When Challenging Behaviour Becomes an Opportunity to Communicate: Functional Communication Training
One of the questions I hear most often from parents and professionals is, “How can we help this person communicate what they need without relying on challenging behaviour?” It is a particularly important question because, in many situations, the behaviour that concerns us most is also the person's most effective means of communicating. A child may scream when they want something, push materials away when a task becomes too difficult, leave the classroom when they feel overwhelmed, or become physically aggressive when they cannot find another way to express frustration. When we look only at the behaviour itself, it is easy to conclude that the primary objective should be to make it stop. When we look more closely at what is happening around the behaviour, however, we may discover that the behaviour is actually providing us with valuable information about what the person needs.
This way of thinking has been an important part of the Positive Systems Approach for many years. Rather than beginning with the assumption that challenging behaviour is something located within the individual that needs to be corrected, we try to understand the interaction between the person and the environment in which the behaviour occurs. What is happening immediately before the behaviour? What happens afterward? Is the person trying to obtain something, avoid something, gain someone's attention, communicate discomfort, or regain some sense of control over a situation? These questions do not excuse behaviour that may be unsafe or disruptive, but they can help us understand why it continues to occur and, perhaps more importantly, what we might teach the person to do instead.
This is also the fundamental idea behind Functional Communication Training, or FCT. FCT emerged from Applied Behaviour Analysis and involves teaching a person a more appropriate communication response that serves the same function as the challenging behaviour. A substantial body of research has demonstrated that when individuals are taught effective, functionally equivalent communication responses, challenging behaviour can often be reduced while meaningful communication increases.
Although the terminology can sometimes make FCT sound like a highly technical intervention, the underlying idea is quite straightforward. If a person is engaging in a particular behaviour because it reliably helps them accomplish something, we need to understand what that behaviour is accomplishing and then teach them another way of achieving the same outcome.
Consider, for example, a young student who regularly tears up worksheets or pushes them onto the floor whenever independent work begins. The behaviour might initially be described as defiance, non-compliance, or an unwillingness to participate. The adults around the child may respond by insisting that the work be completed, perhaps increasing the prompts or consequences in an effort to discourage the behaviour. Yet if we take the time to observe the sequence of events, we may notice that the assignment is consistently followed by signs of frustration, the worksheet is pushed away, and the demand is subsequently removed. From the child's perspective, the behaviour has become an effective way of communicating, “I can't do this,” or perhaps, “This is too difficult for me.”
Once we understand that possibility, our approach can change considerably. Rather than concentrating exclusively on preventing the worksheet from being thrown, we can teach the child to communicate “help,” “break,” or “I don't understand.” Depending on the individual's abilities, that communication might involve a spoken word or phrase, a sign, a gesture, a picture, or a communication device. The particular form of communication is less important than the fact that it provides the person with a practical way to accomplish the same purpose that the challenging behaviour previously accomplished.
There is an important distinction here that is sometimes missed in behavioural intervention. We are not simply teaching the child to behave appropriately because adults prefer appropriate behaviour. We are teaching a skill that has genuine value to the child. If “I need a break” does not result in a break, or if asking for help does not result in meaningful assistance, then the communication response is unlikely to compete successfully with a behaviour that has historically worked. For communication to replace challenging behaviour, it has to be useful to the person who is communicating.
This is one of the reasons that I have always viewed behaviour and communication as so closely connected. When a person has an effective means of communicating what they want, what they do not want, what they find difficult, or what they need from the people around them, there is often much less reason for them to rely on behaviours that others find challenging. The objective is therefore not simply to suppress the behaviour. It is to expand the person's repertoire of skills so that the behaviour becomes less necessary.
Imagine a child who screams whenever a parent begins preparing dinner because the child wants attention. It would certainly be possible to focus on reducing the screaming, perhaps by withholding attention when it occurs. But the more useful question may be what the child could do to obtain attention in an acceptable and effective way. Perhaps the child can learn to say, “Mom, come here,” touch the parent's arm, or use another agreed-upon signal. If the adults consistently recognize and respond to that communication, the child begins to learn that there is a more efficient way of getting their needs met.
The same principle applies when the function of the behaviour is escape or avoidance. A student who repeatedly leaves the classroom when an activity becomes overwhelming may not need another lecture about staying in the classroom. They may need a way of communicating that the situation has become too difficult. Teaching the student to request a brief break, ask for assistance, or indicate that they need some additional support provides an alternative that is both more understandable to others and more useful to the student.
What is particularly interesting about these examples is that the solution is not necessarily located entirely within the child. The behaviour is occurring within a system, and the system is part of the intervention. If a child learns at school that saying “break” is an effective way to communicate a need but discovers at home that the adults only respond when the child screams, then the child is receiving two very different messages about how communication works. From the child's perspective, both responses may continue to have value, depending on the circumstances.
This is where the systems perspective becomes so important. The Positive Systems Approach recognizes that meaningful behavioural change is rarely sustained when we focus exclusively on the individual and ignore the environments in which the behaviour occurs. Parents, teachers, educational assistants, support workers and other caregivers all contribute to the contingencies surrounding behaviour, whether they realize it or not. Consequently, teaching a new communication skill also involves helping the important people in the person's life understand what that communication means and how they can respond to it consistently.
This does not mean that every adult needs to become an expert in Applied Behaviour Analysis or that families need to implement complicated behavioural programs throughout their daily lives. In many situations, what is needed is simply a shared understanding of what the person is trying to communicate and a reasonably consistent response when they use the new communication skill. When everyone understands that “break” means the person is asking for a brief opportunity to step away from a difficult situation, for example, the communication begins to have predictable meaning. Over time, the individual can learn that they do not have to escalate their behaviour in order for other people to understand what they need.
There is also a broader lesson here about how we think about challenging behaviour. We often describe behaviour as though it belongs entirely to the individual: “He is aggressive,” “She is non-compliant,” “He has tantrums,” or “She refuses to cooperate.” Such descriptions can be useful as shorthand, but they can also cause us to overlook the circumstances in which the behaviour occurs. The same individual may behave very differently depending upon the demands being placed upon them, the people around them, the predictability of the environment, their ability to communicate, and their previous experiences with asking for help.
When we begin to pay attention to these relationships, behaviour becomes considerably more understandable. A child who has learned that screaming is the only reliable way to escape an overwhelming situation may continue to scream until someone teaches them another effective response. A person who has discovered that pushing others away is the only way to create personal space may continue to do so until the environment provides a safer and more effective means of communicating that need. In both cases, the behaviour may be telling us something that the individual has not yet learned to communicate in another way.
This is why I believe that one of the most useful things we can do when confronted with challenging behaviour is to slow down our response long enough to become curious about what the behaviour might be telling us. What was happening immediately before it occurred? What did the person gain or avoid as a result? What might they have been trying to communicate? And, once we have developed a reasonable hypothesis about the function of the behaviour, what communication skill could we teach that would allow them to accomplish the same thing more effectively? Those questions can lead us in a very different direction from simply asking how we can make the behaviour stop.
They also encourage us to notice progress that might otherwise be overlooked. The first time a child hands over a card to request a break rather than throwing the worksheet may seem like a very small event, particularly if the child has a long history of challenging behaviour. The first time a young person says, “I need help,” instead of becoming aggressive may pass almost unnoticed in a busy classroom. Yet these moments represent something important. The person is beginning to discover that communication can work.
As that experience is repeated, the relationship between the individual and the people around them can begin to change. Adults no longer have to wait for behaviour to escalate before they understand what the person needs, and the individual no longer has to escalate their behaviour before they are heard. Communication becomes more efficient, the environment becomes more predictable, and opportunities for positive interaction increase.
This is also why I see Functional Communication Training as fitting so naturally within the Positive Systems Approach. Although FCT comes from the behavioural tradition of Applied Behaviour Analysis, it reflects many of the principles that have guided my own work for decades: understanding behaviour in context, looking for the function behind what we observe, building on existing strengths, teaching useful skills rather than simply correcting problems, and recognizing that lasting change often requires changes in the systems surrounding the individual.
Perhaps most importantly, it reminds us that the purpose of behavioural intervention should not simply be to make a person easier for others to manage. The purpose should be to help the individual participate more successfully in their own life. Being able to ask for help, request a break, express a preference, indicate discomfort, obtain attention, or communicate that something is not working are fundamental skills that increase independence and provide people with greater control over their own environment.
When we look at challenging behaviour from that perspective, the behaviour itself can become the beginning of a conversation rather than the end of one. Instead of simply asking, “How do we stop this?” we can begin asking, “What is this person trying to communicate, and how can we help them communicate it more effectively?”
That change in perspective may seem small, but it can have profound implications. It moves us away from viewing behaviour as something that needs to be controlled and toward understanding behaviour as information. It encourages us to look beyond the individual to the relationships and environments in which behaviour occurs. And it reminds us that sometimes the most effective way to reduce challenging behaviour is not to focus on the behaviour at all, but to teach the person a better way of communicating what they need.
In the Positive Systems Approach, this is ultimately what prevention is about. We are not waiting for behaviour to escalate before we respond. We are trying to understand the conditions that make challenging behaviour more likely and then create the skills, relationships and environments that make more positive responses possible.
Functional Communication Training gives us a practical way to begin that process. By understanding the function of behaviour, teaching an alternative form of communication, and ensuring that the people surrounding the individual respond consistently to that new communication, we can begin to replace frustration with understanding and reaction with connection. And sometimes, when we take the time to listen carefully enough, we discover that the challenging behaviour was communicating something important all along.
Click on the link below to get a handy parent resource handout regarding FCT.
Comments