The development of the proposed school-linked services appears to be somewhat problematic, yet still holds potential for youth-centered, interprofessional collaboration. This case example illustrates a youth-centered approach to me because the services are being brought to the school, not to the home, and are focused primarily on the needs of the child. Also, the parents of the children and community members are not mentioned to be involved according to the example, therefore ruling out community and family centered approaches. There are some parts of this development process that I feel were absent.
This group is in the "forming stage". Therefore, it is not uncommon for some of the team members, especially the pupil support staff, to feel unsure about their future roles and responsibilities. According to the handout "Analyzing Stages of Team Development", the first stage labeled Testing and Dependency, mentions that members may be uncertain of individual, group and authority roles. It is also written that communication may falter as a reaction to the mistrust of team members and lack of commitment to the team. As mentioned in the case example, these staff feel "threatened" and "feared losing their jobs". I believe the major cause of this problem was the fact that these professionals were not notified or included in the beginning phases of the planning. .
According to the handout Tool 6.1 Getting From Here to There: Action-Planning Phases, phase 1 involves the very beginning steps to forming a community collaborative. The steps of the superintendent meeting with the principals and caring community coordinators was carried through in this case example. However, I believe that the plans were not shared with the teachers and supportive staff at the appropriate time or in the appropriate manner. It is stated in the example that one principal called a staff meeting while the other met individually with teachers and staff as they requested.
