Multi-professional collaboration in student-welfare services: Balancing tenstion

Authors

• Harri Jalonen Vaasan yliopisto
• Jaanet Salminen Turun yliopisto https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2607-2948
• Miia Tuominen Turun yliopisto https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0181-1732

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23990/sa.128756

Keywords:

multiprofessional collaboration, student-welfare services, social and health care, tension, expert commentary

Abstract

Since the beginning of 2023, organizing social and health services has been the responsibility of the well-being services function at county level. However, many welfare-related tasks remain the responsibility of municipalities; consequently, professionals must cooperate closely. For this reason, close cooperation is needed between professionals in the well-being counties and municipalities. This study examines multi-professional collaboration in the context of student-welfare services. The term student welfare encapsulates promoting and maintaining students’ learning, mental and physical health, and social well-being in a school or other educational community. Previous research has shown that the shared understanding of student welfare among professionals from different fields is insufficient, reactive, and problem-centered. Consequently, student-welfare services struggle to be proactive in pursuing comprehensive well-being goals for students. This study approaches the challenges of multi-professional collaboration from the perspective of tension. The data consist of expert commentary on the Student and Pupil Welfare Act and related laws. Building on the previous research literature on multi-/interprofessional cooperation and tensions, and using theory-driven content analysis, seven tensions were identified from statements: i) health promotion versus supporting schoolwork and studying, ii) student-welfare plans versus student-welfare practices, iii) effective information flow versus children’s and young people’s data protection, iv) ; comprehensiveness of student-welfare services versus fragmentation of services, v) profession-based expertise versus community-based student welfare, vi) the agency of a child or young person versus professional duty and responsibility, and vii) preventive student welfare versus delays caused by collaboration. The conclusion section presents ways to address those tensions and discusses their implications for practical student-welfare services.