The Social Origin Of
Using Speech For Self-Regulation Of Motor Acts In Conductive Education
by Clare Cheng Yuk Kwan
Adult-child interaction
and the use of private speech
Studies in the
adult-child interactions in the use of private speech
The adult's communicative
style
The content of the adult guiding speech
Guidelines for Promoting the
self-Regulation Role of Rhythmical Intention
The ultimate
aim of CE is to develop children with brain damage a positive personality with
problem-solving abilities (Kozma, 1995). To reach
this goal, CE stresses the active participation of the children in their whole
process of learning and that the learning environment has to be facilitating
rather than compromising to their disabilities.
Persons with
brain damage are characterised by the cardinal signs
of spasticity and uncoordinated movements. The normal
sequencing of movements subservient to daily functions are impaired or replaced
by stereotypic reactions. From the point of view of CE, such difficulties faced
by persons with brain damage can only be overcome by arousing a conscious
learning path-way to achieve active control. According to Vygotsky and later Luria, speech has not only a communicative function but
also performs a regulatory role on volitional behaviour
(Vygotsky, 1934/1962, 1987). Based on similar concept, Petö
innovated the use of the semantic and rhythmic part of
speech as a tool for children with brain damage to plan, intend and regulate
their movements for carrying out motor functions. Rhythmical Intention is the
term he used to describe this technique. In practice, Rhythmical Intention goes
like this.
The adult
defines the motor act to be learnt by verbalising the
action in first person, such as “I stretch my arms up”. The children repeat the
sentence and then carry out the action while counting out loud usually for
five. The series of movements carried out in this way add up to achieve a
functional goal which the children alone might not be able to achieve by their
reflexive response. Hence, besides facilitating movements, Rhythmical Intention
is thought to serve as the person’s mental preparation for overt behaviour as well as a means for problem solving. (Hátri, et al., 1984). In other
words, Rhythmical Intention relates to self regulation of behaviour.
The principles
of CE have been adopted in some special child care centres
and special schools in
1. Some children rarely repeat the
intention after file adult in task series.
2. Some children frequently remain
silent and do not attempt to co-ordinate their movement with speech.
3. Most children rarely generalise the use of speech regulation when they encounter
difficulties in daily activities.
Based on the
developmental stages of speech regulation, Jernqvist
(1985) formulated the different linguistic structures of the intention to be
repeated by children at different stages. Improvement in participating in the
use of Rhythmical Intention during task series has been observed. However,
there remains an unexplored area concerning the generalisation
of the use of this strategy of self regulation beyond the adult-mediated
learning sessions. Children seldom show spontaneous use of speech to guide
their motor planning when they experience any difficulties in physical demand
in daily lives.
As Rhythmical
Intention was derived from Vygotsky’s concept on the
regulatory role of speech, a review of literature on studies in this
theoretical framework might give insight for improving the implementation of
this important part of CE. The present paper attempted to derive some practical
guidelines from the review to promote the participation of children with motor
disability in using Rhythmical Intention during teaching sessions of motor
tasks and the generalised use of verbal regulation of
motor functions in daily activities.
As the use of
Rhythmical Intention is proposed to aim at self regulation, understanding the
origin of self regulation will be helpful for uncovering its underlying
mechanism and hence ways for improvement.
According to
Vygotsky, self regulation represents the transformation of basic, biologically
determined processes into higher psychological functional processes such as
volitional attention, memory and problem solving (Vygotsky, 1981). In the
transformation, the child becomes less bound to and controlled by the concrete,
immediate environmental stimuli but demonstrates the increasing role of self
formulated plans and goals in the regulation of behaviour.
Thus, self regulation is the child's capacities to plan, guide, and monitor his
or her behaviour from within and flexibly according
to changing circumstances.
According to Vygotsky's formulation, the regulation of behaviour begins as a social process and is seen to rely on
the mediation with an auxiliary sign of shared meaning between the adult-child
dyad within their sociocultural orientation. The sign
serves to "break up the fusion of the sensory field and the motor system
and thus makes new kinds of behaviour possible."
(Vygotsky, 1978, 1935). Postulated by Vygotsky and
elaborated by Luria (1960), speech is this sign for
mediation.
Vygotsky
formulated the developmental progression in the use of speech in this respect
in three specific stages. First, the caregivers bring in speech and use it to
help the child focus his or her attention on salient aspects of the physical
social environment. In this stage, the child is not able to use speech all by
him/herself but there is a close co-operation between the child and the adult
though the child's behaviour is basically regulated
by the adults' speech. Later, the child initiates to use his or her own speech
to describe his or her ongoing activity. To differentiate speech from the
communicative purpose, such speech-to the-self is coined private speech. In
this stage, private speech accompanies the child's activity. There is interplay
between the child's private speech and the adult's guiding speech in regulating
the child's behaviour. It is noticed that very often
the child's private speech mirrors the adult's guiding speech. The adult's
speech augments the child's private speech. Gradually, private speech undergoes
structural and temporal changes. It precedes the child's action and is not
merely a description of the situation. It is more orienting, planning and
guiding in nature. At this stage, private speech does not simply mirror adult's
speech. It represents the child's verbal thought and arrives at the self
regulatory function. Finally, private speech becomes inaudible utterances and
"goes underground" as internal thought processes (Vygotsky, 1962). These
internalised utterances would appear again as overt
speech for problem-solving processes in situations of challenges.
The use of
Rhythmical Intention in CE in the regulation of motor behaviour
resembles the function of private speech in Vygotsky's
concept on the development of higher cognitive processes. Examination of
teaching strategies that promote children's use of private speech will thus
give insights to the improvement in the use of Rhythmical Intention.
Adult-child interaction and the use
of private speech
From the above
description, it can be seen that private speech as a vehicle for self
regulation roots in the adult-child interaction. It begins as a shared act
between the adult and the child. With the gradual withdrawal of the adult from
the joint activity, the child takes over the regulatory role. Based on this
central idea, it is logical to postulate that facilitating the use of private
speech relates to the quality of the adult-child interaction in the shared act.
The following sections will attempt to deduce some guidelines to improve the
self regulatory function of Rhythmical Intention based on findings in studies
relate to the adult-child interaction in promoting the use of private speech.
Studies in the adult-child
interactions in the use of private speech
According to
Vygotsky, before the child can use his or her own speech to regulate behaviour, the adult's speech exerts its regulatory role by
channeling the child's focus at relevant features of the environment. It is
often noticed that mothers of infants talk to their infants all the time, labelling the objects that the infants come across and
describing the activities that they engage with their infants. Other
researchers also noted that in the pre-language stage, the reciprocal patterns
of "communication" and interaction between infants and their
caregivers is the origin of the self initiated monitoring (Hubley
& Trevarten, 1979; Ratner
& Brunet, 1978). Through this reciprocal interaction, the effects and
consequences of the caregivers' and the infants' own acts are brought to the
infants' notice. Intuitively, it is reasonable to expect an awareness of behaviour is essential for later self initiation of regulation.
This early experience of enriched language input and sensitive responses from
caregiver forms a foundation for self regulation.
However, the
early experience of social interaction and enriched environment with language
is often overlooked in children with disabilities. Their atypical behaviour such abnormal movement patterns and delayed or
apparently non-existent response to social or physical stimulation easily puts
their parents off from handling them and initiating interaction. It is often
quoted that in contrast to mothers of normal children,
mothers of children with disabilities engage much less 'talking' with their
infants in play and in the routine chores such as feeding and changing nappies.
As strategies
to encourage the use of private speech, the early interaction between the
caregivers and the child should be emphasised very
early on. For children with disabilities, parents would need help to handling
their children physically and at the same time interact effectively with them.
The mother-and-baby group in CE serves this function. Mothers are encouraged to
sing and repeat the Rhythmical Intention to their babies in task series.
Further encouragement for the parents to talk to their babies should be emphasised in other natural situations.
The
adult's communicative style
When the child
can initiate speech, private speech begins in the child as an imitation of the
adult's guiding speech. In other words, the dialogic exchange that takes place
between the adult and the child in face of a task is incorporated into the
child's self directed utterances. This notion of social origin of private
speech suggests that adult especially parental communicative style and
child-rearing pattern is influential in promoting the use of private speech.
Based on Baumrind's (1973) classification of parental
child-rearing styles and Brunner's (1985) concept of scaffolding, Berk, et al. (1995) explored the relationship of maternal
interaction to pre-schoolers' private speech and task
performance by using both microanalytic measures of
instruction and global ratings of the parental teaching style. The microanalytic assessments measure the moment-by-moment
contingent shifting and maintenance of adult responses within the child's region
of sensitivity.
Global ratings
of parental teaching style give an overall measure of the parents'
authoritativeness. In their findings few relationships were found between microanalytic measures of instruction and the use of
private speech and task performance. On the other hand authoritative parenting
appeared to be a broad and flexible predictor of age-appropriate private
speech, and it was strongly correlated with overall task success and
performance gain. Authoritative parental teaching behaviour
is characterised as warmth, responsiveness, patience,
and an appropriate degree of structure and control with verbal reasoning and
rationale for their requests, commands, and directives. These findings suggest
that the overall quality of a parent's teaching behaviour
is crucial in promoting a transfer of cognitive strategies from adult to child.
Positive, considerate and encouraging communicative style may energise children's motivation to make use of the adult's scaffolded intervention, that is,
using the guiding speech as the adults do.
The social
taboo of not talking out loud, whether to self or others, might discourage the
use of private speech when the child becomes more aware of social rules (Frauenglass, et al., 1985). A permission to talk out loud
in Frauenglass, et al. maximised
the production of children's private speech. As adult-child interaction is the
major part in promoting private speech, adults' demonstration of using their
own private speech in labelling and describing their
own activity and verbalising their plans and goals
would encourage the children to use private speech.
Following the
same line of thought, for an attempt to encourage children's participation in
Rhythmical Intention, the way the adult conducts the session for learning motor
tasks using Rhythmical Intention has to be considered in the first place. An
encouraging attitude of the adults in the whole day management of the children
with disabilities also counts in promoting a more active role of the children
in regulating their behaviour.
The
content of the adult guiding speech
Private speech
is proposed to evolve from the adult guiding speech in a joint activity.
Training to use the adult guiding speech has been considered as a way to
promote private speech and hence self regulation. A number of researchers have
used modelling self instructional strategies in an
attempt to train verbal self regulatory capacity in different types of
childhood disorders including hyperactivity, impulsivity, learning disabilities
and mental retardation(see Kendal, et al.. 1985). The
common features of the strategies used are that the children are asked to
repeat the adult speech while they are doing specific tasks. Diaz, et ai. (l990) criticised
that the effect of such training can possibly claim to have is self control and
not self regulation. They considered self control to be the child's compliance
to an internalised adult directive or command in a
specific situation. The behaviour is in a rigid
stimulus-response manner. Self regulation, on the other hand, taps the child's
capacity to plan, guide and monitor his or her behaviour
from within and flexibly according to changing circumstances. Self control, in
contrast to self regulation, is characterised by its
lack of generalisation.
In using
Rhythmical Intention, the child is modelled to use
speech regulation by repeating the aduit
instructions. According to Diaz, et al. this kind of training is far from
achieving self regulation. Personal observation of the children's lack of generalisation of using speech to regulate their motor
functions in situations other than the learning sessions seems to support this
notion. However, the problem of uncoordinated movements inherent in brain
damaged children entails the teaching of normal movement sequences as the background
for self regulated motor behaviour. Breaking down the
motor components of a motor function and learning step by step with
verbalisation of each step serve to teach normal sequencing of movements. The
problem here is how to transpose the control of movements to self regulatory
mode of motor behaviour. The studies done by Diaz, et
al. may give some clues to the solution.
In an attempt
to examine parental teaching strategies that promote children's use of self
regulatory language, Diaz, et al. classified maternal verbal teaching into nine
categories: commands, directives, directive questions, perceptual questions,
conceptual questions, praises, direct relinquishing, other speech and
whispers/inaudible utterances. Their analysis of 51 mother-child dyads
indicates that the use of praise and encouragement, conceptual questions and
direct relinquishing statements promote the child's active participation in a
teaching task and the gradual take-over of the self regulatory role. Praise and
encouragement as a general parenting style promotes the child's willingness to
adopt the adult's strategies in approaching a task as mentioned previously in
this paper. It also communicates to the child his or her competence and mastery
over his or her environment.
The use of
direct relinquishing statements (such as "Now you show me how you do it.") places the child at the centre of the action and
exerts a subtle pressure and demand for the child to take over responsibility
for the task. Conceptual questions (such as "What goes next?") have
the effect of taking the child to function at a cognitive level for plans and
rules. This helps the child to think forward and detach from the immediate
perceptual field. This is in line with Vygotsky's
developmental concept of self regulation.
The use of
direct relinquishing statements and conceptual questions to promote self
regulation is an inspiring finding for the improvement of the use of Rhythmical
Intention. To achieve the self regulatory role, Rhythmical Intention should be
more than a mere recitation of a pre-planned movement sequences. The adult
stating the functional goal before the verbalisation of movement sequence will
direct the child to the conceptual level of the motor acts. Then instead of
following through the verbalisation of the pre-planned sequence, relinquishing
statements (such as “Now it's your turn to tell me what is next.”) or
conceptual questions (such as "Can you roll over with your arms stuck
under your chest like now? What would you do?) should
be added after the child has been familiarised with the normal sequence of
movements.
Diaz, et al.
finding also shows a direct correlation between the withdrawal of adult
physical assistance and the child's take-over of the regulatory role on the
task. They found that maternal manipulation of the task materials, as an index
of maternal intrusiveness and lack of withdrawal, discouraged the use of
independent verbalisations of the child. This is particularly relevant to the
teaching of motor functions to the child with disabilities. Too much assistance
given to the child might directly reduce his or her need for self regulation.
The gradual withdrawal of physical assistance, the use of relinquishing
statements and conceptual questions all have the fundamental effect of demanding
responsibility on the part of the child. Thus the promotion of self regulation
entails the cultivation of a sense of responsibility in the child.
Guidelines for Promoting the
self-Regulation Role of Rhythmical Intention
Deduced from
the above findings, the promotion of the self regulatory function of Rhythmical
Intention can be, in part, achieved by:
1. Early enriched parental verbal
interaction with the child;
2. Positive and encouraging attitude
of the parents and adults;
3. A permissive attitude to talk out
loud;
4. The appropriate withdrawal of
physical assistance in learning a task or in daily activities and thus the
fostering of self responsibility in the child;
5. The use of direct relinquishing
statements and conceptual questions in learning a task or in daily activities.
As these
guidelines are derived from the adult-child interaction, effective
implementation of these guidelines will entail the proper management of the
whole day schedule and the consistent attitude and skills of the adults
involved. Thus, implementation of these guidelines necessitates:
1. Parent and staff education in the
understanding of the use of self regulatory function of speech and the need for
their positive attitude in their interaction with the children;
2. Training of the staff and parents
to use task-relevant speech in verbalising the plan
and steps to accomplish a task or activity of everyday life as modelling for the children;
3. Redesigning
of the flow of motor task learning sessions (called task- series in CE
terminology to incorporate challenges for the children to use their own speech
as part of Rhythmical Intention.
The change is
expected to happen in the children's more spontaneous use of speech in
regulating their motor learning activities as well as in dealing with physical
tasks in daily living, especially at times of challenges. However, the
intervention mentioned above relies heavily on the compliance of the adults in
contact with the children. Before ascertaining any changes in the children,
assessment on the part of the adults have to be done. Peer and self evaluation
of performance will be a causal way to evaluate the quality of interaction on
the part of the adult. For the part of children, naturalistic observation of
the response in the learning sessions as well as during daily routine has to be
taken into account. Their response to any novel tasks or activities in the day
will also indicate whether they generalise the use of
speech for problem solving.
The social
origin of private speech stresses the role played by adults in promoting the
children’s use of self regulation through speech. The affect as well as the
content of the adult-child interaction in this respect influences the child's
ability and tendency to employ this strategy in regulating their behaviour. This paper attempts to extract ideas from
studies in private speech for the improvement of the use of Rhythmical
Intention in CE. Rhythmical Intention is a technique based on the concept that
speech also serves a regulatory role in motor behaviour.
The idea is very similar to private speech in regulating higher cognitive
functions. Thus to improve the use of Rhythmical Intention, the quality of
adult-child interaction as in private speech is emphasized. The positive
attitude, the appropriate withdrawal of adult assistance, the cultivation of a
sense of responsibility in the child, the modelling
of the use of task-relevant overt speech and the encouragement to talk out loud
are the factors that are seen to improve the use of Rhythmical Intention in the
self regulation of motor behaviour. The early
experience of enriched language input from the caregiver forms a foundation for
speech regulation.
1. Baumrind, D. (1973). The development of
instrumental competence through socialization. In A.D. Pick (Ed.),
2. Berk, L.E. & Spuhl, S.L.
(1995). Maternal interaction, private speech, and task
performance in preschool children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,
10, 145-169.
3. Brunner,
J. (1985). Vygotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture,
communication, and cognition: Vygotskian
perspectives.
4. Diaz,
R.M., Neal, C.J. & Amaya-Williams, M. (1990). The social origins of self regulation. In
L.C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and Education.
5. Frauenglass, M.H., & Diaz, R.M. (1985). Self regulatory
functions of children's private speech: A critical analysis of recent
challenges to Vygotsky's theory. Developmental
Psychology, 21, 357-364.
6. Hari, M., & Tillemans, T.
(1984). Conductive Education. In D. Scrutton (Ed.), Management of the Motor disorders of
Children with Cerebral Palsy.
7. Hubley, P., & Trevarthen, C.
(1979). Sharing a task in Infancy. In
LC. Uzgiris (Ed.), Social Interaction and Communication during infancy.
8. Kendall,
P.C., & Braswell, L. (1985). Cognitive-behavioral Therapy
for Impulsive Children.
9. Jernqvist, L. (1985). Speech regulation
of motor acts as used by cerebral palsied children.
10. Kozma,
11. Luria, A.R. (1960). Verbal regulation of
behavior. In M.A.B. Brazier (Ed.), The central nervous system and
behavior: Transactions of the third conference February 21, 22, 23, and 24,
1960,
12. Luria, A.R. (1981). The development of the role of speech
in mental processes: The regulative function of speech and its development. In J.V. Wertsch (Ed.), Language and
Cognition.
13. Ratner, N., & Bruner, J. (1978). Social
exchange and the acquisition of language. Journal of Child Language, 5,
391-401.
14. Vygotsky,
L.S. (1962). Thought and Language.
15. Vygotsky,
L.S. (1978). Mind in Society.
17. Vygotsky,
L.S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In
the collected work of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol. I. Problems of general psychology.
(N. Minick, Trans.)