Team-teaching for inclusive learning: Purposes, practices and perceptions of a team-teaching initiative in Irish post-primary schools

Background. Schools unequivocally privilege solo-teaching. This research seeks to enhance our understanding of team-teaching by examining how two teachers, working in the same classroom at the same time, might or might not contribute to the promotion of inclusive learning. There are well-established policy statements that encourage change and moves towards the use of team-teaching to promote greater inclusion of students with special educational needs in mainstream schools and mainstream classrooms. What is not so well established is the practice of team-teaching in post-primary settings, with little research conducted to date on how it can be initiated and sustained, and a dearth of knowledge on how it impacts upon the students and teachers involved. Research questions and aims. In light of the paucity and inconclusive nature of the research on team-teaching to date (Hattie, 2009), the orientating question in this study asks ‘To what extent, can the introduction of a formal team-teaching initiative enhance the quality of inclusive student learning and teachers’ learning at post-primary level?’ The framing of this question emerges from ongoing political, legal and educational efforts to promote inclusive education. The study has three main aims. The first aim of this study is to gather and represent the voices and experiences of those most closely involved in the introduction of team-teaching; students, teachers, principals and administrators. The second aim is to generate a theory-informed understanding of such collaborative practices and how they may best be implemented in the future. The third aim is to advance our understandings regarding the day-to-day, and moment-to-moment interactions, between teachers and students which enable or inhibit inclusive learning. Sample. In total, 20 team-teaching dyads were formed across seven project schools. The study participants were from two of the seven project schools, Ash and Oak. It involved eight teachers and 53 students, whose age ranged from 12-16 years old, with 4 teachers forming two dyads per school. In Oak there was a class of first years (n=11) with one dyad and a class of transition year students (n=24) with the other dyad. In Ash one class group (n=18) had two dyads. The subjects in which the dyads engaged were English and Mathematics. Method. This research adopted an interpretive paradigm. The duration of the fieldwork was from April 2007 to June 2008. Research methodologies included semi-structured interviews (n=44), classroom observation (n=20), attendance at monthly teacher meetings (n=6), questionnaires and other data gathering practices which included school documentation, assessment findings and joint examination of student work samples (n=4). Results. Team-teaching involves changing normative practices, and involves placing both demands and opportunities before those who occupy classrooms (teachers and students) and before those who determine who should occupy these classrooms (principals and district administrators). This research shows how team-teaching has the potential to promote inclusive learning, and when implemented appropriately, can impact positively upon the learning experiences of both teachers and students. The results are outlined in two chapters. In chapter four, Social Capital Theory is used in framing the data, the change process of bonding, bridging and linking, and in capturing what the collaborative action of team-teaching means, asks and offers teachers; within classes, between classes, between schools and within the wider educational community. In chapter five, Positioning Theory deductively assists in revealing the moment-to-moment, dynamic and inclusive learning opportunities, that are made available to students through team-teaching. In this chapter a number of vignettes are chosen to illustrate such learning opportunities. These two theories help to reveal the counter-narrative that team-teaching offers, regarding how both teachers and students teach and learn. This counter-narrative can extend beyond the field of special education and include alternatives to the manner in which professional development is understood, implemented, and sustained in schools and classrooms. Team-teaching repositions teachers and students to engage with one another in an atmosphere that capitalises upon and builds relational trust and shared cognition. However, as this research study has found, it is wise that the purposes, processes and perceptions of team-teaching are clear to all so that team-teaching can be undertaken by those who are increasingly consciously competent and not merely accidentally adequate. Conclusions. The findings are discussed in the context of the promotion of effective inclusive practices in mainstream settings. I believe that such promotion requires more nuanced understandings of what is being asked of, and offered to, teachers and students. Team-teaching has, and I argue will increasingly have, its place in the repertoire of responses that support effective inclusive learning. To capture and extend such practice requires theoretical frameworks that facilitate iterative journeys between research, policy and practice. Research to date on team-teaching has been too focused on outcomes over short timeframes and not focused enough on the process that is team-teaching. As a consequence team-teaching has been under-used, under-valued, under-theorised and generally not very well understood. Moving from classroom to staff room and district board room, theoretical frameworks used in this research help to travel with, and understand, the initiation, engagement and early consequences of team-teaching within and across the educational landscape. Therefore, conclusions from this study have implications for the triad of research, practice and policy development where efforts to change normative practices can be matched by understandings associated with what it means to try something new/anew, and what it means to say it made a positive difference.

Reasoning about trust, entrepreneurial services, and the virtual team

This Portfolio of Exploration (PoE) tracks a transformative learning developmental journey that is directed at changing meaning making structures and mental models within an innovation practice. The explicit purpose of the Portfolio is to develop new and different perspectives that enable the handling of new and more complex phenomena through self transformation and increased emotional intelligence development. The Portfolio provides a response to the question: ‘What are the key determinants that enable a Virtual Team (VT) to flourish where flourishing means developing and delivering on the firm’s innovative imperatives?’ Furthermore, the PoE is structured as an investigation into how higher order meaning making promotes ‘entrepreneurial services’ within an intra-firm virtual team, with a secondary aim to identify how reasoning about trust influence KGPs to exchange knowledge. I have developed a framework which specifically focuses on the effectiveness of any firms’ Virtual Team (VT) through transforming the meaning making of the VT participants. I hypothesized it is the way KGPs make meaning (reasoning about trust) which differentiates the firm as a growing firm in the sense of Penrosean resources: ‘inducement to expand and a limit of expansion’ (1959). Reasoning about trust is used as a higher order meaning-making concept in line with Kegan’s (1994) conception of complex meaning making, which is the combining of ideas and data in ways that transform meaning and implicates participants to find new ways of knowledge generation. Simply, it is the VT participants who develop higher order meaning making that hold the capabilities to transform the firm from within, providing a unique competitive advantage that enables the firm to grow.

A critical realist examination of the inhibitors of double loop learning in an agile adoption

The original solution to the high failure rate of software development projects was the imposition of an engineering approach to software development, with processes aimed at providing a repeatable structure to maintain a consistency in the ‘production process’. Despite these attempts at addressing the crisis in software development, others have argued that the rigid processes of an engineering approach did not provide the solution. The Agile approach to software development strives to change how software is developed. It does this primarily by relying on empowered teams of developers who are trusted to manage the necessary tasks, and who accept that change is a necessary part of a development project. The use of, and interest in, Agile methods in software development projects has expanded greatly, yet this has been predominantly practitioner driven. There is a paucity of scientific research on Agile methods and how they are adopted and managed. This study aims at addressing this paucity by examining the adoption of Agile through a theoretical lens. The lens used in this research is that of double loop learning theory. The behaviours required in an Agile team are the same behaviours required in double loop learning; therefore, a transition to double loop learning is required for a successful Agile adoption. The theory of triple loop learning highlights that power factors (or power mechanisms in this research) can inhibit the attainment of double loop learning. This study identifies the negative behaviours - potential power mechanisms - that can inhibit the double loop learning inherent in an Agile adoption, to determine how the Agile processes and behaviours can create these power mechanisms, and how these power mechanisms impact on double loop learning and the Agile adoption. This is a critical realist study, which acknowledges that the real world is a complex one, hierarchically structured into layers. An a priori framework is created to represent these layers, which are categorised as: the Agile context, the power mechanisms, and double loop learning. The aim of the framework is to explain how the Agile processes and behaviours, through the teams of developers and project managers, can ultimately impact on the double loop learning behaviours required in an Agile adoption. Four case studies provide further refinement to the framework, with changes required due to observations which were often different to what existing literature would have predicted. The study concludes by explaining how the teams of developers, the individual developers, and the project managers, working with the Agile processes and required behaviours, can inhibit the double loop learning required in an Agile adoption. A solution is then proposed to mitigate these negative impacts. Additionally, two new research processes are introduced to add to the Information Systems research toolkit.

Convergence and translation: attitudes to inter-professional learning and teaching of creative problem-solving among medical and engineering students and staff

Background: Healthcare worldwide needs translation of basic ideas from engineering into the clinic. Consequently, there is increasing demand for graduates equipped with the knowledge and skills to apply interdisciplinary medicine/engineering approaches to the development of novel solutions for healthcare. The literature provides little guidance regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, effective interdisciplinary learning for engineering and medical students in a team-based project context. Methods: A quantitative survey was distributed to engineering and medical students and staff in two universities, one in Ireland and one in Belgium, to chart knowledge and practice in interdisciplinary learning and teaching, and of the teaching of innovation. Results: We report important differences for staff and students between the disciplines regarding attitudes towards, and perceptions of, the relevance of interdisciplinary learning opportunities, and the role of creativity and innovation. There was agreement across groups concerning preferred learning, instructional styles, and module content. Medical students showed greater resistance to the use of structured creativity tools and interdisciplinary teams. Conclusions: The results of this international survey will help to define the optimal learning conditions under which undergraduate engineering and medicine students can learn to consider the diverse factors which determine the success or failure of a healthcare engineering solution.