Collaboration Between Team Members in Inclusive Educational Settings

Abstract

SUMMARY The inclusion of students with disabilities into general education settings and programs has necessitated the development of integrated, collaborative service delivery models that are compatible with the goals and purpose of inclusive education. Although there is considerable theoretical literature on collaboration, there is minimal empirical data available on the process or its outcomes. The purpose of this exploratory study was to gain insight on the perspectives of regular and special educators, and occupational, physical, and speech-language therapists towards collaboration. Using a semi-structured interview, participants (n = 51) responded to questions concerning the definition, nature, and extent of collaboration in their school setting. Participants also responded to questions related to the advantages of, barriers towards, and strategies to promote collaboration. Participants typically defined collaboration as not a problem-solving process, but in terms of activities associated with it. Results indicate that participants believed collaboration was mutually beneficial for both students and team members. However, implementing a collaborative approach was problematic. Lack of administrative approval for time for planning meetings was the most frequently cited barrier to collaboration. Although 51.6% of the participants reported time available for collaborative planning by regular and special educators, only 21.5% of the participants reported this time being available for therapists to meet with educators. Education about collaboration, either in professional/preservice education programs or as continuing education, was recommended as a strategy to facilitate a collaborative approach. Although a collaborative approach is being used by therapists and educators more and more frequently, there is a need for research to validate its efficacy.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 63 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.