Interview comments relating to changes in transactional support

Although parents and preschool practitioners were not asked directly about changes in transactional support, responses to questions relating to their role in the intervention and continuing aspects of the interventions were linked with this. It would be assumed that when individuals were more engaged in using strategies demonstrated by LEAP specialists then their scores for transactional support would be higher.

Ten parents interviewed during LEAP commented that they learnt strategies during the sessions to implement with their children. Another parent noted that the sessions stimulated her recall of strategies.

“… also … just taking the lessons … you know … really paying attention during the sessions … so you can learn from what they are doing … what successes they have and then using that when they’re not there … so yeah … it seems like a catalyst … to teach us …” (P4)

113

“… getting a bit of inspiration … I won’t say I’m learning new

techniques … but just sometimes reminding me of what … you know … I need to do …” (P12)

Six parents and two preschool practitioners described strategies linked with interpersonal support and ten parents and six preschool practitioners

referred to strategies linked with learning support. Parents’ comments reflecting interpersonal support focussed on being responsive to the child; encouraging initiation such as using choices; waiting for the child; obtaining the child’s attention; and adjusting the language for the child. Preschool practitioners’ comments related to obtaining attention and interaction.

“… I’ve learnt of ways that I can interact with him … of ways that will make it easier for him to focus ……I’ve reduced the speech right back … I give him maybe a choice of one or two and make him make the choice … even in the bath and things like that …” (P6)

This particular parent referred to several strategies she had learnt and it was interesting to note that the score for transactional support for her child

increased considerably more than scores for the other children. As the transactional support score would also include observations of the

practitioner at the preschool’s interaction with the child, consideration of this involvement is also necessary. The practitioner was also responsive to suggestions made by the LEAP specialist.

“… it was nice being there to take on the knowledge … and to see what behaviour (LEAP specialist 3) was demonstrating … and try to mirror those outside of the session …” (PP6)

114

focussed on structuring the task for the child; using augmentative

communication support; providing visual supports; and modifying the tasks. “… some of the strategies we’ve learnt with turn taking … and getting him to wait … and the idea that he has to put something away … before he starts something new …” (P1)

Strategies to assist with turn taking were mentioned in a number of parent interviews, perhaps the fact that many of the children had objectives which linked to taking turns could be a reason for this being a popular task which parents continued with at home. Two practitioners mentioned turn taking although other preschool staff did not, perhaps because it was not one of the partner objectives.

“… it’s not dissimilar to something I would do anyway with a child ...it was specifically for communication and interaction with other children ... I feel my children coming in at three and four ... they’re things I would use anyway ... you know ... turn-taking … sharing ...” (PP2)

However, another reason it was not focussed on much by practitioners may have been because it was something that is used frequently with all children in preschools and so may not have been considered noteworthy. Four practitioners made comments relating to using augmentative communication support. This was the most common subtheme of transactional support reported by practitioners.

“… using Makaton … and I know that is something that LEAP have been supporting us with in the setting … from a point of kind of bringing in resources … and laying out an expectation of doing one sign a week … and things like that …” (PP1)

115

Eight children had objectives linked to speech and communication and this may have related to why this subtheme was commented on by some of the practitioners. However, other practitioners may have been using the

strategies but did not refer to them in the interviews. In general, eight practitioners reported that they continued using LEAP strategies. Not all referred to specific techniques they used.

“… we will keep going with what we’ve been asked to do … we’re using picture cards we’re making her ask for things … we’re

encouraging her to join in with groups of other children … when she’s in a very self-directed mode we’re interrupting her and making her … sort of interact with us …” (PP8)

Comments such as this suggest that some practitioner staff were really trying hard to implement strategies in the preschools, although not all preschools implemented all strategies.

“… quite a bit of the stuff that they’ve suggested has not necessarily been appropriate … for some of our children just yet … because they’re not at that … at that stage … so therefore for us implementing the things that they want us to implement it is pointless … so that’s quite hard …” (PP3)

This comment also links to the areas for improvement which are discussed later.

As well as examining social communication, emotional regulation and transactional support as separate components it was important to consider the relationships that existed between them rather than just looking at them in isolation. The next section explored these relationships.

116