Journal+Article+Review

Kim Tetterton EDU 713 June 1, 2011

Atkinson, C., Regan, T., & Williams, C. (2006). Working collaboratively with teachers to promote effective learning. Support for Learning, 21(1), 33-39. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9604.2006.00398.x

Introduction Many general education teachers’ frame of reference about Educational Psychologists is limited to individual casework and students with special needs. However, the goal of this research project was to encourage teachers to see Educational Psychologists as more than aids to students with special needs. The authors wanted encourage teachers to see E.P.s as professionals with the ability to enhance all students’ self-efficacy and use and awareness of metacognitive strategies. To achieve this goal of enlightenment, the Psychologists and teachers collaborated to develop materials that would promote self-efficacy among students and develop the use of metacognitive strategies, and then evaluated the effectiveness of those materials.

The Project In this study, the researchers (who are also E.P.s), collaborated with teaching professionals to answer three questions: 1) Does working at a whole class level have an impact on how teachers view the roles of EP’s in schools? 2) Is joint work to develop strategies that promote self-efficacy and metacognition perceived by teachers as useful and effective use of EP time? 3) Can teachers and EP’s work together to develop materials that are useful in helping 5th graders establish more positive views of themselves as learners? To answer these questions, researches met with teachers to evaluate their current expectations of E.P.s and their methods in teaching self-efficacy and metacognitive strategies. Students were also interviewed informally through the use of a Scale survey. The survey looked at student self-efficacy and metacognitive familiarities at the start and conclusion of the project.

Method For their research, the authors indentified schools interested in participating in their project and then paired those schools with a participating Educational Psychologist. The E.P. and teachers met during a “Twilight” session to become familiar with the project goals and relevant terms (such as self-efficacy and metacognitive), and to complete an informal interview where the E.P.s learned about the teacher’s knowledge of an E.P.’s role in the school and about the teacher’s current teaching practices of self-efficacy and metacognition. After the Twilight session, teachers were to distribute MALS (Myslef as a Learner Scale) to their fifth grade students to complete at the beginning and end of the six week data collection period. During this six week period, the teachers from the three different schools were to use materials created by the E.P.s (and subsequently revised after teacher interviews) to teach and reinforce self-efficacy and metacognition.

Results The authors of this research set out to answer three questions relating to collaboration between Educational Psychologists and general education teachers. The first question asked if E.P.s work with whole classes rather than select special needs individuals, if teachers’ views of the E.P. would be impacted. After the six week study, most teachers indicated they were seeing the Psychologists in a different light. Teachers were able to think of E.P.s as more of a sounding board for ideas, rather than just someone to work with individual students. The second question asked if collaborating with teachers to create materials to teach kids self-efficacy and metacognition would be beneficial for teachers. While most teachers appreciated the insight afforded by the project, it is uncertain whether or not the teachers and schools would reprioritize E.P. time to be used as it was suggested in the project. Teachers struggled to find a place for the lessons and skills suggested by the Psychologists into the curriculum. The final question asked whether or not teachers and E.P.s could work together to create materials that would help students develop more positive views of themselves as learners. For many teachers, time was a large factor in the production and revision of appropriate materials for students to use. Without appropriate time for collaboration, the material was viewed by the students as extra work to be completed, rather than a guide to learning.

Discussion, Implications and Recommendations Although the results of this project were not as strong as the researchers seemed to hope for, most teachers had a positive experience with their assigned Educational Psychologists and vice versa. According to the researchers, “the project helped shape our professional practice and gave us an insight into ways in which we can best support and work with teachers" (Atkinsons, Regan, & Williams, 2006). However, there were a few limitations to the project. Time constraints as well as curriculum requirements made carrying out the project difficult. And although the participants did so voluntarily, it would have been more beneficial to search out participants who were equally invested in the project to attain results that reflected a more collaborative, dedicated approach.

My Thoughts While I believe the project has value, I do think the limitations to the project prevented the project from attaining greater results. Yet, the project did encourage teachers and E.P.s to step out of their own frame of reference in relation to job titles. Teachers were able to see E.P.s as valuable resources for whole group instruction, and E.P.s were able to better identify with the needs and struggles of teachers. Also, teachers and E.P.s benefited from shared ideas on self-efficacy and metacognition. Many teachers reported the need to reflect on their own teaching practices as a result of their collaboration efforts.

As to whether or not this article would be beneficial for other teachers and educational professionals to read, I do not think it would greatly inform our understanding of collaboration in the classroom. Hopefully, there are many teachers out there already teaching students how to be metacognitive and to use metacognitive strategies. There are also many school counselors and teachers already promoting self-efficacy. However, I do like the idea of encouraging Educational Psychologists, as well as other special educators and IEP participants to expand their role in the general education classroom. I think the main way in which our understanding of collaboration can be informed is to remember that although most specialists generally stick to their area of expertise, they can be a valuable resource for all students, not just those with special needs. Connections to Course Material Friend and Cook (2007) suggest that collaboration should include the following elements: there must be parity, the participation should be voluntary, there should be mutual goals, shared responsibility, shared resources, and shared accountability. While I can see most of those factors evident in the collaboration efforts between the Educational Psychologists and the general education teachers, there are two pieces I feel as though could have been improved. The first is that the collaboration efforts should be voluntary. The researchers only chose three schools that were willing to participate in a project such as theirs. However, the teachers from each of the schools struggled to make time to meet with the Psychologists to plan and develop instruction. From the report, the effort on both ends seemed somewhat strained. Perhaps if participation had been not only voluntary but sought after by //both// parties then the outcome of the project could have been different.

Another condition to collaboration is that there be shared responsibility. The E.P.s were only able to meet every other week with the teachers, which equaled a total of 3 visits with the teachers during the six week study. The teachers on the other hand administered the MALS, taught the lessons, interacted with the students, and then readministered the MALS at the end of the study. Many collaboration models include the two collaborating teachers working together within the classroom setting. The E.P.s did not share in the responsibility of educating the students. They helped create the materials, however, they did not participate in the actual instruction which would have seemed more like collaboration.

In the end, this article served as a reminder to the potential benefits of working with other educational specialists. I think it also enhanced my own understanding of what true collaboration is and how beneficial it can be for students when we work together equally with other professionals to make decisions and work towards a common goal of providing effective education of all students.