Journal of Further and Higher Education

ISSN: 0309-877X (Print) 1469-9486 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjfh20

Teacherparent partnership: an authentic teacher

education model to improve student outcomes
Mary M. Murray & Mariana Mereoiu
To cite this article: Mary M. Murray & Mariana Mereoiu (2016) Teacherparent partnership:
an authentic teacher education model to improve student outcomes, Journal of Further and
Higher Education, 40:2, 276-292, DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2014.971108
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.971108

Published online: 12 Jan 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 448

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjfh20
Download by: [Texas State University, San Marcos]

Date: 25 April 2016, At: 17:51

Journal of Further and Higher Education, 2016

Vol. 40, No. 2, 276292, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.971108

Teacherparent partnership: an authentic teacher education

model to improve student outcomes

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Mary M. Murray* and Mariana Mereoiu

College of Education and Human Development, Bowling Green State University,
Bowling Green, Ohio, USA
(Received 29 December 2013; accepted 21 April 2014)
This manuscript describes a statewide initiative to implement a training
model for educators and parents of children with disabilities in more
than 90 public school districts and 20 higher education institutions. The
proposed model was designed to facilitate positive changes among families, teachers and administrators by increasing their knowledge, improving their attitudes and dispositions, and improving their ability to
develop effective partnerships. Through this statewide initiative, teachers
and families will be trained together in learning communities whose
members share a vision and a mission to serve children with disabilities
and improve student outcomes. This article describes (a) the theoretical
and research basis that provides the foundation of this training model,
(b) the core components of the training model, and (c) the procedures
for implementing the model throughout the state.
Keywords: collaboration; professional development; special education;
communication; state-wide; respect; parents

Introduction
Teachers who serve children with disabilities must understand the value and
implications of creating collaborative partnerships with families. They must
master the skills of (a) establishing a rapport with parents and other family
members, (b) developing and sustaining collaborative relationships based on
trust, (c) communicating effectively, and (d) encouraging families to participate as partners across all phases of the educational processes (Dunst and
Dempsey 2007; Turnbull et al. 2010). This article describes (a) the theoretical foundation and the research ndings that support the TeacherParent
Partnership Model (TPPM); (b) the components of the TPPM, in which teacher candidates are trained together with parents of children with disabilities; and (c) the process through which the model was expanded as a
statewide initiative targeting teachers, administrators and parents in school
*Corresponding author. Email: mmuray@bgsu.edu
2015 UCU

Journal of Further and Higher Education

277

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

districts and institutions of higher education. The goal of the TPPM is to

develop effective collaborators and enable them to care for and educate
students with special needs. When this model is fully implemented, it is
expected that more than 90 school districts and 20 universities will have
trained thousands of parents, teachers, teacher candidates and administrators
in how to develop effective partnerships with parents of students with
disabilities.
Homeschool partnerships for students with disabilities
Oftentimes, despite well-intentioned institutional policies, families experience the consequences of contradictions between the intent and practical
application of these policies (Lai and Vadeboncoeur 2012). Simply put, parents participating in special education are sent mixed messages. On one
hand, they are sent the message that they play key roles in establishing partnerships and that legislative policies support their engagement and, on the
other, that they should not do or request too much. Likewise, they are
simultaneously sent the message that their knowledge and participation are
important but they are not educational experts (ibid). Despite these mixed
messages, the importance of family participation and its role in the academic success of children has been well-documented (Turnbull et al. 2010).
Research ndings have suggested that children whose families establish a
partnership with their schools receive higher test scores, attend class more
frequently and are more likely to graduate and attend college (Kreider et al.
2007). Research further has suggested that, when families participate in educational teams, including pre-referral intervention teams, greater alignment
is achieved between students needs and the services that schools and families provide to meet those needs. In addition, the number of unnecessary
referrals for special education decreases (Chen and Gregory 2011).
Teacher preparation for familyprofessional partnerships
Even though the importance of family participation has been welldocumented, research on the preparation of pre-service teachers to help
them engage in parentprofessional partnerships (and the potential impact of
these partnerships on teacher candidates dispositions) has been limited primarily to focusing on groups of involved professionals and/or pre-service
teachers (Bartels and Eskow 2010; Flanigan 2007). Few studies focusing on
the collaboration among family members and educators have investigated
teacher candidates directly. Lam (2005) conducted a study of teacher candidates on a graduate course that required them to complete a partnership
project with a family that included a child with exceptional needs. The
course was taught for four consecutive semesters. These graduate-level teacher candidates were required to meet with their assigned families throughout the semester and discuss the needs, resources and goals of both the

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

278

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

family members and children. Students then wrote four reection papers
describing the knowledge they acquired after working with these families as
well as any insights the graduate students gained about themselves. Lam
found that, after completing the class, these graduate students reported that
they felt more condent working with families that have exceptional children and that they also felt better prepared to educate exceptional children
in their classrooms. A similar study by Stoddard et al. (2011) examined
undergraduate teacher candidates on an undergraduate course who worked
directly with families and exceptional children in recreational settings. The
goal of this undergraduate course was to help the exceptional children feel
more included in regular activities rather than being singled out and recognised only for their exceptional academic or intellectual abilities. After completing the course, the undergraduate teacher candidates were asked to
reect on their experiences by writing journal entries. Stoddard et al. found
that these teacher candidates had developed empathy with the families and
children they worked with and also had formed positive relationships with
them. The teacher candidates also reported feeling more prepared to work
with children with exceptional abilities than they had prior to completing
the summer course.
Similarly, Murray and Curran (2008) found that candidates felt more prepared to work with parents of children with disabilities after taking a class
with parents of children with disabilities. They conducted their study on a
college-level undergraduate course that included embedded parents as participants in all the course meetings as well as a parent co-teacher. These
researchers found that, unlike in traditional university classrooms (i.e. without embedded parents), the candidates in the class with the embedded parents experienced positive changes in their dispositions toward parents of
children with disabilities at the end of the semester. Murray et al. (2008)
also saw changes in dispositions of candidates at the end of the semester
after consistent contact with parents throughout the class. These researchers
also found that teacher candidates viewed parents as uncaring and unknowledgeable prior to the beginning of the course that included embedded parents. However, after completing the course, the teacher candidates viewed
parents as knowledgeable partners. Moreover, teacher candidates discovered
that, as a result of working with parents who were embedded in the
classroom experience, the teacher candidates were more empathetic toward
families and children than they had been prior to completing the course.
Based on their newfound empathy, the teacher candidates were able to
recognise how their own attitudes, beliefs and practices played a vital role
in establishing effective partnerships. In addition, because the course was
set up for the teacher candidates to place themselves in the role of a parent
through case studies and role-playing assignments, they were able to build
on their ability to fully appreciate the perspectives of parents of children
with disabilities (Novak et al. 2009).

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

279

The research results with graduate candidates were the same as those
demonstrated with undergraduate candidates. Murray et al. (2013b) investigated the impact of embedding parents of children with disabilities in a
graduate-level course. This research indicated that the life stories and experiences that parents shared had a positive inuence on the disposition of teacher candidates. From these shared stories, teacher candidates learned to be
accepting of families regardless of their childrens disability, family structure, culture or economic status. The parents embedded in the courses were
also positively inuenced (Murray et al. 2013a). More specically, after
completing the course, the parents reported that they held viewpoints that
were opposite to those they had held at the beginning of the course. For
example, prior to the course, parents viewed the teacher candidates as
uncaring and insensitive, but by the end of the course they viewed the teacher candidates as caring professionals. The parents indicated that at the
beginning of the course they felt intimidated by the teacher candidates;
however, by the end of the 16-week course, parents stated that not only
were they not intimidated but they also had formed trusting relationship
with the teacher candidates. The parents who participated in the program
indicated that they felt empowered and condent when the course ended. At
the end of the course, parents consistently indicated that they would feel
honoured to have any of the teacher candidates in their class teach their
own children (Murray et al. 2013a).
In order to establish strong parentprofessional relationships in education, in 2006 Bowling Green State University designed a foundational
course within its special education programme in which pre-service educators are required to work effectively and collaboratively with parents of children with disabilities. During this 16-week course, parents of children with
disabilities are required to interact and collaborate with pre- and in-service
educators. The course is co-taught by a professor at the university and a
parent of a child with a disability. Embedded parents are paid a small
stipend of $50.00 per class ($800.00 per semester) for participating in the
course and working with teacher candidates in their homes during the
semester. The stipends are provided by school districts and community
agencies that have as their mission parent engagement, parent involvement
or parent empowerment. Upon completion of the course, the participating
parents are qualied to train other parents or participate in parent leadership
initiatives in targeted districts or agencies.
The course provides multiple opportunities for teacher candidates to
develop relationships with parents of children with disabilities. Teacher candidates and parents participate in class together and are expected to take part
in class discussions, focus groups, class readings and projects (Murray and
Curran, 2008). The course combines general educators together with special
educators and is offered at a point in the special education curriculum prior
to courses on teaching methods and prior to student teaching practicums.

280

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Candidates are taught the core aspects of partnership and are provided with
opportunities to practise collaboration skills necessary to establish rapport
with families during the required 20 eld hours working with embedded
parents. Seven essential components form the core of the course:
(1) One parent of a child with a disability serves as a co-teacher and is
responsible, together with the faculty member, for planning,
instructing and grading.
(2) Parents of a child with a disability participate in the course with
pre-service teachers for an entire semester (a minimum of one
parent for three students).
(3) Parents actively participate during the class meetings (engage in
class discussions, participate in group activities with students and
share family stories).
(4) Parents commit to spending a total of 1520 hours per semester in
their homes or participating in an activity of their choice together
with their family and an assigned group consisting of no more than
three students.
(5) Students commit to spending a total of 1520 hours per semester
with their assigned families outside the class.
(6) Students participate in an experience whereby they are given a
simulation activity and put themselves in the shoes of a parent of a
child with a disability through a written case study.
(7) Students complete a capstone project at the end of the class in
collaboration with families (e.g. the family team project requires
teacher candidates to apply their theoretical knowledge to their
experiences with the families).

TeacherParent Partnership Model (TPPM)

Based on research and the success of the BGSU course, the TeacherParent
Partnership Model (TPPM) was designed to improve relationships between
parents of children with disabilities and teachers not just locally but also
throughout the state of Ohio. The implementation of the model started in
2013 for the school districts. Higher education institutions are scheduled to
implement the model in 2015. The primary goal of the model is to implement a systematic method of preparing pre-service teachers, in-service
teachers and parents of children with disabilities to engage in collaborative
and mutually-productive relationships. Another goal of the model is to
facilitate positive changes among family members, educators and school
professionals. More specically, the model is designed to improve attitudes
and dispositions, increase participants knowledge and develop effective
partnering skills.

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

281

The TPPM was designed to create opportunities for teachers and families
to partner within learning communities. These learning communities help
participants develop team vision statements and mission statements that
emphasise schoolhome partnerships and ways that they should function
collectively to better serve students. The expectation for teachers and parents who are trained within the framework of the TPPM is that they develop
a set of values as a team values that translate into goals and objectives to
be accomplished in future partnerships between schools and families.
The parents and teachers who are trained within the TPPM learn to value
each others expertise and work as a team to support academic and behavioural student outcomes. They learn how to communicate as a team and
how to share decision-making power and decision-making responsibilities.
One of the most important benets of the TPPM is that it teaches participants how to share information and resources effectively and to create genuine opportunities for families and teachers to participate as partners in
making decisions in the best interest of their students. The entire set of fundamental principles of the training are aiming to create authentic, in-depth
changes in the ways teachers approach collaboration with families
The TPPM was designed to be self-sustaining. The rst cohort of teachers, administrators and families to be trained within the framework of the
TPPM during the autumn of 2013 have now been prepared to become
trainers for future cohorts. The projected outcomes of the model include the
following:
 An increase in schoolhome communication based on a shared understanding of core collaboration concepts.
 An increase in knowledge and improved collaborative skills. One of
the primary expected outcomes of implementing the TPPM is a
renewed sense of trust and communication that leads to improved
student outcomes.
Conceptual framework
The conceptual framework for the TPPM is based on three theoretical
approaches: (a) family systems theory, (b) the bio-ecological theory of
human development, and (c) family-centred and help-giving practices. The
rst theoretical approach is family systems theory. Family systems theory
emphasises boundaries that determine interdependencies among family relationships (Sturge-Apple et al. 2010). At the same time, family characteristics
serve as inputs in family interactions (Turnbull et al. 2010). Depending on
the (a) characteristics of the family as a whole, (b) characteristics of the
individual members of the family, and (c) unique circumstances, each family
will approach and experience disabilities and the special education process
in different ways. Within this theory, the construct of family must be

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

282

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

understood as a whole and more than simply the sum of individual

members or the sum of subsystems within the family (Turnbull et al. 2010;
Whitechurch and Constantine 1993).
The second theoretical approach upon which the TPPM is based is the
bio-ecological theory of human development. This theoretical approach
considers child development to be the result of the interaction of multiple
factors. The processpersoncontexttime (PPCT) model, the most current
and rened version of the bio-ecological theory, views human development
as the result of (a) an interplay among multiple factors that include a variety
of interrelated systems and contexts, (b) person-related factors, and (c) processes situated within specic time settings (Bronfenbrenner and Morris,
1998; Tudge et al. 2009). Teachers and school professionals must recognise
the inuence of individuals and events within environments to which children have direct access as well as the inuence of other factors over which
children have little control but that nevertheless impact their lives (e.g.
school district policies, medical insurance, values placed by society on
children and education, etc.).
The third theoretical approach upon which the TPPM is based is family-centred practice. Because the family structure is relatively constant in
the lives of most children, family members are frequently in the best position to determine their needs and provide for their well-being (Bruder 2010;
Gallagher et al. 2004). Dened as a service delivery approach, familycentred practice emphasises practices that: (a) empower families (e.g. sharing information with families so they can truly become decision makers,
extending a genuine invitation for families to share their knowledge about
their child, etc.); (b) focus on families as a unit (e.g. understanding the
impact of disability on family functioning); (c) stress the value of respect
towards families and their cultural beliefs, values and strengths (e.g.
acknowledging and valuing family values and practices by embedding them
in strategies implanted in school and at home, etc.); (d) allow families to be
treated with dignity (e.g. emphasising the value of all family contributions
in developing and delivering services for children with disabilities, etc.); (e)
share information with families to facilitate informed decision-making
processes (Bruder and Dunst 2005; Epley et al. 2010).
The most benecial ways in which professionals can support children
include establishing a clear understanding of the strengths, needs and goals
of individual families. Another way in which professionals can support families is by employing effective help-giving practices that provide families
with opportunities to make choices and make decisions (Dunst 2002). Dunst
et al. (1996) found that the type of support and the style used by professionals helping families are much stronger predictors of parents sense of control
than family or child characteristics. These researchers also identied two
key aspects of effective help-giving practices: participatory practices
and relational help-giving practices. Participatory practices support and

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

283

encourage caregivers to build on their strengths and to participate in

decision-making processes. Relational help-giving practices employ empathy
and active listening and help caregivers understand that they are competent
and valuable participants (Dunst and Dempsey 2007; Dunst et al. 1996).
In addition to these three theoretical approaches, the conceptual framework of the TPPM also relies on the newly identied model of family
school relations. Even though familyschool relation theories have evolved
away from the separation of academic institutions from family and more
towards familyschool cooperation and integration, current models have yet
to incorporate critical elements that can lead to positive and productive
changes in the relationships between schools and families (Epstein 2011). In
response to this trend, Epstein (ibid) proposed a new model of school
family relations that accounts for historical, developmental and experiential
factors. According to this model, overlapping and non-overlapping spheres
of the family, school and community are shaped by the developmental and
historical timelines of children and families as well as their social contexts.
Additionally, the experiences, philosophies and practices employed by
families, schools and communities are reected in the changes within the
relationships between families and schools. Therefore, learning about and
understanding the personal history and the needs of each family and each
child is a critical step in developing and sustaining effective partnerships.
Core TPPM concepts
The TPPM model relies on ve key components: communication, a
strengths-based approach, trust, respect and conict resolution (see Figure 1).
The TPPM encourages educators and families to use a strengths-based
approach and conict resolution strategies when working together strategies that help students with disabilities to reach their highest potential.
Within the framework of a strengths-based approach, communication, trust,
respect and conict-resolution skills can be developed and practised more
effectively.
The rst component, communication, is critical in establishing effective
partnerships between schools and families. Sharing resources; communicating clearly and honestly; being positive, open, and tactful; and coordinating
information are viewed as indicators of good communication (Blue-Banning
et al. 2004). An intrinsic component of effective communication is active
listening with a strong emphasis on empathy (McNaughton et al. 2008;
OShea et al. 2000). Communicators who employ active listening techniques
convey empathy in their comments during conversations, ask meaningful
questions and use effective communication strategies (e.g. summarising,
paraphrasing, etc.) to gain a clear understanding of the speakers message
(McNaughton et al. 2008; Turnbull et al. 2010). When teacher candidates
are trained to use active listening strategies, they feel more prepared to work

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

284

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

Figure 1. TeacherParent Partnership Model.

with families (McNaughton et al. 2008). For families from culturally diverse
and linguistically diverse backgrounds, it becomes even more important that
schools make concerted efforts to communicate in culturally sensitive ways,
such as sharing information on a regular basis, sending home informal daily
progress notes and making efforts to share information in the native
language of the family (Lo 2008).
Teachers and school professionals working with families who have
children with disabilities need to develop the skills to understand and connect emotionally with parents and caregivers individuals who oftentimes
experience a wide variety of emotional challenges throughout the special
education journey. Building effective forms of support for families requires
the ability to understand the unique circumstances that families face as well
as the implications of those circumstances (Van Haren and Fiedler 2008).
The TPPM helps teachers and specialists by offering opportunities to
develop, practise and demonstrate compassion and empathy towards
families. The ability to connect emotionally with families, identify with their
experiences and support children helps teachers (a) recognise and communicate appreciation of the efforts and the strengths of the parents, (b) develop
positive attitudes, and (c) frame families stories in positive and empowering
terms (Forlin 2006).

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

285

The second component, a strengths-based approach, encourages

professionals to identify and value the strengths of families when designing
services for children with disabilities. In more traditional models, parents
have often been regarded as passive recipients in the parentteacher partnership (Van Haren and Fiedler 2008). The TPPM uses a strengths-based
approach that views families as equal partners by supporting them in making the best use of their personal and family strengths, their individual and
collective skills, their community ties and the resources in their social and
cultural environments (Drolet et al. 2007).
As a result of inviting families to share their unique knowledge about
their children and participate in the educational process, educators working
with families are able to recognize the expertise of parents and caregivers.
Educators are also able to help them establish a sense of balance between
the needs of the children and the well being of the families (Van Haren and
Fiedler 2008). Hartas (2008) suggested that equality in parentprofessional
relationships does not necessarily mean that parents possess equal amounts
of specialised knowledge; however, parents can and frequently do bring
equivalent perspectives and information about the functioning of their
children.
The third component, trust, is the cornerstone of partnerships between
schools and families. Turnbull et al. (2010) dened trust as having condence in anothers reliability, judgement, words and actions. Establishing
relationships based on trust empowers families and enables them to support
their childrens educational growth and learning (Jones and Worley 2005).
At the same time, developing and maintaining relationships based on trust
is a complex process. When referring to families, authentic caring often
has been dened as a concern for student welfare and trust as acceptance
of children and families (Angell et al. 2009). More specically, the most
important factors in establishing trust-based relationships are (a) quality in
communication and interactions between individuals at school and in the
home, (b) professional knowledge of student characteristics and individual
educational needs, (c) a positive teaming process, (d) a shared vision, and
(e) shared decision making.
For families from diverse backgrounds, it is critical that teachers and
school professionals commit to supporting family engagement by consistently inviting input, sharing information and making a sustained effort to
establish trusting relationships (Kalyanpur et al. 2000; Lai and Vadeboncoeur
2012; Lo 2008). More specically, learning about home practices can help
teachers and school professionals better understand the uniqueness of families and the valuable contributions families can make both in academic and
non-academic contexts (Lai and Vadeboncoeur 2012).
The desire and capacity to trust administrators also inuence the extent
to which families can establish collaborative partnerships with schools. In
their investigation into the ways in which school principals can inuence

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

286

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

the trust that mothers of children with disabilities place in schools, Shelden
et al. (2010) found that the personal and professional attributes of principals,
as well as their actions, inuence the trust parents place in school leadership. Approachability, authentic caring, accessibility and a thorough understanding of various disabilities are personal and professional traits that help
build trust-based relationships with families. At the same time, encouraging
teachers to support family engagement; participating in individualised
education programme (IEP) meetings; taking personal interest in children;
and engaging families all help to build and maintain trust among parents of
children with disabilities, school principals and families (ibid). It is critical
that schools make substantial and consistent efforts to build trust-based
relationships with families. Families who feel empowered by the relationships they have with the schools their children attend can effectively support
their childrens learning and therefore contribute to improved educational
outcomes (Jones and Worley 2005).
The fourth component, respect, is a concept that has appeared consistently in research literature on familyschool partnerships. Treating families
with dignity, honouring their cultural beliefs and afrming their strengths
are essential elements in establishing partnerships with families (Turnbull
et al. 2010). A respectful approach starts with being aware of ones own
beliefs and values about working with families. In order to develop respect,
teachers and parents both must ensure they are open to the possibilities of
teacherparent partnerships and the positive impact that these partnerships
can have on student learning (Pushor 2011). The rst steps in developing
collaborative homeschool relationships require that teachers and parents
view each other as peers, not as subordinates or adversaries. This is accomplished by getting to know, trust, like and respect each other (Smith 2013).
In their study on dimensions of partnerships between families and teachers,
Blue-Banning et al. (2004) found that families describe respectful professionals as those who are courteous in their communication, are punctual and
who acknowledge the contributions of others. In addition, parents of children with disabilities dene respect as valuing students as people rather
than seeing them simply as a diagnosis. From a professional perspective,
respect is viewed as employing a non-judgemental attitude when working
with families, particularly parents and their children with disabilities from
culturally diverse backgrounds.
The nal component, conict resolution, has been dened as strategies
to resolve the struggle that occurs when individuals in relationships with
others perceive that those others are interfering with their goal attainment
(Friend and Cook 2013). Conict often occurs within the complex process
of designing and delivering specialised education services. Oftentimes,
families and schools experience conict that results in emotionally and
nancially draining experiences (Mueller 2009). In their study on parent
dissatisfaction with special education services at the systems level,

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

287

Mueller et al. (2008) identied three sources of parent dissatisfaction: (a)

lack of leadership, (b) lack of compliance with laws and regulations, and
(c) exclusion of families from partnerships with educators. The participants in this study identied relationship building as one of the key components in maintaining positive relationships and addressing difcult
situations. More specically, establishing trust, listening empathetically
and communicating consistently with each other were identied as proactive strategies to use when working with families who might be concerned or upset. Moreover, as ndings on teacher preparation have
indicated, learning how to communicate effectively and how to resolve
conicts helps teachers work with individuals who may hold different
views on disability (Carter et al. 2009). Therefore, one of the main goals
of the TPPM model is to ensure that parents and teachers learning
together have opportunities to practise strategies that address difcult
interactions and avoid conicts.
Implementation of the TPPM
The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) Ofce for Exceptional Children
(OEC) and Bowling Green State University (BGSU) collaborated in designing and implementing the TPPM at BGSU. BGSU uses this model to prepare teacher candidates as part of the Ohio School Improvement Process
(OIP), Ohios strategy designed to create a system of support for all districts
in the state. The state is using federally-awarded funds to support its
improvement plan by working through district/building/teacher-based teams.
Additionally, the states parent training institute and the Ohio Coalition for
the Education of Children with Disabilities (OCECD) have worked closely
together. Based on the data gathered and the research ndings published by
faculty members at BGSU, the ODE-OEC has acknowledged the multiple
benets of BGSUs model for preparing teachers and families to become
collaborators. This partnership was established by connecting learning communities that share their learning goals in the service of improving student
achievement outcomes.
The ODE-OEC invited university team members to participate in a
collaboration process through which large and small teams designed and
planned implementation procedures for the model at the state level. The
team created to work on the implementation of the model included
leadership members from ODE-OEC, the Ofce of the Ohio Network of
Innovation and Improvement, the Ofce of Family and Community Support,
the Ohio Coalition for the Education of Children with Disabilities, State
Support Teams and BGSU faculty members.
Sixteen districts in Ohio have been selected to implement the model during the rst year. Parents of children with disabilities and teachers involved

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

288

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

in the OIP will participate in training sessions provided during the

implementation of the model. The ODE-OEC also will collaborate with four
institutions of higher education to ensure that training occurs not only at the
in-service level but also at the pre-service level. This training will prepare a
taskforce of teachers and administrators to work with families well in
advance of entering the eld.
An equal number of teachers and families have been selected to participate in the initial implementation phase of the TPPM. The teachers
and families selected to participate in the initial implementation phase of
the TPPM will begin their training with an orientation/preparation session
during which they will learn about the benets of establishing equal partnerships in an environment conducive to communication, transparency
and constructive discussions. Teachers and families in this programme
will be representative of the diversity within their communities. All
teachers and families participating in the programme will receive incentives for their participation as well as childcare and transportation
services as necessary.
The implementation of the TPPM at the state level and its extension at
the IHE in Ohio is intended to increase the teachers, school professionals
and parents understanding of collaboration principles; improve partnering
skills; and foster attitudes and dispositions necessary to establish and maintain effective collaborative partnerships between schools and families for the
purpose of improving student outcomes. It is expected that the changes
experienced by professionals will occur at an in-depth level and these
changes will reect in practice. Teachers completing this project will
approach collaboration with families through new lenses reecting respect
and investment in the unique resources and needs of each family. When
teachers and families learn together about family and teacher perspectives
and experiences, the attitudes, knowledge and dispositions both of teachers
and families are more likely to reect an emphasis on collaborative
partnerships (Murray et al. 2013b).
New directions for research on TPPM
The team proposing and implementing the TPPM will collect data in a variety of forms in order to better understand the experiences of the families,
teachers and administrators trained under the new model. The main goals of
future research will include investigating the extent to which the model (a)
is effective in meeting its stated objectives and (b) is implemented with
delity by participating school districts. Research will focus on participants
perceptions of strategies that help them (a) increase their knowledge, (b)
build their collaborative and partnership skills, and (c) examine their views
and attitudes within a collaborative context. Quantitative and qualitative data
will be collected from participants before and after they participate in the

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

289

training programme. Observations during the programme delivery by the

rst trained cohort will collect information on model implementation delity. Based on observations and individual interviews, the trainees will
receive feedback to ensure conformity with the training model in the context
of the unique needs of their school districts.
Implementation of the TPPM by a department of education ofce for
special education on a statewide basis is an important step towards
acknowledging the importance of teacherparent collaboration and its
impact on student achievement. Successful implementation of this model
will provide teachers across Ohio with the skills and abilities to address the
needs of students with disabilities and their families throughout the state by
establishing effective teacherparent partnerships in the school districts.
Ideally, educators, school professionals, parents and administrators will better understand the critical factors that inuence academic and developmental
outcomes for students with disabilities and their families, and therefore
create and implement more effective programmes so that, as at the state
level, schools can begin to close the achievement gap for students with
disabilities.

Summary
The initiative of the State of Ohio Department of Education Ofce for
Special Education to implement the TPPM on a statewide basis represents a very important step in promoting the importance of schoolhome
collaboration at the state level. The message sent to schools and families
is that the expectations are for teachers, specialists, administrators and
families to work together in supporting the best interests of students.
Although federal laws state these expectations in their mandates, schools
and families need local, individualised support in order to establish, practice and maintain collaborative partnerships. The TPPM can be tailored
to the needs of school districts and their families. The TPPM helps
schools and families develop a shared vision and a mission for teams
serving children with disabilities. The model is designed to help families
and schools who work together (a) identify a set of values they embrace
as teams and (b) collaboratively develop goals and objectives for serving
students who receive special education services. Ultimately, the model
proposes that schools and families learn how to recognise and value each
others expertise so that they can work together towards improved student
outcomes. It is expected that, by 2017, all school districts in the state of
Ohio will have a trained team of parentteacher partners. It is anticipated
that these partnerships will lead to improvement in student achievement
in the state.

290

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

Notes on contributors

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Mary M. Murray, EdD, is an associate dean in the College of Education and

Human Development and associate professor in the School of Intervention Services
in special education at Bowling Green State University. She has more than 20 years
of experience working with parents of children with special needs as a teacher and
administrator in special education, as well as in higher education as a faculty member and most recently in administration. She is chair of the State Advisory Panel
for Exceptional Children, and is a member of the Autism Society of Ohio board, as
well as the Voices for Ohio Childrens board. She has also served as the chair of
the professional development committee for the Council for Exceptional Children
Division of Early Childhood.
Mariana Mereoiu, PhD, is an assistant professor in the School of Intervention Services at Bowling Green State University. Her research interests focus on collaboration and establishing collaborative partnerships in educational settings, issues
related to cultural diversity in special education and building partnerships between
schools and families of children with unique abilities and needs. Dr Mereoius
activities include projects focusing on collaboration in special education, cross-cultural studies in early childhood special education and teacher preparation focusing
on working with diverse families and their children with disabilities.

References

Angell, M. E., J. B. Stoner, and D. L. Shelden. 2009. Trust in Education Professionals: Perspectives of Mothers of Children with Disabilities. Remedial and
Special Education 30: 160176.
Bartels, S. M., and K. G. Eskow. 2010. Training School Professionals to Engage
Families: A Pilot University/State Department of Education Partnership. School
Community Journal 20 (2): 4571.
Blue-Banning, M., J. A. Summers, H. C. Frankland, L. Nelson, and G. Beegle.
2004. Dimensions of Family and Professional Partnerships: Constructive
Guidelines for Collaboration. Exceptional Children 70: 167184.
Bronfenbrenner, U., and P. A. Morris. 1998. The Ecology of Developmental Processes. In Handbook of Child Psychology, edited by E. Damon, 9931028.
New York: Wiley.
Bruder, M. B. 2010. Early Childhood Intervention: A Promise to Children and
Families for their Future. Exceptional Children 76 (3): 339355.
Bruder, M. B., and C. J. Dunst. 2005. Personnel Preparation in Recommended
Early Intervention Practices: Degree of Emphasis across Disciplines. Topics in
Early Childhood Special Education 25 (1): 2533.
Carter, N., M. A. Prater, A. Jackson, and M. Marchant. 2009. Educators Perceptions of Collaborative Planning Processes for Students with Disabilities. Preventing School Failure 54 (1): 6070.
Chen, W., and A. Gregory. 2011. Parental Involvement in the Prereferral Process:
Implications for Schools. Remedial & Special Education 32 (6): 447457.
doi:10.1177/0741932510362490.
Drolet, M., M. Paquin, and M. Soutyrine. 2007. Strengths-based Approach and
Coping Strategies used by Parents Whose Young Children Exhibit Violent
Behavior: Collaboration between Schools and Parents. Child & Adolescent
Social Work Journal 24 (5): 437453.

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

Journal of Further and Higher Education

291

Dunst, C. J. 2002. Family-centered Practices: Birth through High School. Journal

of Special Education 36 (3): 139147.
Dunst, C. J., and I. Dempsey. 2007. FamilyProfessional Partnerships and
Parenting Competence, Condence, and Enjoyment. International Journal of
Disability, Development & Education 54 (3): 305318.
Dunst, C. J., C. M. Trivette, and D. W. Hamby. 1996. Measuring the Helpgiving
Practices of Human Services Program Practitioners. Human Relations 49:
815835.
Dunst, C. J., C. M. Trivette, and D. W. Hamby. 2007. Meta-analysis of FamilyCentered Helpgiving Practices Research. Mental Retardation & Developmental
Disabilities Research Reviews 13 (4): 370378.
Epley, P., J. A. Summers, A. Turnbull, and A. 2010. Characteristics and Trends in
Family-centered Conceptualizations. Journal of Family Social Work 13 (3):
269285.
Epstein, J. L. 2011. School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Preparing Educators and Improving Schools. 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Epstein, J. L., and M. G. Sanders. 2006. Prospects for Change: Preparing Educators for School, Family, and Community Partnerships. Peabody Journal of
Education, 81 (2): 81120.
Flanigan, C. B. 2007. Preparing Pre-service Teachers to Partner with Parents and
Communities: An Analysis of College of Education Faculty Focus Groups.
School Community Journal 17 (2): 89109.
Forlin, C. 2006. Inclusion The Heart of the Matter: Trainee Teachers Perceptions
of a Parents Journey. British Journal of Special Education 33 (2): 5561.
Friend, M., and L. Cook. 2013. Interactions: Collaboration Skills for School
Professionals. 7th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Gallagher, P. A., C. A. Rhodes, and S. M. Darling. 2004. Parents as Professionals
in Early Intervention: A Parent Educator Model. Topics in Early Childhood
Special Education 24: 513.
Handyside, L. M., M. M. Murray, and M. Mereoiu. 2012. Learning Together:
Teachers and Families as Learning Communities. Journal of Emerging Trends
in Educational Research and Policy Studies 3 (4): 438443.
Harry, B. 2008. Collaboration with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families:
Ideal versus Reality. Exceptional Children 74 (3): 372388.
Jones, R. B., and J. Worley. 2005. Build Trust with Diverse Families and Communities. Dimensions of Early Childhood 33 (1): 38. http://www.southernearly
childhood.org/upload/pdf/Vol_33_No_1_Winter_05.pdf.
Kalyanpur, M., B. Harry, and T. Skrtic. 2000. Equity and Advocacy Expectations
of Culturally Diverse Families Participation in Special Education. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 47: 119136.
Kreider, H., M. Caspe, S. Kennedy, and H. Weiss. 2007. Family Involvement in
Middle and High School Students Education. Harvard Family Research
Project 3: 112.
Lai, Y., and J. A. Vadeboncoeur. 2012. The Discourse of Parent Involvement in
Special Education: A Critical Analysis Linking Policy Documents to the Experiences of Mothers. Educational Policy. doi:10.1177/0895904812440501.
Lam, S. K. 2005. An Interdisciplinary Course to Prepare School Professionals to
Collaborate with Families of Exceptional Children. Multicultural Education 13
(2): 3842.
Lo, L. 2008. Expectations of Chinese Families of Children with Disabilities
towards American Schools. School Community Journal 18 (2): 7390.

Downloaded by [Texas State University, San Marcos] at 17:51 25 April 2016

292

M.M. Murray and M. Mereoiu

McNaughton, D., D. Hamlin, J. McCarthy, D. Head-Reeves, and M. Schreiner. 2008.

Learning to Listen: Teaching an Active Listening Strategy to Preservice Education
Professionals. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 27 (4): 223231.
Mueller, T. G. 2009. IEP Facilitation. Teaching Exceptional Children 413: 6067.
Mueller, T. G., G. S. Singer, and L. M. Draper. 2008. Reducing Parental Dissatisfaction with Special Education in Two School Districts: Implementing Conict
Prevention and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Journal of Educational &
Psychological Consultation 18 (3): 191233.
Murray, M. M., and E. M. Curran. 2008. Learning Together with Parents of
Children with Disabilities: Bringing ParentProfessional Partnership Education
to a New Level. Teacher Education and Special Education 31 (1): 5963.
Murray, M. M., E. M. Curran, and D. Zellers. 2008. Building Parent/Professional
Partnerships: An Innovative Approach for Teacher Education. Teacher Educator
43: 87108.
Murray, M. M., L. M. Handyside, L. Straka, and T. Arton-Titus. 2013a. Parent
Empowerment: Connecting with Pre-service Teachers. School Community
Journal 23: 145169.
Murray, M. M., M. Mereoiu, and L. M. Handyside. 2013b. Building Bridges in
Teacher Education: Creating Partnerships with Parents. Teacher Educator 48:
218233.
Novak, J., M. M. Murray, A. Scheuerman, and E. Curran. 2009. Enhancing the
Preparation of Special Educators through Service Learning: Evidence from Two
Preservice Courses. International Journal of Special Education 24 (1): 3244.
OShea, L., R. Algozzine, D. Hammittee, and D. OShea. 2000. Families and
Teachers of Individuals with Disabilities: Collaborative Orientations and
Responsive Practices. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Olivos, E. M., R. J. Gallagher, and J. Aguilar. 2010. Fostering Collaboration with
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Families of Children with Moderate to
Severe Disabilities. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation 20
(1): 2840.
Smiley, A. D. 2006. Power, Families of Color, and Special Education: A Qualitative Examination of Discourse between Families and Professionals in Urban
Settings. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Stoddard, K., B. Braun, and M. Koorland. 2011. Beyond the Schoolhouse:
Understanding Families through Pre-service Experiences in the Community.
Preventing School Failure 55: 158163.
Sturge-Apple, M., P. Davies, and E. Cummings. 2010. Typologies of Family
Functioning and Childrens Adjustment during the Early School Years. Child
Development 81: 4: 13201335.
Tudge, J. H., I. Mokrova, B. Hateld, and R. B. Karnik. 2009. Uses and Misuses
of Bronfenbrenners Bioecological Theory of Human Development. Journal of
Family Theory & Review 1: 198210.
Turnbull, A., R. Turnbull, E. J. Erwin, L. C. Soodak, and K. A. Shogren. 2010.
Families, Professionals, and Exceptionality: Positive Outcomes through
Partnerships and Trust. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Van Haren, B., and C. R. Fiedler. 2008. Support and Empower Families of
Children with Disabilities. Intervention in School & Clinic 43 4: 23135.
Whitechurch, G. G., and L. L. Constantine. 1993. Systems Theory. In Sourcebook
of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach, edited by P. G. Boss,
W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, and S. K. Steinmetz, 325352.
New York: Plenum Press.