, because the nature of a

child’s primary attachments (attachments to caregivers) lay the foundations for socio-

emotional well-being and children’s capacity to learn. Secondly, educators themselves might

establish an “attachment-like” relationship with their pupils (i.e., nurturing and responsive),

particularly with challenging and vulnerable pupils, in order to enhance learning

opportunities. Thirdly, because secure attachment relationships correlate strongly with higher

academic attainment, better self-regulation, well-being and social competence. Securely

attached children are more likely to attain higher grades, have greater emotional regulation,

443

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

social competence, willingness to take on challenges, and have lower levels of ADHD and

delinquency (Bergin & Bergin, 2009).

Attachment issues in school relate not only to pupils’ attachment relationships with

their parents, but also with their teachers and support staff. It has been suggested that

“schools may be the optimum sites for buffering the impact of stress, building resilience and

enhancing individual capacities for learning” (Nagel, 2009). Kennedy (2008) offers an

interdisciplinary theoretical model for the role that teachers can play in helping to

“rehabilitate” pupils’ internal working model with a subsequent impact on academic progress.

She writes that teacher-pupil relationships may offer a context for insecurely attached

children to “repair” or ameliorate their internal working model through more positive

relational experiences and highlights how internal working models can shift, (despite

operating as a prototype from early experiences) throughout the life span. Although more

research is needed to ascertain the positive effect secure attachments between pupil and

teacher might have, the evidence implies that schools might play a role in affecting

constructive changes in attachment representation with a subsequent impact on academic

progress (Bergin & Bergin, 2009; Kennedy, 2008; Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004; Riley, 2009;

Verschueren & Koomen, 2012). The impetus for this is strengthened by the evidence

emerging from the field of neuroscience, which is affirming Bowlby’s original theory.

The neuroscience of attachment

Attachment theory has recently received support from neuroscientific research, particularly

the field of neurobiology. Several authors have linked the findings emerging from

neuroscience (Balbernie, 2001; Cozolino, 2013; Kennedy, 2008; Schore, 2001; Siegel, 2012 ;

Trevarthen, 2011). For example, Siegel (2012) demonstrates how warm, responsive

relationships and interactions (attunement) help to create the cognitive-affective neural

structures of the internal working model creating the prototype for future relationships.

Schore’s work has shown how the early emotionally laden attachment communications that

occur between infant and caregiver help to wire the maturing brain in areas essential for

affect regulation (Schore, 2001).

Furthermore, research on the extent to which stressful events have lasting adverse

effects on the brain has shed more light on the importance of a secure attachment. Although

this impact is determined in part by the duration, intensity, timing, and context of the stressful

experience, as well as an individual’s genetic predispositions, the availability of supportive

relationships that help moderate the stress response has been shown to have significant

444

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

consequences for the development of brain functioning (NSCDC 2012, 2014; McCrory, De

Vito & Viding, 2010; Rappolt-Schlichtmann et al., 2009). Constant activation of the body’s

stress response systems due to chronic or traumatic experiences in the absence of caring,

stable relationships with adults, especially during sensitive periods of early development, can

be toxic to brain architecture and other developing organ systems (Badenoch, 2008; Field &

Diego, 2008; Montgomery, 2013; Porges, 2011). Connections in the brain are reduced and

lost through toxic stress. Fewer connections means it is more difficult to utilize the brain’s

capacity and learn effectively (Cozolino, 2013; Siegel, 2012).

Cairns (2006) suggests that trauma from insecure attachments can lead to a range of

disorders. Regulatory disorders are associated with challenging behaviour, with high levels of

stress hormones, inability to manage behaviour, hypersensitivity to criticism and apparent

lack of remorse. Social function disorders can involve impaired understanding of and

empathy for others, feelings of worthlessness and low self-esteem. Processing disorders

include cognitive difficulties such as impaired understanding of the world, difficulty in

making sense of sensory information, or of feelings. Cozolino (2013) indicates that, in

neurological terms, this can mean that the neural systems in the brain are employed to defend

rather than exercised to cooperate with others. Regulatory systems become biased or primed

towards arousal and fear rather than being in a receptive state for learning. In this way, neural

brain patterns (attachment schemas) are used as battle plans for survival rather than for ways

of connecting, and the brain’s circuitry seeks relief and comfort from stress through

alternative distractions, such as drugs, rather than from human contact with attachment

figures.

Kennedy and Kennedy (2004) also draw attention to the evidence which suggests how

teachers may misinterpret insecurely attached children’s behaviour as uncooperative,

aggressive, demanding, impulsive, withdrawn, reactive and/or unpredictable. These

judgments of behavioural manifestations of underlying inner experiences and relationship

history affect teachers’ attitudes and responses to behaviour. It is suggested that teachers need

to understand the meaning behind such behavioural displays and the needs that are being

expressed in such defensive behaviour (Kennedy, 2008). This is a necessity given that it is

estimated that at least one third of children have an insecure attachment with at least one

caregiver, which in turn will affect their school performance and behaviour (Bergin &

Bergin, 2009). O’Connor and Russell (2004) indicate that 98% of children they surveyed had

experienced one or more trauma event, and for one in four this trauma resulted in behavioural

and/or emotional disturbance. Clarke, Ungerer, Chahoud, Johnson & Stiefel (2002) and Moss

445

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

and St-Laurent (2001) also indicate that as many as 80% of children diagnosed with ADHD

may have attachment issues.

A key message about the neuroscience of attachment for education is how the brain’s

attachment system takes priority over the brain’s exploratory system. Thus, feeling safe and

secure is more important than learning (Sroufe & Siegel, 2011). By recognising the critical

role of neuroplasticity, the process by which the brain’s neuronal connections are continually

shaped by experience, positive attachment-like relationships, such as those that can exist in

school contexts, can also contribute to the reparation of impaired internal working models

(Schore, 2003). Verscheuren and Koomen (2012) add to the claim that relational-based

teaching might play a moderating role in supporting “at risk” children. Therefore, teachers

can function as both a safe haven and a secure base from which a child can explore and learn

(Verschueren & Koomen, 2012). This suggests that, at the very least, “attachment-like” or

“ad hoc” attachment relationships with pupils and the utilisation of attachment-based systems

and strategies to foster such relationships, may be beneficial for all children, but particularly

for those who may have insecure working models. Both Bergin and Bergin (2009) and

Verschueren and Koomen (2012) do, however, offer a cautionary note that such secondary

attachment relationships are not necessarily of the same ilk or as bonded as those with

primary caregivers.

Towards an alternative model—Attachment aware schools

Hart’s (2010) consideration of psychodynamic strategies based on attachment theory for

supporting children’s behaviour draws attention to the importance of the relational model and

relational actions that address the meaning of behaviour rather than merely the behaviour

itself. There is a range of literature that now attests to the importance of stable, caring and

trusting relationships which promote success at school and beyond (Kennedy, 2008). Such

approaches are rooted in humanist ideology and notions of unconditional positive regard and

the encouragement of critical thinking. They also resonate powerfully with Noddings’ (2005)

notion of the “ethic of care.” Kennedy notes how Noddings’ work provides a “philosophical

underpinning regarding the importance of relationships that pervades all decisions made in

schools” (2008, p. 216).

In England, there are a number of influential practice-based guides such as Cairns and

Stanway (2004) and Bomber (2007 and 2011), which offer an effective alternative model

rooted in attachment practice. However, they tend to be evidence informed rather than

evidence based. Mindful of the debates that currently contribute to educational neuroscience

446

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

(Ansari, Coch, De Smedt, 2011; Howard Jones, 2014; Hruby, 2012), at Bath Spa University

we have been working towards creating the evidence base for an Attachment Aware Schools’

model. Drawing on the work of Cairns and Bomber in particular, it also brings together

different strands of community based work in the region. This operates on principles of

joined-up thinking and interagency collaboration firmly endorsing the concept of “the team

around the child” and community-wide collaboration (Anning, 2006; Chivers & Trodd,

2011). Although our work has focused attention on schools, we collaborate closely with a

range of professionals and organisations within the children and young people’s workforce

such as youth offending teams, youth centres, children’s centres, social care and mental

health services. Our journey has included working with other organisations such as the In

Care Council to raise awareness of the circumstances and experiences of Looked After

Children (Parker & Gorman, 2013).

Attachment Aware Schools—Our framework

447

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

The Attachment Aware Schools framework is outlined in the model below (Figure 1).

Figure 1. The Attachment Aware Schools framework

Figure 1 identifies the key elements for enabling effective implementation of attachment

awareness in schools. This includes a consideration of the school ethos, the specific training

needed for school staff, the promotion of particular attachment-based strategies, the

development of collaborative partnerships with the wider community and the importance of

building an evidence base via robust evaluations. Each key element includes various aspects

that need to be addressed in order to be effective as listed in Figure 1. For example, the

school ethos element should ensure a whole school approach is adopted and that the process

is “owned” by all staff, from the governors and leaders to the teachers and all other support

staff, including personnel such as the caretaker and receptionist. The framework draws upon

a review of relevant literature, our preliminary findings from our pilot studies and the

448

Attachment AwareSchool

Framework

EthosWhole school

approach, leadership and

governance

School Strategies Attachment lead

(Bomber 2007),key adults, transitions,

secure bases, supervision.

PartnershipsParents, carers,

support mechanisms,

outside agencies

KnowledgeAttachment theory, trauma awareness,

neuroscience, mindfulness,

emotion coaching, ongoing CPD

EvaluationOutcomes,

monitoring and assessment

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

contributions of the participating schools, as well as relevant literature in the field regarding

educational change (such as Fullan, 2005, and Coe, 2013).

This framework operates within a pyramid of support to meet the spectrum of needs,

as presented in Figure 2 below. At the top is the small number of high-need children who

require specialist help such as referrals to mental health services. In the middle are children

who require some additional support within the school environment such as 1:1 tutoring or

nurture group provision. At the base of the triangle is the entire school community which

provides whole school approaches based on relational models and relational actions, such as

emotion coaching.

(Rose, Gilbert, Gorman & Parker, 2014)

Figure 2. The spectrum of need

The work we have been developing suggests that schools need to:

Be child-centred and acknowledge children’s different attachment styles

Create nurturing relationships to promote children’s learning and behaviour and

satisfy children’s innate need to have a secure “sense of belonging”

449

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Acknowledge adults’ roles as a potential secondary attachment figure that can help to

reshape insecure attachment behaviours and support the development of more secure

ones.

Create appropriate nurturing infrastructures for children with emotional and

behavioural impairments (as they do for physical and learning impairments)

This model of school activity does not sit easily with the top-down, performance focussed

and behaviourist approaches of many schools. However, we would make three main points,

reflecting on our engagement with these issues over the past few years.

First, there is a key issue of principle. Every child has the right to an appropriate

education, and to maximising his or her educational and life opportunities. As the Children’s

Commissioner for England, Dr Maggie Atkinson, has declared, “Every teacher, and every

school, should be so aware and so practising, because it is the duty of the public body to

adapt to the child, not the other way round” (Foreword to Rose, Parker, Gorman, 2014).

Secondly, the approaches we are proposing do not undermine, but enhance existing

school behaviour and other policies. As noted by an Infant School Deputy Head:

It took a series of children with needs that we just found hard to identify until we

started to apply attachment theory thinking. And it just unlocked these children

and made us able to understand what was going on with far greater clarity. As a

result we got to make much more progress with them. (Rose, 2014)

Thirdly, adopting attachment aware approaches do not simply benefit the individual child, but

the whole school community, including staff and parents. Staff have reported reduced levels

of stress in dealing with difficult situations as one Primary Head commented:

I show more empathy with how the child must be feeling and it helps you slow

down to consider why a child is upset/angry. Because I now use this, I think the

relationship I have with the children is much more relaxed. (Rose, McGuire-

Sniekus & Gilbert, 2015)

Building an evidence base

450

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Although our research has yet to attract sufficient funding to generate RCTs, our mixed

method pilot studies have yielded some promising indicators of positive impact. For example,

one primary school reported a reduction in serious classroom behaviour incidents in the

classroom and elsewhere in the school. School staff reported the school being a different

place with a focus on learning rather than behaviour management, while a school inspection

confirmed: “This is a very caring school where pupils are treated as individuals. Pupils

understand the school’s code of behaviour, and discrimination is not tolerated. In and around

the school, pupils are polite and respectful” (Ofsted, 2014b). Another head-teacher who has

adopted the Attachment Aware model commented:

If a child comes to a school with a wheelchair, a school has to put in a ramp.

These children have a different need. We need to make sure the environment is

good for them. It’s basically inclusion…; It’s had an influence on the whole

school, making us more sensitive to particular needs. We have much more

empathy now. (Rose, et al, 2014)

The value of whole school approaches is echoed by this primary head-teacher: “There’s a

more unified approach to how we respond to children’s behaviour. It’s changed people’s

mind-set about understanding the emotions behind behaviour and how they see children,

especially the support staff and the lunch-time supervisor” (Rose, et al, 2014).

A key aspect of the Attachment Aware Schools model is the utilisation of Emotion

Coaching as a useful tool or approach in supporting children’s behaviour and well-being.

This is based on the work of John Gottman and colleagues in the USA. It emphasises the

importance of considering the emotions which underlie particular behaviours, “in the

moment,” before dealing with limit setting and problem solving (Gottman, Katz & Hooven,

1997). Emotion Coaching resonates strongly with attachment-based strategies. Our findings

from this work have been reported elsewhere (Gilbert, Rose & McGuire-Snieckus, 2014;

Rose et al, 2015; Gus, Rose & Gilbert, 2015) and our evidence appears to complement the

work being undertaken in the USA (Gottman et al, 1997, Katz, Maliken & Stettler, 2012,

Shortt, Stoolmiller, Smith-Shine, Eddy & Sheeber, 2010) and Australia (Havighurst et al,

2012, Havighurst, Wilson, Harley, Prior & Kehoe, 2010), which points to the efficacy of

emotion coaching in supporting behaviour management across the age range.

For example, the youth centre, where we had trained a number of young peer mentors

in emotion coaching, reported a reduction in disruptive behaviour and reduced call-outs to the

451

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

police. A small primary school reported more effective and less stressful interventions in

responding to challenging behaviour. The secondary school cascaded training to all their

staff, and offered training to the parents of a group of boys identified as being at risk of

permanent exclusion; behaviour incidents among this group reduced by 57 %, and short term

exclusions by 37%. The format for detentions was changed to incorporate role play and

problem solving, rather than sitting in silence. Staff at all levels were involved in schools,

including mid-day assistants and caretakers. Many reported feeling calmer and better able to

cope with difficult behaviour. An extension of this work in another community area involved

more children’s centres, parents, health visitors, family support workers, inclusion workers,

social workers and – in the case of one primary school—training a whole pupil cohort as peer

mentors in order to support younger children. One particularly interesting outcome is the

reduction in the use of rewards and sanctions by one secondary school since adopting

emotion coaching and restorative approaches to discipline (see Tables 1 and 2, Rose et al,

2015). This evidence suggests that, by focusing attention on the feelings underlying

behaviour rather than behaviour modification, a more relational model can reduce the need

for rewards and sanctions in supporting behaviour.

Table 1. Means plot of pupil consequences pre- and post- training with + / - 1 SE

Note. N = 1350

452

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Table 2. Means plot of pupil rewards pre- and post- training with + /- 1 SE

Note. N = 1350

Further evidence to support this approach comes from other collaborative work with a social

enterprise company, Brighter Futures, who utilise attachment-based strategies, including

emotion coaching, to support vulnerable children, operating at the upper end of the pyramid

of support. Their Primary Partnership Intervention Project with Bath Primary Schools was

intended to help narrow the gap in educational achievement and improve the social

functioning and emotional resilience for children with additional needs in the Bath area. This

work comprises targeted interventions for children exhibiting attachment-related behavioural

issues. Although the sample size is small, an evaluation of this project demonstrated

significant reductions in disruptive behaviour, alongside improvements in attendance and

increased academic attainment beyond expected levels of achievement (Tables 3-6, Rose &

McGuire-Snieckus, 2014).

453

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Table 3. Decrease in behavioural incidents

Note: N = 30

Table 4. Increase in attendance

Note: N =30

454

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Table 5. Improved maths scores exceeding expected levels

Note: N = 30

Table 6. Improved reading scores exceeding expected levels

Note: N = 30

Wider issues and challenges

455

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Attachment aware schools operate within a dynamic system and we need to accommodate the

various contexts and processes that shape its evolution. For example, we need to take into

consideration the cost-effectiveness of the model. The recent evaluation of some of the work

by Brighter Futures (reviewed earlier) has revealed significant savings in terms of projected

costs, indicating that the costs involved in providing more specialist support for children with

unmet attachment needs lie far below the costs that might be entailed in providing more

specialist provision should such needs continue to go unmet. The table below shows how

these intervention costs fall far below all other costs such as 1:1 provision or placement in a

special school (Table 5, Rose & McGuire-Snieckus, 2014).

Table 5. Cost of different types of provision

One headteacher expressed the cost-benefit ratio well:

456

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Even if we were to express it in terms of crude economics, (and it is about far

more than that), there is no way a school can afford not to be doing this work.

These children place demands on the school system which, if not properly

addressed, far outweigh the demands of learning to manage and work with them

properly. (Rose, 2014)

We are beginning to make some inroad into influencing national policy. For example, Bath

Spa and Bath and North East Somerset Council were commissioned in 2013 by an executive

agency of the Department for Education (the National College for Teaching and Leadership)

to produce training materials on the implications of attachment for governors and school

leadership. In the same year the National Institute for Clinical Excellence began work on its

advice with regard to attachment disorders and accepted our recommendation that a school

representative should be included. Similarly, the Health Select Committee recommended that

all teacher training should include a mandatory module on children’s mental health (House of

Commons, 2014, p. 101). We have been working with a number of initial teacher education

providers, including the Universities Council on Teacher Education (UCET), Teach First, and

teaching schools, to develop a common approach, and were pleased that the government’s

own review of initial teacher training, led by Sir Andrew Carter, specifically recommended

that “child and adolescent development should be included within a framework for ITT

content” (Carter, 2015, p. 9) However, even here, the emphasis on behaviour management is

largely concerned with classroom presence, language and routines, with little cross-reference

to relationships or emotions.

Further, as outlined above, there is still relatively little empirical research on the

effectiveness of attachment-based school strategies for meeting children’s attachment needs,

and the implications of whole school strategies (Bergin & Bergin, 2009; Kennedy, 2008;

Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004; Riley, 2009). Convincing schools and teachers that alternative

approaches can and do work effectively means establishing a body of evidence that

demonstrates a clear causal link between strategies and performance. This is easy to do in the

limited confines of a sanctions and rewards argument, but much more difficult to “prove” in a

complex framework of relationships, emotions and possible alternative explanations.

Finally, we need to be cautious about creating an “either/or” perspective in offering

this alternative model. There is some evidence that utilising traditional behavioural

modification techniques alongside more attachment-based strategies may be as effective

(Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004), although we need to tread carefully in terms of the mixed

457

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

messages children may receive. Moreover, we are mindful of critics of so-called “therapeutic

education” such as Eccelstone, Hayes and Furedi (2005) and Gillies (2011), or those who

urge caution in applying such techniques in practice (Mayer & Cobb, 2000), Attachment-

based strategies also place personal demands on teachers given the emotional investment they

require and we ought to be wary of the professional boundaries between teacher and therapist

(Howes, 1999).

As the Attachment Aware Schools movement gathers momentum, there are still

strong forces operating to retain and entrench traditional behaviourist models. The emphasis

on teachers’ authority (Department for Education, 2010), a school inspection framework that

demands evidence of “reward and sanction” practices (Ofsted, 2014a), alongside the

somewhat simplistic, “common sense” behaviour checklists (Department for Education,

2011), further reinforce the behaviourist model. While there are signs of a shift in priorities in

some areas, such as children’s mental health, this has yet to be linked to mainstream

government thinking about whole school issues. However, our growing networks of contacts

demonstrate the appetite nationally for attachment and emotionally aware approaches. The

difficulties encountered by practitioners attempting to challenge embedded cultures are well-

known, particularly when they are reinforced by socio-political forces. Systemic change

which operates at multiple levels within the ecosystem of school and wider society are clearly

necessary; we firmly believe in the potential of these alternative approaches to transform both

schools as institutions and the lives of individual students.

References

Anning, A. (2006). Developing multi-professional teamwork for integrated children’s

services. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Ansari, D., Coch, D. & De Smedt, B. (2011). Connecting education and cognitive

neuroscience: Where will the journey take us?, Educational Philosophy and Theory,

43(1), 37-42.

Badenoch, B. (2008). Being a brain-wise therapist: A practical guide to interpersonal

neurobiology. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.

Balbernie, R. (2001). Circuits and circumstances: The neurobiological consequences of early

relationship experiences and how they shape later behaviour, Journal of Child

Psychotherapy, 27, 237-255.

458

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Bergin, C. & Bergin, D. (2009). Attachment in the classroom. Educational Psychology

Review, 21, 141-170.

Bomber, L. (2007). Inside I’m hurting; Practical strategies for supporting children with

attachment difficulties in schools. London: Worth.

Bomber, L (2011). What about me? Inclusive strategies to support pupils with attachment

difficulties make it through the school day. London: Worth.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development.

London: Routledge.

Cairns, K. (2006). Attachment, trauma and resilience. London: British Association for

Adoption and Fostering.

Cairns K. & Stanway C. (2004). Learn the child: Helping looked after children to learn.

London: British Association for Adoption and Fostering.

Chivers, L. & Trodd, L. (2011). Interprofessional working and practice: Learning and

working together for children and families. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Commodari, E. (2013). Preschool teacher attachment, school readiness and risk of learning

difficulties. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28, 123–133.

Clarke, L., Ungerer, J., Chahoud, K., Johnson, S., & Stiefel, I. (2002). Attention deficit

hyperactivity disorder is associated with attachment insecurity. Clinical Child

Psychology and Psychiatry, 7, 1359-1045.

Coe, R. (2013). Improving education: A triumph of hope over experience. Durham

University: Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring.

Cozolino, L. (2013). The social neuroscience of education: Optimizing attachment and

learning in the classroom. London: Norton & Co.

Davis, H. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student–teacher relationships on

children’s social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38, 207–234.

Department for Education. (2010). The importance of teaching. The schools white paper,

2010. Norwich: TSO. Retrievable from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

175429/CM-7980.pdf

Department for Education. (2011). Getting the simple things right: Charlie Taylor’s

behaviour checklists. Retrievable from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

283997/charlie_taylor_checklist.pdf

459

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Department for Education. (2014a). Behaviour and discipline in schools: Advice for

headteachers and school staff. Retrievable from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

463452/

Behaviour_and_discipline_in_schools_guidance_for_headteachers_and_staff.pdf

Department for Education. (2014b). School behaviour and attendance: Research priorities

and questions. Retrievable from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

287610/Behaviour_and_school_attendance_research_priorities_and_questions.pdf

Department for Education. (2014c). Mental health and behaviour in schools: Departmental

advice for school staff. Retrievable from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

416786/Mental_Health_and_Behaviour_-

_Information_and_Tools_for_Schools_240515.pdf

Carter, A. (2015). Carter review of initial teacher training (ITT). Retrievable from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

399957/Carter_Review.pdf

Driscoll, K. & Pianta, R.C. (2010). Banking time in Head Start: Early efficacy of an

intervention designed to promote supportive teacher-child relationships. Early

Education and Development, 21(1), 38–27.

Ecclestone, K., Hayes, D. & Furedi, F. (2005). Knowing me, knowing you: The rise of

therapeutic professionalism in the education of adults. Studies in the Education of

Adults, 37, 182-200.

Field, T. & Diego, M. (2008). Vagal activity, early growth and emotional development.

Infant Behaviour and Development, 31, 361-373.

Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership & sustainability: Systems thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Corwin Press.

Geddes, H. (2006). Attachment in the classroom. The links between children’s early

emotional wellbeing and performance in school. London: Worth.

Gilbert, L ., Rose, J. & McGuire-Snieckus, R. (2014) Promoting children’s well-being and

sustainable citizenship through emotion coaching. In M. Thomas (Ed.), A child’s world:

Working together for a better future. Aberystwyth: Aberystwyth Press.

460

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Gillies, V. (2011). Social and emotional pedagogies: Critiquing the new orthodoxy of

emotion in classroom behaviour management. British Journal of Sociology of

Education, 32, 185-202.

Gottman, J. M., Katz, L. F. & Hooven, C. (1997). Meta-emotion: How families communicate

emotionally. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gus, L., Rose, J. & Gilbert, L. (2015). Emotion coaching: A universal strategy for supporting

and promoting sustainable emotional and behavioural well-being. Educational & Child

Psychology, 32(1), 31-41.

Harold, V. L. & Corcoran, T. (2013). On behaviour: A role for restorative justice?

International Journal of School Disaffection, 10(2), 45-61.

Hart, R. (2010). Classroom behaviour management: Educational psychologists’ views on

effective practice. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15, 353–371

Havighurst, S. S., Wilson, K. R., Harley, A. E., Kehoe, C., Efron, D. & Prior, M. R. (2012).

Tuning into kids: Reducing young children’s behavior problems using an emotion

coaching parenting program. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 43,

247-264.

Havighurst, S. S., Wilson, K. R., Harley, A. E., Prior, M. R., & Kehoe, C. (2010). Tuning in

to kids: Improving emotion socialization practices in parents of preschool children—

findings from a community trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51,

1342-1350.

House of Commons. (2014). Health Committee: Children’s and adolescents’ mental health

and CAMHS. Third report of Session 2014-15. London: The Stationery Office.

Howard-Jones, P. (2014). Evolutionary perspectives on mind, brain and education. Mind,

Brain and Education, 8, 21-32.

Howes, C. (1999). Attachment relationships in the context of multiple caregivers. In J.

Cassidy & P.R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment; Theory, research and clinical

applications. New York: The Guildford Press.

Hruby, G. (2012). Three requirements for justifying an educational neuroscience. British

Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 1-23.

Katz, L. F., Maliken, A. C. & Stettler, N. M. (2012). Parental meta-emotion philosophy: A

review of research and theoretical framework. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 417-

422.

Kennedy, B. L. (2008). Educating students with insecure attachment histories: Toward an

interdisciplinary theoretical framework. Pastoral Care in Education, 26, 211-230.

461

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Kennedy, J. H. & Kennedy, C.E. (2004). Attachment theory: Implications for school

psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 247-259.

Mayer, J. & Cobb, C. (2000). Educational policy on emotional intelligence: Does it make

sense? Educational Psychology Review, 12,163-183.

McCrory, E., De Brito, S. & Viding, E. (2010). Research review: The neurobiology and

genetics of maltreatment and adversity. Journal of Child psychology and Psychiatry,

51, 1079-1095.

Montgomery, A. (2013). Neurobiology essentials for clinicians. New York: W.W. Norton &

Co.

Moss, E., & St-Laurent, D. (2001). Attachment at school age and academic

performance. Developmental Psychology, 37, 863-874.

Nagel, M. (2009). Mind the mind: Understanding the links between stress, emotional well-

being and learning in educational context. International Journal of Learning, 16(2), 33-

42.

Noddings, N. (2005). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education.

New York: Teachers College Press.

NSCDC. (2012). The science of neglect: The persistence absence of responsive care disrupts

the developing brain. Working paper 12. Retrievable from

http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu

NSCDC. (2014). Excessive stress disrupts the architecture of the developing brain. Working

Paper 3. Retrievable from http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu

O’Connor, M. & Russell, A. (2004). Identifying the incidence of psychological trauma and

post-trauma symptoms in children. Clackmannanshire: Clackmannanshire Council

Psychological Service.

Ofsted. (2014a). St Martin's Garden Primary School inspection report March 2014.

Retrievable from http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/

provider/ELS/133290

Ofsted. (2014b). Below the radar: Low-level disruption in the country’s classrooms.

Manchester: Ofsted. Retrievable from

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

379249/Below_20the_20radar_20-_20low-

level_20disruption_20in_20the_20country_E2_80_99s_20classrooms.pdf

462

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Parker, R. & Gorman, M. (2013). In care, in school – Giving voice to young people in care.

In S. Jackson (Ed.), Pathways through education for young people in care. London:

British Association for Adoption and Fostering.

Pianta, R. C. (Ed.) (1992). Beyond the parent: The role of other adults in children’s lives. San

Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Porges, S. (2011). The polyvagal theory: Neurophysiological foundations of emotions,

attachment, communication, and self-regulation. New York: Norton and Company.

Riley, P. (2009). An adult attachment perspective on the student-teacher relationship and

classroom management difficulties. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 626-635.

Rose, J. (2014, May). Attachment aware schools—Nurturing places to grow and achieve:

Preliminary findings report. Presentation to Institute for Recovery from Childhood

Trauma, House of Lords, London.

Rose, J., Gilbert, L. & Smith, H. (2012). Affective teaching and the affective dimensions of

learning. In Ward, S. (Ed.), A student’s guide to education studies. London: Routledge.

Rose, J., Gilbert, L., Gorman, M. & Parker, R. (2014). An introduction to attachment and the

implications for learning and behaviour. Nottingham: NCTL.

Rose, J. & McGuire-Snieckus, R. (2014). Impact evaluation: Brighter futures and Bath

primary partnership intervention project report. Bath: Bath Spa University.

Rose, J. McGuire-Sniekus, R. & Gilbert, L., (2015). Emotion coaching—A strategy for

promoting behavioural self-regulation in children/young people in schools: A pilot

study. European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 13,1766-1790.

Rose, J., Parker, R. & Gorman, M. (2014). Foreword by Dr Maggie Atkinson, Children’s

Commissioner for England to Attachment Aware Schools website resource. Retrievable

from http://www.attachmentawareschools.com/foreword.php

Shaughnessy, J. (2012). The challenge for English schools in responding to current debates

on behaviour and violence. Pastoral Care in Education: An International Journal of

Personal, Social and Emotional Development, 30, 87-97.

Schore, A. (2003). Affect regulation and the repair of the self. New York: W.W. Norton and

Co.

Schore, A. (2001). The effects of early relational trauma on right brain development, affect

regulation and infant mental health. Infant Mental Health Journal, 22, 201–269.

Shortt, J. W., Stoolmiller, M, Smith-Shine, J. N., Eddy, J. M. & Sheeber, L. (2010). Maternal

emotion coaching, adolescent anger regulation, and siblings’ externalizing symptoms.

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 799-808.

463

Chapter 29: pp. 441-463

Siegel, D. (2012). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape

who we are. New York: Guildford Press.

Smith, D. (2006). School experience and delinquency at ages 13 to 16. Edinburgh study of

youth transitions and crime, number 13. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Centre for Law and

Society, University of Edinburgh.

Sroufe, A. & Siegel, D. (2011). The verdict is in: The case for attachment theory. Retrievable

from http://www.drdansiegel.com/uploads/1271-the-verdict-is-in.pdf

Trevarthen, C. (2011). What young children give to their learning, making education work to

sustain a community and its culture. European Early Childhood Education Research

Journal, 19, 173-193.

Rappolt-Schlichtmann, G., Willet, J., Ayoub, C., Lindsley, R., Hulette, A. & Fischer, K.

(2009). Poverty, relationship conflict and the regulation of cortisol in small and large

group contexts at child care. Mind, Brain and Education, 3(3), 131-141.

Verschueren, K. & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2012). Teacher-child relationships from an

attachment perspective. Attachment and Human Development, 14, 205-211.

464