Meeting the Challenge of Consultation and Collaboration

Abstract

The roles of special educators as consultants and collaborators have long been established and supported. The rationale for these roles is also well documented. Many models--consultative, collaborative, and teaming--have been suggested in the literature; sometimes, these models exhibit similar goals, competencies, and processes. Because of intensified pressures to collaborate, successful implementation of collaborative and team efforts requires that special educators expand their roles as interactive professionals. The purpose of this article is to define and describe the consultation, collaboration, and teaming models that have been implemented, discuss their strengths and limitations, delineate how these models contribute to interactive teaming, outline key features of the interactive team, and provide some guiding principles for successful implementation.

Collaboration with teachers: A survey of South Australian occupational therapists' perceptions and experiences

“…Existing literature on the topic of collaboration between therapists and teachers shows inconsistency in definition and highlights the benefits of, barriers to and strategies for collaboration (Coben et al, 1997;Hillier, Civetta & Pridham, 2010;Kennedy & Stewart, 2011;Nochajski, 2001;Prigg, 2002). Despite variations in defining collaboration, descriptions of barriers to collaborative practice are common (Kennedy & Stewart, 2011).…”

“…Bose and Hinojosa (2008) reported professional status, often a feature in the culture of health settings, as a barrier to collaboration. While stressing the influence of the workplace and professional training on collaborative experiences, the literature also suggests that individuals require both the personal skills and the desire to collaborate effectively (Bose & Hinojosa, 2008;Coben et al, 1997;Nochajski, 2001).…”

Collaboration between occupational therapists and teachers: Definitions, implementation and efficacy

“…Insufficient time to plan and meet, as a result of working hours and caseloads, was a predominant organisational barrier in the related research (Bose & Hinojosa, 2008;Herbert et al, 2007;Nochajski, 2001), as was lack of administrative support (Barnes & Turner; Nochajski). Coben et al (1997) and Walsh et al (1999) went on to suggest that lack of support and insufficient time results in infrequent and informal collaborative interactions (Barnes & Turner; Bose & Hinojosa). Organisational determinants were reported in all three research papers from the health ⁄ education milieu discussed in this review so far (Barnes & Turner; Bose & Hinojosa; Nochajski).…”

“…Often a definition is absent; terms are used interchangeably or can describe varying degrees of collaboration (D'Amour, Ferrada-Videla, MartinRodriguez & Beaulieu, 2005). Variations described include: cooperation (Walsh, Brabeck & Howard, 1999), collaborative consultation, teaming (Coben, Thomas, Sattler & Morsink, 1997;Knackendoffel, 2005) and multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration (Paul & Peterson, 2001). Despite the inconsistency in definition and terminology, the literature reports common features of collaboration including joint communication and goal setting.…”

Processes and challenges in identifying learning disabilities among students who are English language learners in three New York State districts

“…There has been little research on collaborative structures and coordination between special education staff and English language learner personnel to support the identification of learning disabilities among students who are English language learners (Garcia and Ortiz 2006;Zehler et al 2003). What research there is focuses on monolingual settings, with scholars discussing the role of collaborative consultation (Coben et al 1997), collaborative problem solving (Pugach and Johnson 1995;Vaughn, Bos, and Schumm 1997), and coteaching Cook 1991, 1996). Other research, also in monolingual contexts, has shown that district collaboration shapes how This study illustrates that the three districts struggle to provide instruction and support services that meet the needs of students who are English language learners before and during the prereferral process and have difficulties providing services for dually identified students limiTaTionS and implicaTionS for furTher reSearch 23 schools use resources (Fullan and Hargreaves 1996;Hargreaves and Fullan 1998;Leonard and Leonard 2003; National Commission on Teaching and America's Future 2007; Shannon and Bylsma 2004).…”