Search

This paper narrates the development of a project developed by four researchers with differing approaches to qualitative research. The aim of the study was to examine the value of a school-based approach to pedagogy and curriculum subjects for pre-service teachers. What emerged from our collaboration was the accommodation of significant differences about what constituted "evidence." The article begins with an account of the project itself, followed by a number of research narratives. The researchers draw upon diverse traditions in qualitative research fields that include program evaluation, empirical research and narrative inquiry. Our study embraced Lather's (2006) notion of paradigm proliferation in order to elicit more interesting and useful ways of knowing. Our study reveals the importance of school-university partnerships in improving the quality of teacher education.

How do health professionals and teachers make decisions about supporting young people whose lives are disrupted by chronic health conditions to stay in touch with schooling? Analysis of the interview and focus group data from health and education professionals who participated in the "Keeping Connected" project reflected common family-focused orientations in supporting young people in their care. However, their practice ideals appear to be compromised by institutional constraints such as inflexible hospital policy and treatment schedules, and rigid criteria and lack of clarity associated with disability funding for support in schools. These constraints have implications for policy-makers in terms of how knowledge and evidence about supporting these young people might be communicated more effectively within and across the health and education sectors.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to show that the "Back on Track" program is designed to support students with a chronic illness (usually cancer) to maintain contact with their school and peers whilst undergoing treatment, to promote socio-emotional wellbeing and to facilitate the ease of return to school when they are well. An evaluation of the program occurred in its first year. Design/methodology/approach: A clarificative evaluation approach was used. This involved collecting data about the elements of the program design and implementation to understand and make explicit the logic of the program. It comprised three stages: documenting the program design; gathering stakeholder feedback about the experiences in the program; and reviewing the program logic of the design and implementation approaches. Findings: The program ("Back on Track") actively engaged teachers, parents, students and Program staff in negotiating strategies to keep the students (patients) connected with their school and peers whilst undergoing hospital-based treatment for their chronic condition, in this case cancer, and when recovering at home before a full return to school. Difficulties emerged with the use of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) as one of the key program components in keeping the students connected. There were also differences in views between the Program staff, schoolteachers and some of the students and their parents about the ongoing role of the Program once students had returned to school. Originality/value: The paper indicates what is needed to enhance the implementation and success of programs such as "Back on Track" for this group of young people who have significant chronic illnesses, which necessitate prolonged absences from school and separation from peers. (Contains 2 notes.)

How do health professionals and teachers make decisions about supporting young people whose lives are disrupted by chronic health conditions to stay in touch with schooling? Analysis of the interview and focus group data from health and education professionals who participated in theKeeping Connectedproject reflected common family-focused orientations in supporting young people in their care. However, their practice ideals appear to be compromised by institutional constraints such as inflexible hospital policy and treatment schedules, and rigid criteria and lack of clarity associated with disability funding for support in schools. These constraints have implications for policy-makers in terms of how knowledge and evidence about supporting these young people might be communicated more effectively within and across the health and education sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]