Using cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) tools to understand reflecting teams as a process for professional learning

Abstract

AimsTo explore the views and experiences of educational psychologists (EPs) using Reflecting Teams (RT; see Andersen, 1987) via an online virtual platform, as a new approach to practice within one local authority (LA) educational psychology service (EPS).MethodsThis exploratory research was based on a case study design (Yin, 2018) and, using Engeström’s (1999, 2015) cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) as an analytical tool, sought to capture and explore how members of one LA EPS as a unique social context, used RT in practice via an online meeting platform, over the course of one academic school session. Nine members of the EPS responded to open-ended questions on an online survey after one month of using the RT method. Six EPS members responded to the same survey after ten-months implementation of the RT method. Data were interpreted through thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2019, 2020) and CHAT, to explore participants’ views and experiences of their RT activity.FindingsCHAT analysis identified seven contradictions in relation to EPs’ perceptions of their Reflecting Teams activity: ‘learning vs. implementing’ (object of activity), ‘stakeholder-oriented vs. practitioner-oriented’ (outcome), ‘protected time’ vs. ‘not enough time’ (rules), ‘equitable participation’ (roles), ‘safety vs. vulnerability’ (roles), ‘actual community vs. ideal community’ (community), and ‘online platforms vs. in-person meetings (tools)’. EPs reported that Reflecting Teams provided: support with complex problems and challenges in EP casework and practice; peer-support from colleagues; and enhanced staff wellbeing. Time, training, resources, distribution of roles and the importance of ensuring a sense of safety, were highlighted as factors that mediated EPs’ experience of the Reflecting Teams method.LimitationsFindings reflect the experiences of a small sample of participants from an EPS in one local context.ConclusionsThe study represents a unique example of the use of Andersen’s (1987) Reflecting Teams method, as an approach to systemic practice and family therapy, applied within the context of EP practice. CHAT provided a valuable framework which offered an insightful and nuanced interpretation of participants’ perceptions and reflections of their engagement in RT as a novel process for professional learning in one LA EPS.