This response to Eusden's (2011) article “Minding the Gap: Ethical Considerations for Therapeutic Engagement” explores ethics and contracts in education and learning, the implications of adopting a relational approach, and the potential risks and creative outcomes of doing so.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanerjeeR. (2010). Social and emotional aspects of learning in schools: Contributions to improving attainment, behaviour, and attendance [Study commissioned by the U. K. National Educational Strategies Body]. School of Psychology, University of Essex, Brighton, England.
FreireP. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London, England: Penguin.
8.
HargadenH.SillsC. (2003). Transactional analysis: A relational perspective. London, England: Routledge.
9.
McVeighT. (2011, 13 March). Half of pupils are being consigned “to the scrapheap” by schools. Observer, p. 20.
10.
NewtonT. (2003). Identifying educational philosophy and practice through imagoes in transactional analysis training groups. Transactional Analysis Journal, 33, 321–331.
11.
SchultzK. (2010). Being wrong: Adventures in the margin of error. London, England: Portobello Books.
12.
ShmucklerD. (2010, 4 December). The use of the self in psychotherapy [Keynote speech]. Presented at the International Association for Relational Transactional Analysis Conference, London, England.
13.
SteinerC. (1975). Scripts people live: Transactional analysis of life scripts. New York, NY: Grove Press.
14.
TudorK. (1997). Social contracts: Contracting for social change. In SillsC. (Ed.), Contracts in counselling (pp. 207–215). London: Sage.
