0 JCPSLP Nov 2013 3rd draft

9 / 52

Interprofessional education and practice
JCPSLP Volume 15, Number 3 2013 115
Keywords
collaboration
inclusion
inter­
professional
student
speech
pathologists
student
teachers
Collaboration towards
inclusion
An interprofessional learning opportunity for education and
speech pathology students
Deborah Hersh, John O’Rourke and Abigail Lewis
manageable for individual or small group work. However,
the withdrawal model could also lead to a mismatch
between the curriculum focus of the classroom and the
language therapy provided, a lack of communication
between teacher and therapist, and a reinforcement of
segregation, rather than inclusion, of the child from his or
her peers (Hartas, 2004; McCartney, 1999).
Despite barriers to collaborative practice, such as
the above example of the withdrawal model reducing
opportunities for interprofessional communication,
or the speech pathologist’s position as a “visitor” to
the school (Baxter, Brookes, Bianchi, Rashid & Hay,
2009; Hemmingsson, Gustavsson, & Townsend, 2007;
McCartney, 1999), a number of approaches have been
reported to promote the interdisciplinary collaboration
required to assist children with communication problems.
For example, O’Toole and Kirkpatrick (2007) used the
Hanen program “Learning Language and Loving It”
(Weitzman, 1992) as the basis for their training for 16
teachers, special needs assistants and therapists working
with children with language delay. They found that attitudes
to collaboration were positive even before the training
but that participants’ skills and understanding about how
to support these children improved. Wright, Stackhouse
and Wood (2008) ran a “Language and Literacy: Joining
Together” program for participants of varying professional
backgrounds in the UK and found that the majority valued
the opportunities, not just to learn about the links between
language and literacy, but also to explore the role of other
professionals and interdisciplinary work. Bauer, Iyer, Boon
and Fore (2010) also summarised some practical strategies
for speech pathologists and classroom teachers to work
together. These strategies included valuing the expertise of
one another on an equal basis, being flexible and keeping
channels of communication open.
While there are papers, such as those mentioned above,
reporting ways to enhance collaborative practice between
teachers and speech pathologists, there is some evidence
that more could be achieved at an undergraduate level to
prepare these professionals to work together (Law et al.,
2001). For example, Sadler (2005) surveyed 89 teachers
in the UK who were working in mainstream classrooms
with children with moderate or severe speech/language
impairment, about their training, knowledge, confidence
and beliefs around supporting these children. She found
that “few of these mainstream teachers had received any
information on speech and language impairment as part
of their initial training” (p. 157). Serry (2013) found that
In order to support the policy of inclusion,
where children with special educational
needs are catered for within general
education classrooms, teachers and speech
pathologists need to develop close
collaborative practices. This paper reports on
an interprofessional learning opportunity for
education and speech pathology students to
explore and learn about each other’s role and
work through cases. Reports on
interprofessional learning opportunities
between these two professions have been
published but are relatively sparse at the
undergraduate level. An evaluation completed
by 19 students revealed a positive response
to the experience but also suggestions for
change. It is suggested that encouraging
students to consider collaboration and
inclusion early in their training may help to
develop positive and flexible attitudes to the
challenges of collaboration in practice.
In Australia, there is an increasing trend towards the
policy of inclusion in which students with special
educational needs are catered for within mainstream
classrooms (Ashman & Elkins, 2012; Foreman, 2011;
Lindsay & Dockrell, 2002; and, for example, the Western
Australia’s Department of Education “Building Inclusive
Classrooms” initiative:
inclusiveeducation/detcms/navigation/building-inclusive-
learning-environments/building-inclusive-classrooms/). With
this trend, there is also more awareness of a role for speech
pathologists in mainstream schools because of a growing
body of knowledge around the links between oral language
skills and literacy (Roth & Troia, 2006; Speech Pathology
Australia [SPA], 2011b; Walsh, 2007). Effecting these policy
changes involves close interprofessional collaboration
between teachers, education assistants and speech
pathologists, and challenges alternative models of service
delivery such as “pull-out” or withdrawal models where
children are removed from the classroom for their speech
pathology sessions (Hartas, 2004). McCartney (1999)
argued that such an approach allowed “peace and privacy”
(p. 436), reduced distractions for children and was more
Deborah Hersh
(top), John
O’Rourke
(centre) and
Abigail Lewis
This article
has been
peer-
reviewed