La complejidad y los sistemas sociales

Developing a pedagogical environment which facilitates learning and growth in children is the daily task of a teacher. From the classroom observations and teacher interviews a theme emerged that indicated that teachers generally perform this task independently without the in-class support and guidance of other adults. Independent classroom practice was seen as the usual method of practice by the two participating teachers. From enquiries made of them by the researcher they did not believe that their practice was different from their peers. Building a collaborative relationship with a teacher who is not used to having other adults in their class needs careful nurturing and planning, especially if teacher change through professional development is contemplated (Poskitt, 2005). In this section

of the discussion, themes which were found in the research to facilitate collaborative relationships are examined.

7.4.1 Facilitating a move from independent to collaborative practice

Because individual classroom teachers do not necessarily have all the skills and knowledge necessary to provide for diverse student learning, there is a growing movement within the literature to facilitate collaborative practice which is also seen as contributing to inclusive pedagogy. Collaboration is recommended not only amongst teachers but also between teachers and others including researchers, visiting specialists and parents (Booth & Ainscow, 2002; Brotherson, Sheriff, Milburn & Schertz, 2001; Burbank & Kauchak, 2003; Poskitt, 2005; Ruthven, 2005). Whilst the nature of the collaboration recommended is varied there is an underlying theme that teachers’ practice is enhanced through collaboration.

However, the results from Cycle 1 of this research found that two participating classroom teachers practised independently from each other and from their peers, especially when delivering their teaching in the classroom. Independent practice was manifested in various ways including: little communication between class teachers and those other teachers providing extra support (e.g. remedial reading assistance through Tape Assisted Reading), specialist ORRS teaching being delivered without reference to the class teacher, para-professionals providing assistance without teacher direction, detailed class planning, teaching, and evaluation without support from colleagues, no instances observed or reported of co-teaching or collaborative teaching, no instances observed or reported of teachers visiting other classes to observe lessons, and a belief by the teachers that independent practice was the normal method of providing teaching to their students. From the findings, a conclusion can be drawn that there was no joint stewardship of the teaching and learning in the school. Specific examples of independent practice are reported in Sections 5.3.2, 5.6.1 and 5.8. Instances of joint macro planning by groups of teachers were reported. These were primarily to do with sporting or cultural events or topics that classes intended to participate in at the same time (e.g., a study around the weather). However, even for these macro projects, classroom planning and teaching were independently performed by each teacher.

When discussing what it means to say that a school is doing well, Eisner (2005) argues, “The deeper problems of schooling have to do with teacher isolation and the fact that teachers don’t often have access to other people who know what they’re doing when they teach and who can help them do it better.” (Eisner, 2005b, p.186) The results of this study confirm Eisner’s view in that whilst both the teachers in the study did collaborate with their peers in some respects and sought help, at times, when it came to their practice in the classroom they were virtually on their own. Independent practice is viewed by some as being an artisan model where the teacher develops their own skills and knowledge from repeated practice, generally in a haphazardous trial and error form (Huberman, 1988). Whilst Huberman acknowledges that teachers will occasionally reach out to peers, he also says that they tend to interpret any learning from these interactions into their existing schema without examining that schema as a result of the new learning.

The finding of independent practice and absence of collaboration confirms the findings of Fisler & Firestone (2006). Whilst their focus was on social trust and teacher efficacy beliefs, they found that the teachers in their study, “held tightly to norms of privacy and teacher autonomy in the classroom.” (Fisler & Firestone, 2006, p.1178) The authors report that the teachers did not share ideas, instructional strategies or interact in meaningful pedagogically focused ways. One of the reasons why the teachers held on to their autonomy was their failure to develop trust within a collaborative group according to the findings of the researchers. They went on to conclude that teachers who collaborate and seek to challenge the norms of teacher isolation and autonomy experienced higher level of success in their classes (Fisler & Firestone, 2006, p.1182). A major difference between the Fisler & Firestone study and this research was the context of the collaborative relationships. Fisler & Firestone had collaborative groups that met and discussed generally away from the classroom. As demonstrated in this thesis, enhancement of inclusive pedagogy occurred when the teachers began to collaborate within a partnership with the researcher in the classroom. The context of the classroom is viewed, in this thesis, as one of the levers for the