The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

When age-appropriateness isn’t appropriate

When age-appropriateness isn’t appropriate
When age-appropriateness isn’t appropriate

This chapter examines the origins of the intensity of commitment to ageappropriateness and how intensive interaction highlights the problems of the concept as it is currently often applied. Practitioners with regimented ideas of age-appropriateness tend not to be those who have moved on in their thinking about normalization. As A. L. Chappell highlights in her critique of normalization, no debate remains static and there is growing recognition amongst those associated with the normalization principle that people with learning difficulties are not a homogenous group. The practitioner using the approach modifies her or his interpersonal behaviours with, for example, exaggerated facial expression, more dramatic use of body language, repetitive, simplified language. The practitioner responds to feedback by constantly adjusting the content, mood and pace of the activity to maintain optimal levels of interest and arousal. Intensive interaction has been developed for the kinds of learners who are hardest to reach and for whom other approaches have failed to have impact.

48-57
Taylor & Francis
Nind, Melanie
b1e294c7-0014-483e-9320-e2a0346dffef
Hewett, Dave
c169802f-a43c-4a28-8c34-a7e64eca1159
Nind, Melanie
b1e294c7-0014-483e-9320-e2a0346dffef
Hewett, Dave
c169802f-a43c-4a28-8c34-a7e64eca1159

Nind, Melanie and Hewett, Dave (2018) When age-appropriateness isn’t appropriate. In, Whose Choice?: Contentious Issues for Those Working with People with Learning Difficulties. Taylor & Francis, pp. 48-57.

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

This chapter examines the origins of the intensity of commitment to ageappropriateness and how intensive interaction highlights the problems of the concept as it is currently often applied. Practitioners with regimented ideas of age-appropriateness tend not to be those who have moved on in their thinking about normalization. As A. L. Chappell highlights in her critique of normalization, no debate remains static and there is growing recognition amongst those associated with the normalization principle that people with learning difficulties are not a homogenous group. The practitioner using the approach modifies her or his interpersonal behaviours with, for example, exaggerated facial expression, more dramatic use of body language, repetitive, simplified language. The practitioner responds to feedback by constantly adjusting the content, mood and pace of the activity to maintain optimal levels of interest and arousal. Intensive interaction has been developed for the kinds of learners who are hardest to reach and for whom other approaches have failed to have impact.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 1 January 2018

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 446087
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/446087
PURE UUID: 7489ad9d-a57b-4478-ad66-eb0e12ba610c
ORCID for Melanie Nind: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-4070-7513

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 20 Jan 2021 17:31
Last modified: 06 Jun 2024 01:42

Export record

Contributors

Author: Melanie Nind ORCID iD
Author: Dave Hewett

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×