Psychodynamic theory

The term ‘psychodynamic’ is used when the study of interacting motives and emotions is discussed. This approach stresses the evolutionary and biological foundations of human behavior and is closely linked with psychology, psychiatry and socio-biology. The ‘Attachment Theory’, developed by John Bowlby, is based on psychodynamic theory and it is this that is often implemented in a school that works in a ‘psychodynamic’ way. Holmes (1995) describes attachment theory as:

a theory about relationships, based on the idea that human beings evolved in kinship groups and that in the original environment of evolutionary adaptedness (Bowlby 1969) survival was increased by the maintenance of secure bonds between their members, primarily, but by no means exclusively, between parents and children. (Holmes, 1995: 1789)

Therefore, according to the psychodynamic theory approach, how learners feel about themselves can determine how they behave. As they seek to make sense of the world, learners’ past experiences, as well as their current ones, will shape the way they feel. ‘Attachment disorder behaviors’ occur when a child has been unable, for any of many reasons, to securely attach to one or a small group of consistent carers, at a young age. O’Connor et al.(cited in Bennathan and Boxall, 2001: 124) support this definition following studies of the English and Romanian Adoptees (ERA) project: ‘Considered together, available findings on attachment disorder behaviors suggest that the critical causal factor may be the lack of a consistent and responsive caregiver (or small number of caregivers), or the opportunity of the child to form selective attachments.’

A learner who may benefit from this approach may not respond positively to the behaviorist approach. Returning to Pupil Y described in Case Study 3, an example of a psychodynamic approach can be illustrated.

Case study

Further observations of Pupil Y by the SENCO took place and a number of additional factors for consideration became apparent. Pupil Y found it extremely difficult to accept praise and if a teacher verbally rewarded him for good work he would tear this work up. To try and prevent this, the teacher had been quickly taking the work away from Pupil Y and sticking it in a scrap book so that his parents could be shown his good work. Pupil Y tried to do everything to prevent this from happening. The fighting in the playground continued and when asked why he thought he had such difficult playtimes, he explained that he was a bad boy. Following further discussions with Pupil Ys parents, it was also clear that he was behaving in the same way at home, especially towards his well-be-haved younger sister. His father disciplined him when incidents occurred either at home or at school. The SENCO, with the support of the class team, started to work on a one-to-one basis with Pupil Y. The SENCO started talking to Y about how his behavior was sometimes not very nice, but that HE was good. Pupil Y did not believe this and once again said he was a bad boy. A visual image of his growing goodness was then set up. After every playtime the SENCO (whatever else was happening stopped!) met Pupil Y and if he had played well, a small coloured line would be added to a growing spiral on a large piece of paper on the SENCOs wall (Figure 1).Within a few days Pupil Y trusted the SENCO to turn up at the end of playtimes and then after a couple of weeks he looked at the spiral on the paper, smiled and said, Look how good I am growing.

Pupil Y did not manage to get a line every playtime to begin with, especially when the trust was being built, and on these occasions the bad behavior (not Pupil Y) was discussed and more positive input was put in place for the next time. Similar interventions were put in place in the classroom. Instead of lots of verbal praise for good work, a simple tick or smiley face was put on the work without further comment. In this way the teacher was able to build up Pupil Y’s self-esteem in a slow, steady and consistent manner. Pupil Y’s educators also made concerted efforts to tell the parents about all the good work and behavior Y had achieved. Other than this, the external influences for Pupil Y were beyond the control of the school context (see Learning behavior Figure 1), but by using the psychodynamic approach, the educators tried to understand the origins of the behavior from Ys perspective.They then sought ways of minimising the barriers to learning for Y and put in place interventions that would hopefully encourage behaviors for learning.The educators tackled Ys problems using a wholeschool approach and would also have worked collaboratively with other agencies and professionals if they were involved with the learners family.

A similar approach may be required for a learner who avoids independent work or constantly distracts others. The learner may have developed this behavior because he feels he is going to fail at the task, however hard he tries, because he is a failure. Why, therefore, should he even try, just to receive negative comments from the teacher and hence have it reinforced that he is a failure? As before, the educators cannot know all the reasons why the learner has these feelings, but they can try to remove the barriers and encourage new, positive behaviors for learning.