Innovate Issue 1 November 2019 | Page 7

CHA RACT ER ED UC AT IO N Models of behaviour in Character Education: Transactional Analysis Hugh McCormick, Head of Economics Psychologists have studied teaching and learning for more than a century, looking for ways to enhance adult understanding of young people in the context of a school community. A teacher has many thousands of interactions with over a hundred young people each day. Despite the array of characters and case studies at our disposal, it is unusual to receive training in personality types and educational psychology. Therefore we all have an opportunity to make a significant impact with practical work that enhances understanding of individual and group character. And this opportunity is enhanced by the passion many teachers feel for what is the most rewarding part of the job: to foster healthy, pro-social characteristics in our young people. In short, we love to engage in character education, and learning new skills will help us do so. My research interest focuses on practical models of behaviour that can clarify and enrich our interactions with young people. One of these models is Transactional Analysis. Transactional Analysis A school of psychology that became popular in the 1950s, Transactional Analysis describes every human interaction as a transaction between two or more individuals. According to the model, each individual can occupy three discrete psychological states – Parent, Adult, Child – and can occupy multiple states simultaneously. P Parent ego state: behaviours, thoughts and A Adult ego state: behaviours, thoughts and feelings C Child ego state: behaviours, thoughts and feelings feelings copied from parental figures; recordings of external events. that are direct responses to events today; responses to the needs of the current situation. replayed from childhood; recordings of internal events. Our inner Parent consists in innumerable recordings of external events that occurred during childhood, most frequently the behaviour of our parents. We imbibed what our parents told us and remembered these dictates as rules that must be obeyed. Our Parent then regurgitates these rules, often unquestioningly, as moral commands to others in a ‘should’ voice: ‘you ought to be doing your homework’; ‘you shouldn’t be wasting money on that’; ‘no pudding unless you eat your greens’. The Parent talks downwards, imposes and enforces rules and feels superior. The Parent also has assets, in particular useful habits and guidelines that increase productivity and safety and promote moral conduct. Our inner Child consists in innumerable recordings of internal events that occurred during childhood. So vivid and strong were those feelings that we stored them up. The Child relies upon moral absolutes (‘must’) in order to wrestle some predictability and control from a world that feels domineering and frightening: ‘that’s against the rules’; ‘you can’t do this to me’; ‘everyone’s out to get me’. The Child talks upwards and feels inferior. The Child’s assets are creativity, spontaneity and wonder. Our inner Adult processes real world data in an objective fashion to reach a considered judgement, and responds to the needs of the present situation rather than according to feelings of inferiority or superiority, or learned habits. The Adult talks horizontally and outwards. Importantly, the Adult’s self-esteem is based on a clear assessment of their moral equality, their power to make choices for themselves, and their right to belong – a mixture of Rousseau and Nietzsche. Therefore someone can be transacting with you as an Adult – they ask you, ‘What time is it?’ – and also as a Parent talking to a Child since their ulterior meaning might be, ‘You shouldn’t be late for the lesson’. On the other hand, when they ask ‘What time is it?’ they might instead be transacting as a Child stating to a Parent, ‘The lesson must end on time.’ This is known as the PAC model. A clue about which state is dominant in a person at a given moment is whether they are speaking or acting out a ‘should’ statement, a ‘must’ statement, or an evaluative statement. 5