No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Creating Collaborative, Child- and Family-Centred Education, Health, and Human Service Systems.
Abstract
This chapter details the threats to America's children, reviews
the policies undergirding new proposals for changing the status quo, and reports on integrated service programs currently in
operation and the design and development of interprofessional
education programs to support them. Particular implications
are drawn for the role that research and development must play
in creating collaborative, child- and family-centered, education,
health, and human services systems. Interprofessional collaboration
and participatory research are the key words of the 1990s. Reference: Corrigan, Dean, and Ken Udas. “Creating Collaborative, Child- and Family-Centred Education, Health, and Human Service Systems.” In Handbook of Research on Teacher Education: A Project of the Association of Teacher Educators, edited by John P. Sikula, Thomas J. Buttery, and Edith Guyton, 2. ed., 893–921. New York, NY: Macmillan Library Reference USA [u.a.], 1996.
... The condition of children in the U.S. is exemplified by poverty, rapidly changing families, limited health services, and constant exposure to violence. According to Corrigan and Udas (1995), children under six were twice as likely to be poor than adults between the ages of 18 and 64, with 48 of the African-American and 42 of Hispanic children under six and living in poverty. In 1996, approximately 45% of the children enrolled in Texas public schools were classified as low income. ...
... The value system of poor children comes from a media and a society that value materialism over education; consequently, poor children are more likely to value materialistic rewards coming from dealing drugs and other crimes over the delayed rewards of an education. The existing disjointed education, health, and human services model is less efficient and lacks the effectiveness possible in a collaboration model with children and families as the central focus (Corrigan & Udas, 1995). ...
This research is the result of a study conducted in high-poverty, urban middle school with a 97% Hispanic student population. The study uses a case study approach to explore the development of collaborative services in a middle school.
... Although many positive results were published regarding individual projects and student outcomes, after thousands of projects and initiatives the U.S. public education system is still plagued with school violence, high dropout rates, and undesirable educational outcomes. It has been widely recognized that the challenges facing public school teachers and the public school system are much larger than the schoolhouse and the teaching profession as it is traditionally conceived (Corrigan & Udas 1996;Hooper-Briar & 'Fakulta Management!!, Univerzity Komenskeho, Bratislava, Slovak Republic. 2 To whom correspondence should be addressed at Rudolf Zellergasse 48 B/3, 0123 Vienna, Austria. ...
... These imperatives were integral parts of a comprehensive framework developed in an American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) monograph (Howsam, Corrigan, Denemark, and Nash, 1976) for transforming education into a profession. Although the content of the monograph was approved by AACTE, little action has been taken to move toward the suggested reform since its publication more than 20 years ago (Corrigan & Udas, 1996). The historical reluctance of teacher education programs and educational administration programs to enact reform may be the single largest inhibitor to PAR as educational practice. ...
In this paper participatory action research (PAR) is offered as a foundation for the development of critical pedagogy. The need for public education reform in the United States is identified, PAR principles are described, PAR is discussed in terms of pedagogy and curriculum development, and potential barriers to implementation are indicated. PAR's roots in critical theory are explored and PAR is offered as a way to alleviate the stratifying effects of oppositional culture, learned helplessness, and tracking. Finally, implications of PAR are outlined for critical stakeholding groups. Conclusions include recognition of the applicability of PAR to pedagogy and curriculum development. Reference: Udas, Ken. “Participatory Action Research as Critical Pedagogy.” Systemic Practice and Action Research 11, no. 6 (1998): 599–628. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022184120067.
... In a collaborative, many professional cultures demand for their practitioners a relatively high degree of freedom and a democratic professional environment (Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1993a). Some leaders in collaboration have observed that collaboration cannot be mandated (Topel, cited by Corrigan and Udas, 1996). One basic psychologically relevant form of independence is the perceived feasibility of self-extrication from the collaborative group. ...
This paper describes the development of global virtual communities of practice in Eduforge.org relative to what is considered the precursors to virtual community development and good practice. To this end, we will provide a) background information about Eduforge (a virtual collaborative environment, located at www.eduforge.org), b) identify and describe an example of an emergent community of educators, and c) discuss a development path for Eduforge in terms of how the infrastructure will best support virtual communities of practice. Reference: Udas, K., & Strand, M. (2005). Virtual communities of practice in Eduforge. In EDUCAUSE Australian 2005 Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
... The fourth wave is still forming. It is concerned with expanding the boundaries of school improvement, and especially with incorporating SLS as a vital element in school improvement (e.g., Adelman & Taylor, 1998;Corrigan & Udas, 1996;Franklin & Streeter, 1996;Hatch, 1998;Honig, Kahne, & McLaughlin, in press;Lawson, 1999 b & c;Lawson & Associates, 1999;Wynn, Meyer, & Richards-Schuster, 1999). Similarly, national school reform initiatives include SLS in their structured approaches. ...
When a new cottage industry develops around a bewildering array of buzzwords, something important is happening. When competent people from all walks of life struggle to make sense of these buzzwords, they are identifying important policy needs and problems with practice. When schools are in trouble, and when results for vulnerable children, youth, and families do not improve, the seeds are being sown for self-doubt, cynicism, skepticism, and maltreatment dynamics. When practicing professionals protect themselves from blame by pointing their fingers at others, when they manifest some of the same needs as the most vulnerable families, and when a growing number of them bum out and drop out, systemic problems are being implicated. When children kill other children, their teachers, and their parents, and when America's schools become their killing fields, something is clearly wrong, and that something needs to be fixed. When no one knows all that's wrong, and when there are competing definitions of what is wrong that needs fixing and what is good and right that needs strengthening, individuals, groups, entire professions, and organizations often work at cross-purposes. As they work at cross-purposes, they are effectively manufacturing diversity and simultaneously adding to the list of buzzwords. Finally, when the American "quick-fix mentality" reigns, even the most promising innovations often are constrained, stalled, or eliminated because of insufficient time, limited resources, inadequate supports, and ill conceived evaluations. The state of the art and science of integrated services--the topic addressed here--belongs in this context. For example, the concept of integrated services has become a mainstay in the buzzword industry. In fact, integrated services is associated with a long list of companion buzzwords. These include: interprofessional collaboration, interdisciplinary case management, inter-agency coordination; interprofessional education and training, capitated services community schools, full- service schools, charter schools, voucher and choice plans, asset-based youth development, policy decategorization, systems change and cross-systems change, and comprehensive systems of care. The length of this list is sufficiently bewildering. It becomes all the more challenging when human beings use these buzzwords. Often, they have in mind different meanings when they use the same words, and they mean the same things when they use different buzzwords (Lawson & Briar- Lawson, 1997).
... Adolescent clinics provide basic health services to students caught in the middle of interagency policy contradictions while serving as an entry point into the health system. Schools and adolescent clinics have been identified as major links in developing program models intended to give children greater access to needed health and human services (Corrigan & Udas, 1996;Dryfoos, 1994;Replogle & Shaw, 1995;White & Wehlage, 1995). Adolescent clinics have highly efficient start-up costs, and they promise to reduce future health costs by educating families and future health system users on how to use the system to avoid costly emer gency room use for non-urgent care (Reyes, 1997;Schlitt and Lear, 1996). ...
Explores the development of a collaboration between a clinic and an urban middle school in a high-poverty, language minority community in Texas. Considers the need for an adolescent clinic and issues of community support, funding, clinic objectives, and problems. (JPB)
... In a collaborative, many professional cultures demand for their practitioners a relatively high degree of freedom and a democratic professional environment (Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1993a). Some leaders in collaboration have observed that collaboration cannot be mandated (Topel, cited by Corrigan and Udas, 1996). One basic psychologically relevant form of independence is the perceived feasibility of self-extrication from the collaborative group. ...
In this paper Kurt Lewin's notions of conflict in social systems are applied to interprofessional social service and education collaboratives. Interprofessional collaboration and service integration are parts of a larger reform effort addressed at reconfiguring and rethinking the ways that social service and educational systems are designed, services are delivered, and professionals are prepared. Constructs including privacy, cultural variance, group potency, need divergence, needs saturation, and tension are related and discussed in terms of generic group-life and the interprofessional collaborative. The discussion points to potential sources of tension and conflict in social systems and factors that may be influenced to reduce tension. Reference: Udas, Ken. “Lewin’s Conflict in Marriage Revisited and Expanded: Implications for Interprofessional Social Service Collaboratives.” Systems Practice 10, no. 5 (1997): 509–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02557855.
The purpose of this study was to describe the organizational cultures of two university-based interprofessional development sites. The overall description includes presentations of case studies, as well as focused identification and analysis of the organizational outcomes of the projects; the barriers to interprofessional education and collaboration; the attributes that facilitate interprofessional programming; and the
development and analysis of an intersystemic communication model.
These descriptive products were developed from the literature bases in
educational administration, teacher education, social work education, public health, interprofessional collaboration, system sciences, communication, sociology, and organizational psychology. The interprofessional collaboration agenda is inherently interdisciplinary, it extends across levels of government, and it integrates what is now a fragmented education, health, and human services system. The notion of systemic reform that is part of the interprofessional collaboration mission requires better understandings of system relations, organizational culture, and communication. In this study a qualitative constructivist approach to inquiry was used. The researcher visited the university based programs and their partners in the field. During
site visits data was collected through interviews, observations, collection of documents, and study of artifacts. The data was unitized and stored in a computer database. The inquiry methods used followed those outlined by Erlandson et. al. (1993) and Spradley (1979).
The findings of the study include descriptions of the attributes associated with the interprofessional development programs studied and the communication structures developed and used by the programs. In addition, the management techniques used to manage communication within the interprofessional education programs and among stakeholders were discussed. Finally, questions about design and management of collaborative activities in institutions of higher education were addressed along with the implications of interprofessional education and services integration for professional development and pre-service education activities for educational administrators and faculty. Reference: Udas, Ken. “Identification of Administrative Issues Associated With Communication in Selected University Based Interprofessional Development Programs.” Texas A&M University, 1995.
Twenty years ago, Nicholas Hobbs, in The Futures of Children, advocated an interdisciplinary team-based approach to educate handicapped, disadvantaged, and delinquent children and youth (Hobbs, 1975). Hobbs emphasizes the school as a social system and the need for professional collaboration in educating children with special needs. Although the team-based approach was originally proposed as a promising model specifically for educating special needs students, there is a growing recognition that the education of all youth [emphasis added] is the shared responsibility of classroom teachers, special educators, administrators, related professionals, and parents (Welch et al., 1992, p. 1). Several factors make this shift to an interdisciplinary team-based approach appropriate for all students: the perception that schools are not well serving the increased numbers of at-risk students; the increased emphasis on site-based decision-making and parental involvement in education; and the recognition that schools are social systems set within the context of the larger community, offering a range of social services that if better integrated, could better meet the needs of students and their families (Welch et al., 1992).
Growing numbers of children face conditions that severely limit their ability to learn and develop in good health. As a consequence, both P-12 schooling and higher education will need to modify their practices to help these children reach their full potential. Family-centered integrated services systems, in conjunction with interprofessional preparation, are proposed as being important steps in meeting the needs of disadvantaged children and families. Suggestions for implementation of family-centered programming are offered, and issues that need consideration at the postsecondary level in order to pursue interprofessional collaboration are discussed. Collaboration is essential to the process.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.