Session Information
SES B 02, Paper Session
Paper Session
Contribution
Much work in research and practice has focused on reasons why some children have poorer resources and learning opportunities compared to others and why professional caregivers are not able to achieve a good multidisciplinary collaboration in order to improve children’s situation (Gilligan, 2000; Harker et al, 2004; Klefbeck & Ogden, 2003). Especially interesting is yet why some professionals are doing better despite of difficult preconditions and environmental circumstances. Furthermore what kind of measures could improve the multidisciplinary collaboration for the good of these children?
My doctoral project is based on a qualitative study about multi-agency and multidisciplinary collaboration between child protection workers and teachers at the primary school in Norway. One major goal is to assess how multi-agency and multidisciplinary collaboration can be more successful for children at risk giving them better opportunities to experience a valuable life both at school and during leisure time (Oftstad og Skar, 2004; Helsetilsynet, 2009; Gilligan,2000; Harker et al, 2004; NOU 2009:18; NOU 2009:22; Opplæringslova,1998; Terzi, 2008). I understand children at risk as pupils in compulsory school age that are showing withdrawal, challenging offensive attitudes, drugs abuse and other behaviours implying a need for particular multidisciplinary public help (Helsetilsynet, 2009; Klefbeck & Ogden, 2003).
The capability approach can provide a useful conceptual framework to evaluate multidisciplinary collaboration because it highlights and evaluate the context within individuals can combine their capabilities in order to achieve valuable outcomes (functionings) (Walker & Unterhalter, 2007). What kind of capabilities and functionings are chosen by professional caregivers within child welfare and teachers? Is there a common understanding about valuable capabilities and functionings for children at risk defined by these professionals? What kind of practice is also constructive in order to help children at risk to gain a more decent life?
My doctoral project started in January 2010 has three major targets which will be discussed in three different articles:
- In one article I will assess multi-agency and multidisciplinary collaboration towards children at risk in Norway today through an analysis of main legislative documents and interviews of 10 professional caregivers and 10 teachers.
- In the second article I will discuss how the multidisciplinary collaboration can be improved based on In the third article I will discuss how to use the capability approach within these different contexts, i.e. child welfare and the school. Based on the capability approach I will try to develop an evaluative tool in order to analyze the selected capabilities and functionings defined by the professionals within these two different contexts. I will discuss if these understandings can promote further capabilities for children at risk or entail capability failure.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Gilligan, R. (2000). Adversity, Resilence and Young People: The Protective Value of Positive School and Spare Time Experiences.Children and Society. , 14. pp. 37-4. Harker, M, R., Dobel-Ober, D., Berrigde,D., Sinclair, R. (2004). More than the sum of its Parts? Inter-professional working in the Education of Looked after Children, Children Society, 18, pp. 179-193. Helsetilsynet. (2009). Utsatte barn og unge - behov for bedre samarbeid. Aviable at http://www.helsetilsynet.no/upload/Publikasjoner/rapporter2009/ helsetilsynetrapport5_2009.pdf/ NOU 2009 :18. Rett til Læring, Kunnskapsedepartementet. Aviable at http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/kd/dok/nouer/2009/nou-2009-18.html?id=570566 NOU 2009: 22. Det du gjør, gjør det helt. Betre samordning av tjenester for utsatte barn og unge. Barne- og likestillingsdepartementet. Aviable at http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/bld/dok/nouer/2009/nou-2009- 22.html?id=587673 Klefbeck, J. & Ogden,T. (2003). Nettverk og økologi. Problemløsende arbeid med barn og unge . Oslo:Tano-Aschehoug. Kvale, S.(2002). Det kvalitative forskningsintervju. Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal. Oftstad, K & Skar, R. (2004). Barneloven. Med kommentarer. Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag AS. Opplæringslova (1998). Lovdata. Aviable at http://www.lovdata.no/all/nl-19980717- 061.html Ryen, A. ( 2002). Det kvalitative intervjuet. Fagbokforlaget: Bergen. Terzi, L. (2008). Justice and Ecuality in Education. A capability approach on disability and special educational needs.New york: Continuum International Publishing Group. Walker, M. & Unterhalter, E. (Eds.). (2007). Amartya Sens`s capability approach and social justice in education: Palgrave Macmillan.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.