Right Here, Right Now: Effective Interprofessional Collaboration in Education from the Perspectives of Primary School Teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand

This research aims to develop a deeper understanding of what factors contribute to effective interprofessional collaboration in education from the perspectives of primary school teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand. A qualitative constructivist methodology was used involving semi-structured telephone interviews with seven teachers working in primary schools in Aotearoa New Zealand. Four main themes were established: Collaboration is viewed as one teacher and one professional working together; immediacy is perceived as the most important component of support in IPC in education; effectiveness is identified as observable changes in the learner; and the classroom represents the space through which teachers view collaboration. The overall picture provided in the current research was that IPC in the primary classroom setting remains a siloed entity done in addition to and exclusive from the rest of school business. A tension appears to exist between teacher autonomy and collaboration.


Introduction
Interprofessional collaborative practice has been adopted by the World Health Organisation as the ways in which policy writers, decision-makers, educators, health workers, community leaders, and global health advocates should deliver services (Gilbert et al., 2010). The World Health Organisation defines collaborative practice as occurring when 'multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds work together with patients, families, carers and communities to deliver the highest quality of care.' (World Health Organization, 2010) p. 7). Interprofessional models of practice in health were established in response to international concerns around the fragmentation of public services and the increasing complexity of consumer 1 3 issues. The combined effect of these contribute to poor outcomes and greater financial expense (Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative, 2010;Elsevier, 2013;Gilbert et al., 2010;Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel, 2011).
While interprofessional collaboration originated in health sectors, there has been recent growth in interprofessional education programmes and research (Kelly et al., 2020). According to Kelly, et al. (2020), global developments such as immigration, demographic shifts, technological development and newly emerging health and social challenges have created changes in working environments that require practitioners to have knowledge and skills beyond those taught in traditional professionaleducation paradigms. In contemporary practice, practitioners need capabilities including leading, innovating and working across professional disciplines and communities, using evidence-based practice to support the diverse needs of the people and communities they engage with (Kelly et al., 2020). The practice of IPC involves professionals learning together by interacting, planning, problem-solving, sharing knowledge and making inquiries in ways that support understanding and practice. In the Aotearoa New Zealand context, IPC aims to develop the knowledge, work and roles of different professionals, as well as the skills that promote cultural inclusivity, communication and collaboration within interprofessional teams (Mentis et al., 2016).
Educational settings are becoming more interprofessional, especially regarding inclusive education. According to the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2015, para 6) inclusive education ensures that "all learners of any age are provided with meaningful, high-quality educational opportunities in their local community". Inclusive education involves designing learning that affirms learners' identities and allows learners to participate together in their learning (Ministry of Education: Te Tàhuhu o te Màtauranga, n.d.-c). Schools in Aotearoa New Zealand have binding obligations to include and provide a quality education for all learners under the New Zealand Disability Strategy and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (New Zealand Ministry of Education: Te Tahuhu O Te Matauranga, n.d.). In addition, inclusive education in Aotearoa New Zealand needs to enact Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) principles, which promote high-quality teaching and leadership, learning environments that treat everyone with respect and dignity, acting fair, honest and ethically, and allow for collaborative relationships (Ministry of Education: Te Tàhuhu o te Màtauranga, n.d.-c).
He Pikorua is the practice framework in Aotearoa New Zealand for practitioners who work alongside educators to support the learning and well-being of learners. He Pikorua was partly designed to better align and strengthen how professionals who provide learning support work together with educators (Ministry of Education: Te Tàhuhu o te Màtauranga, n.d.-b). Within the He Pikorua framework, there is an emphasis on collaborative inclusive practices, including practitioners and educators providing tiered levels of support for learners. Effective implementation of tiered levels of support in education requires collaboration in ways that expand upon traditional roles and requires an integration of all those working in educational settings (Kelly et al., 2020;McCauley, 2015). Tiered levels of support in education also represent a fundamental shift in education, requiring professionals to work in new ways, and needing professional development and training to enact these changes (Nellis et al., 2014).
IPC in education is viewed as essential to inclusive education to enable program development and performance, and work towards high-quality education (European Agency for Special Needs & Inclusive Education, 2015;Wiedebusch et al., 2020). Therefore, IPC in education is a cornerstone for high-quality inclusive care for learners who need additional support with their learning (Fukkink & van Verseveld, 2020). However, as Kelly et al. (2020) argue, 'concepts associated with the call for interprofessional practice, such as leadership, diversity and collaboration, are often taken for granted in policy, professional competencies and indeed in practice. Rather than being uniformly understood by health and social-service organisations, registration bodies, practitioners and service users, these concepts are very much contextual and contested ' (p. 33).
Given the importance of IPC in education for inclusive education, the emphasis on collaboration and tiered service support in He Pikorua, and the possibility for varied understandings of collaboration in teaching practice, this research aimed to address the question 'What factors contribute to an effective collaboration between professionals and teachers from the perspectives of primary school teachers working in Aotearoa New Zealand?'.

Method and Methodology
This study employed a qualitative constructivist methodology to examine the perspectives of teachers and how they view their lived experiences of collaborating with professionals. Constructivist methodology refers to social explanations of human life where people construct phenomenon in their social world (Abercrombie et al., 2006). Social constructionism tries to unmask how knowledge has been constructed through the context of human action and interaction (Turner, 2006). This allows for the development of different ways of analysing and critically examining social relations and contexts (Benzer & Reed, 2019).
In the case of this research, the purpose of employing a qualitative constructivist methodology was to explore the meanings primary school teachers bring to their understandings and experiences of working with other professionals. The research acknowledges that the participants' accounts will have been moulded to some extent from their own experiences and from their social interactions with others, as well as historical, professional, and cultural norms.
Telephone interviews using open ended questions were chosen as a method that would allow for participants working across Aotearoa New Zealand to construct their own meanings of working interprofessionally. The questions were designed to be open and to allow the participants to discuss topics broadly.
The participants consisted of seven primary school teachers working in primary schools in Aotearoa New Zealand. The inclusion criteria restricted participants to those who were currently teaching in a primary school in Aotearoa New Zealand, had experience in working with other professionals around a learner or learners in the last 2 years, and had not previously worked with the researcher.
In keeping with a qualitative constructivist methodology, thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Braun & Clarke (2006) state that thematic analysis is a method for identifying and analysing themes from data, and interpreting meaning of the research topic. Using Braun & Clarke's (2006) framework, data analysis involved transcribing data, initial coding, sorting of codes into themes, reviewing the themes, defining and naming the themes, and writing up the themes. This allowed for themes to be clearly defined and refined through an iterative process of analysis and ensured the findings were grounded in the perspectives of the teachers. By using a constructivist methodology, contrasts could be identified between the teachers lived experience on one hand, and policy and the literature on the other.

Results
Four key themes around what teachers find effective when working with a professional were found. These are: • Collaboration is viewed as one teacher and one professional working together around the current needs of one learner. • Immediacy is perceived as the most important component of all teaching support in interprofessional collaboration. Any support or resources which are provided immediately are deemed by teachers to be effective. Therefore, if collaboration is immediate, it is effective. • The evidence of the effectiveness of collaboration is clearly identified as observable changes in the learner. • The classroom represents the space through which teachers view collaboration with another professional.

Collaboration is Viewed as One Teacher and One Professional Working Together Around the Current Needs of a Learner or Learners
Throughout the interviews, the teachers stated that their experiences of collaboration had involved themselves working alongside another professional, with the role of the professional supporting the teacher to manage the current needs of a learner or learners in their class. This suggests that managing the work with another professional appears to be something the teachers identify as doing as individuals rather than at a wider organisational level as part of the rest of the school. When asked how the teachers managed their school priorities with IPC, their responses suggest that managing the work with another professional appears to be something the teachers decided for themselves how to prioritise. One teacher stated, 'I would have to put my school policies in first place in front of other priorities, I try to incorporate all as often as I can and go for win-win'. Another teacher stated, 'those meetings are far more important than any paperwork or anything else I have to do so those always come first'. Another teacher discussed the support the school provided as necessary for collaboration with another professional, 'It gets kind of depressing just when the school's not on board or involved or they just leave you to it-oh well we got the RTLB (resource teacher for learning and behaviour) in so like that's all you need'.
When teachers were asked to provide examples of effective working with another professional, there was variation in the teachers' answers. Four of the teachers described effective collaboration as the professional coming into the classroom. One teacher defined this as 'about coming in to know the kids, having discussions with me, so it works really really well'. Another teacher said, 'they come in and they see our context and they have always helped us, or helped me, figure out how we can incorporate those strategies'. Three teachers identified the professional coming in to view the learner as a way of collaborating effectively. One stated, 'it's always really effective when they come into the class and do observations of students'. This perspective was also shared by another teacher. When asked to describe any experiences of working together effectively with another professional, this teacher responded, 'they come into the classroom and they see the kids'. Other examples of collaboration the teachers stated as effective were more varied and included examples such as the professional giving written notes or providing feedback or offering to be available for the teacher. When identifying and describing examples of working together effectively, one teacher described from experience, 'they can give us some really tailored strategies that are really manageable, and they understand what it is like to work in a busy context'. For another teacher, the way in which the professional interacted in the relationship was critically important, as highlighted by the statement, 'I just think overall it's just working collegially, I think that's the biggest thing that's made it so effective is as I said before they're not telling you what to do, and also that they're listening to my point of view as well'.
Working collaboratively is something the teachers acknowledge doing, mainly with one other professional. The teachers also acknowledge that collaboration includes working in isolation rather than as part of a bigger picture, and this reinforces their need to be heard by the professionals they work with.

Immediacy is Identified as the Most Important Component of IPC in Education
Any support or resources which are provided immediately in IPC are considered by the teachers to be effective. This suggests that, if IPC is immediate, it is effective. The importance on the immediacy was visible throughout the interviews in references around needing things to happen with immediacy and needing interventions which provided time for the teacher outside of the classroom. The need for immediacy also linked with the practice of IPC being done in addition to an existing workload. Therefore, the more immediately IPC could be done, the less it would deplete the time resources the teachers have for what they considered regular classroom work.
There were different ways in which the need for immediacy was expressed. One teacher identified the need for support around the time needed to make referrals, 'I've had different schools that will do ….. referrals for me to help my workload a little bit'. Another teacher required professionals to consider the amount of time a resource may take: 'things that take more time and effort aren't necessarily the best things you want to be doing'. A teacher spoke of the frustration of having to wait for intervention: 'it's been frustrating when you're having to help these kids every day and you're waiting for things just to kick in'. Another teacher expressed a preference for things which could be immediately integrated: 'the thing we talk about the most is what can you pick up and use straight away without having to spend hours and hours and hours on, what can you come back and put instantly into practice that is going to make a difference'; as did another, who stated, 'it seemed that something practical that I could put to immediate use'.
The types of resources the teachers identified as effective were resources that either provided them with time to do work that was immediately required, or those which could be put to immediate use. This is highlighted by the ways the teachers described resources they found effective. For example, one teacher stated, 'resources that are ready made for us are definitely a bonus because we don't have time to do it ourselves'. Release time during class time was identified as important, as stated by one teacher, 'having more class release time would be amazing'. Another teacher also referred to release time: 'work time where we're both released when we can work through things together'; as did another: 'release time to just think and work out what you're doing and to put it in place properly'.
The types of resources the teachers found unhelpful were resources that required additional time from their existing workload and which could not be put to immediate use. Resources which were ready made or which didn't take long to prepare were offered as those deemed as being effective. One teacher provided insight into the provision of resources, stating, 'teachers don't have time to make their own, you know we have to make resources for our own class or buy resources as it is and that's just an extra thing'; and another teacher echoed the difficulties of having enough time to make resources, stating, 'it's just a lot of extra work to take all of those photos and I thought I'd probably get the same effect doing something else'. Another teacher talked about information that could be utilised quickly, stating, 'when they've gone I've just read this really short article about ASD and emotional resilience, but it's like, short, to the point, or it's got bullet points, or they've highlighted it already, so we can come through and go yes, yes, yes and use it but not spend a week trying to read it and understand the language of it and that kind of thing'.
One teacher discussed the benefits of class release time to make referrals and meet with special needs coordinator, 'we'd all like more class release time, but especially when we've had the SENCO help me with referrals before and it's because I haven't had a chance to catch up with her about what she's done on a child or to be sure what I'm reporting and the referral is correct so more time to do that with SEN-COs to discuss that and fill in referral'. Another teacher talked about having more time to attend professional development: 'because we just don't get the time, I wish we did, to go to courses on children with you know developing resilience or language or whatever it is that they're struggling with'; and yet another teacher talked about the practicalities of not having enough time: 'because it's so hard to find a time to call, especially in a school setting where anything can pop up or someone might be off sick and so on '. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies (2023) 58:201-215 The use of teacher aide time and class release time were identified as highly valued by the teachers, as these were identified as resources that could be used with immediacy, while also offering the benefit of providing the teacher with additional time to manage the rest of their class work.
Time was a concept the teachers referred to heavily throughout the interviews. The way that the teachers in this research referred to time involved either needing more time or not having enough time. The ways in which the teachers discussed time highlighted that the work that was done with another professional utilised the same limited time resource the teachers had available for their existing classwork. The frequency with which time was referred to in terms of not having enough or needing more suggests that time is something they do not wish to be depleted through the process of IPC. The teachers referred to the additional time that work with another professional takes as a measure of effectiveness, therefore the less time collaboration with another professional takes, the more effective it seems to be. There was no discussion from the teachers regarding the effectiveness of a service provided with immediacy or if this was the best approach for learners. The need for immediacy and interventions which take less time to prepare suggests that IPC in education is seen as a siloed piece of work done in addition to, rather than within, the routine of classroom teaching.

The Evidence of the Effectiveness of Collaboration is Clearly Identified by Teachers as observable Changes in the Learner or Learners
Despite IPC in education being delivered with immediacy being regarded as effective, there was universal agreement that the target of effectiveness is changes in the learner or learners. However, there wasn't agreement between teachers about what these changes were. All the teachers in this research saw a relationship between effective collaboration and learner outcomes. It is unclear from the research if the teachers believe there is a correlation between the immediacy with which support is provided and learner outcomes. The measure the teachers used to tell if collaboration had been effective was applied after the event, or in retrospect, and was based on assessing if the process of IPC had resulted in some form of change to the learner or learners in the teaching environment, although there was variation in what these changes were.
There was variation in how the teachers could tell if collaboration with another professional had been effective, as shown in the range of examples they provided. One teacher said, 'if the child seems happier, and I feel happier and less stressed, it's just, OK, that's working and I've made the change for my practice'. Another stated, 'the kid becomes more of a self-directed learner, we don't have to monitor them as closely as what we previously have been, and they integrate into the classroom with very few adaptations'. Another teacher referred to '(the learner) feeling happy in their environment'. Another stated, 'there's usually a change for the child in their behaviour or their learning'; and yet another teacher stated, 'it leads to increased learning and engagement for my students'.

The Classroom Represents the Space in Which Teachers View Effective Collaboration with Another Professional
The classroom was referred to by all the teachers throughout the interviews as the place that they viewed the effects of IPC occurring. The frequency with which the teachers in this research referred to their 'classrooms' and 'class', emphasised the importance of this space in how they apply meaning to their work. The references the teachers made to the classroom included the space where they work, the learners in that space, the space they plan around for work when they aren't in their classrooms, and the space they view interventions as being appropriate for, or not.
Collaboration with another professional was viewed by the teachers as being effective or not, by the effect it had in the classroom and on the class. One teacher described an intervention that hadn't been effective due to the effect it had in the classroom: 'basically that didn't really help at all as they just kept taking them (headphones) out and blasting music through the class'; as did another teacher, who said, 'he's been told he can do whatever he wants to get rid of his emotional stress, well, if you've got a class with twenty-seven kids that doesn't work at all'. Other ways teachers described effective collaboration with another professional through the effect on the classroom included: 'you can always apply it to your classroom'; and 'generally if I've got a good change, I just make it whole class and we just do that from then on'.

Discussion
From the findings in this research, IPC was viewed by the teachers as one teacher and one professional working together around the current needs of a learner or small group of learners. This was found throughout the interviews, and highlighted a wider narrative around how IPC was a process that was seen by these teachers as separate from the rest of the school and schoolwide collaboration. There was a distinct lack of discussion from any of the teachers of IPC being part of a system-wide or school wide process. This suggests that the practice of IPE by primary teachers on the ground may be different than how it is advocated in education policy and in new IPE pedagogies. Within the literature, a gap regarding IPC in education involving multiple professionals has been noted (Hynek et al., 2020). Fukkink & van Verseveld (2020) examined the social networks of IPC and found that most IPC relationships consisted of two professionals, most often between professionals with similar functions such as specialists and teachers, and principals with managers.
Working individually appears to be a structurally and culturally embedded construct in teachers' jobs, linked with a strong-rooted culture of individualism, autonomy, and independence in education (Vangrieken et al., 2015). There appears to be a tension between teacher collaboration, as held up in wider pedagogical approaches and in education policy in Aotearoa New Zealand, and these constructs in teaching of autonomy, independence and individualism. In order to work in a way which promotes collaboration among learners and where knowledge is evenly distributed, proficient collaboration among the teaching staff is required (Vangrieken et al., 2015). New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies (2023) 58:201-215 The European Commission (2013) found that teachers involved in collaborative learning reported using more innovative pedagogies and displayed more job satisfaction and self-efficacy. They also found however that teacher collaboration was difficult to achieve in many countries. For the benefits of IPC to be extended across educational facilities, and to increase the reach of IPC beyond the 1-1 model, more teacher collaboration within schools is needed, suggesting a need for more IPE education for primary teachers. There appears to be a relationship between how far IPC in education can flow through the organisation, and the level of collaboration between educators in the school.
When exploring teacher collaboration, Vangrieken et al. (2015) found that different forms of teacher collaboration were part of a continuum. One end of the continuum represents completely individualised teacher work and on the opposite end was strong team collaboration. A continuum of collaboration in IPC in education has also been established. Massey et al. (2015) identified a continuum ranging from 'starting out', then 'moving into a collaborative space', and finally as 'embracing collaborative space'. When measurements of IPC have been taken, they have indicated low levels of implementation (Dias et al., 2016;Meadows et al., 2006;O'Brien, 2014). As teacher collaboration is difficult to achieve (European Commission, 2013;Nellis et al., 2014) and the extent of teacher collaboration in education is less that teachers would like it to be (Leonard & Leonard, 2003), the 1-1 model of IPC may be favoured as it consists of a closer, denser network. This may require less organisation, teamwork, scheduling difficulties, hierarchical involvement and more autonomy than other models provided at an organisational level or wider.
As previously stated, collaboration between educators lies potentially at the lower end of the continuum, and IPC in education potentially sits in a similar position given the dominance of the 1-1 model. The relationship between teacher collaboration and IPC will impact the effect of He Pikorua. This raises questions around the efficacy of implementing He Pikorua without examining the current state of collaboration in education and directly addressing how to move beyond a 1-1 model focused towards a system-wide approach.
Al Otaiba et al. (2019) reported consistent findings across the research suggesting teachers do not have a good understanding of tiered levels of support and have difficulties in using data to make instructional decisions in a tiered framework. To successfully implement tiered models of support, pre-requirements included suitable professional development, powerful leadership and a team which worked collaboratively for the improvement of all students (Safari et al., 2020). Given the emphasis on tiered models of support in the He Pikorua framework, equal emphasis may also need to be given to school-wide collaboration, professional learning development and leadership support. Without supporting these pre-requirements, He Pikorua may have a limited impact.
Immediacy was perceived by the teachers in the current research as the most important component of all teaching support in interprofessional collaboration. Any support or resources which are provided immediately are deemed by teachers to be effective. In the current research, the teachers viewed effectiveness as work which could be included within the time already allocated for existing classroom work, or that minimises the amount of additional time to do regular classroom work. In the 1 3 literature, Vainikainen et al. (2015) addressed immediacy directly, finding that the reactivity of professionals, or how quickly they became involved with cases, was the factor school principals valued most regarding interprofessional collaboration.
Time was also addressed by some of the other literature. Insufficient time for educators and professionals to work together was referred to as a barrier for interprofessional practice (Bose & Hinojosa, 2008;Ekornes, 2015;Greenstock & Wright, 2011;Mulholland & O'Connor, 2016;Vlcek et al., 2020;Wium & Louw, 2015). Vlcek et al. (2020) found that teachers strongly voiced that they felt insufficient time was a limitation to both participating in IPC and implementing suggestions, due to their heavy workload. The need for professionals spending more time in schools and the importance of professionals and educators having time to meet (Rens & Joosten, 2014) were also seen as facilitating IPC in schools.
Time constraints were mentioned most frequently in the literature as a barrier to IPC in education (Bose & Hinojosa, 2008;Ekornes, 2015;Greenstock & Wright, 2011;Mulholland & O'Connor, 2016;O'Brien, 2014). Time constraints consisted of professionals needing to spend more time in schools (Bose & Hinojosa, 2008), heavy workloads, staff shortages, teachers not having time to follow up with learners (Ekornes, 2015), insufficient opportunities to meet for those involved in collaboration (Greenstock & Wright, 2011;O'Brien, 2014), and time for collaboration being taken from class preparation or teaching time for teachers (Mulholland & O'Connor, 2016).
The theme of 'not enough time' came up several times in the current research and is intertwined with the theme of the immediacy with which resources and support could be applied. This demonstrates how complex and dynamic the concept of time is for IPC in education. The need for immediacy emphasises the assumptions sitting behind requests for professional support around a learner. The preference for a quick-fix and resources that provide a short term solution suggest a siloed model of learning support where responsibility for the learner lies with their current teacher, and the learner's needs have to be fitted into an already full schedule of work.
The examples the teachers provided about what they didn't have time to do, and what they would do if they had the time, involved short-term, time limited activities around the current needs of a learner, such as filling out referrals, making resources, working one-on-one with the learner, and planning or meeting with a professional. There was a distinct lack of long-term planning or goals around IPC for the teachers in this research. Effectiveness was therefore viewed as work that could be accommodated within the existing provision for classroom work, or that minimised the amount of additional time on top of regular classroom work.
The use of teacher aides to provide teachers with more time for the rest of the class also appeared to be problematic. Recommendations from Te Tàhuhu o te Màturanga inclusive education website include avoiding using teacher aides to be an informal teaching resource for learners needing additional support and not using teacher aides to replace teachers. The recommendations call for teachers to take responsibility for working with learners who need the most support (Ministry of Education: Te Tàhuhu o te Màtauranga, n.d.-a) as there are few if any beneficial learners outcomes when using teacher aides in informal instructional roles when these teacher aides are unsupported (Sharples et al., 2015).
The evidence of the effectiveness of collaboration was clearly identified in this research as observable changes in the individual learner in the current research. Outcomes of IPC in education for the learner did not feature in the majority of the literature reviewed, however it was measured in some of the literature. International research from Hynek et al. (2020) examined teachers' perceptions of IPC after a year of a programme of implementation. Despite hypothesising that these teachers would show a higher level of interprofessional perceptions using a model they devised than teachers who were not using their model of IPC, Hynek et al. (2020) found no effects of the intervention. Wiedebusch et al. (2020) found that school support to collaborate with other professionals within the school team was rated average-togood by staff members and that school support is an essential factor for teamwork performance. When examining how professionals' attitudes change over time and how collaboration develops in IPC, Fukkink & van Verseveld, (2020) found positive changes in attitudes to IPC over time and more progress in achieving programme goals when the team was smaller and worked closely together.
While the previous examples provided come from the international literature, research from Aotearoa new Zealand found that many studies support the model of collaboration in a professional community leading to positive impacts on learners. In her literature review, Timperley (2008) revealed a dichotomy as research has only managed to evidence a weak relationship between collaboration in a professional community and improved learner outcomes. From these findings, Timperley (2008) contended that collaboration required a focus on being responsive to learners, while giving teachers the ability to take in new information. The current research demonstrates the importance placed on learner outcomes as the measure of effective IPC from the perspectives of these teachers. This finding in the current research appears indicative of the dichotomy Timperley (2008) referred to between the process of IPC in education and improvements in learner outcomes.
Collaboration with another professional was viewed by the teachers in the current research as being effective or not by the effect it had in the classroom and on the class. The frequency with which the teachers in this research referred to their classrooms and class emphasised the importance of this space in how they apply meaning to their work. The classroom was described by the teachers as the place where the effects of collaboration with another professional occur. While the classroom is the place the teacher and the learner spend most time together, this finding also highlights the compartmentalised view of IPC in education around one professional and one teacher, with only peripheral involvement from the rest of the school. It is another example which emphasises how siloed IPC in education appears to be in the setting of the primary school. Despite a lack of vision in the current research of IPC in education extending to the rest of the school, there is an undoubtable need for professionals to be aware of the classroom context when working alongside educators. Awareness of the classroom context can support by making teachers aware of the learner's needs (Ekornes, 2015) and ensuring professional's recommendations are fit for purpose in the learning environment (Cowie et al., 2015;Ekornes, 2015;Harris & Jones, 2017;Rens & Joosten, 2014).
Under the current conditions for IPC in primary education, effectiveness is experienced by this group of primary teachers as something which fits into the existing siloed domain of the classroom and into an already overstreched schedule of teacher time. The lack of school-wide involvement in IPC in education and need for immediate, quick-fix strategies indicates tacking IPC in education onto an already stretched model may not be as effective as it could be for learners. A system-wide change in approach to providing learning support under the framework of He Pikorua will require not only an increase in collaboration across educational organisations, but also a move away from support focused around immediate needs. Certain provision for educators and professionals will need to be made when tiered models of practices, such as He Pikorua, are incorporated into an existing structure. Essential components of incorporating a tiered structure into education for educators requires professional development (Nellis et al., 2014), support around how to adopt data findings into teaching practice, and adequate time during the school day to collaborate and plan using a tiered framework (Regan et al., 2015).
The recommendations and research appear to assume that teachers have the organisational infrastructure behind them that allows for collaboration and provides enough time to incorporate best practice. Until system-wide change addresses increasing teacher collaboration and allowing enough time for inclusive education to be a less reactive, siloed and individualised process, then, given the findings of the current research, educators will struggle to adopt recommendations. Postgraduate interprofessional education (IPE) programmes are available to teachers and educators in Aotearoa New Zealand, which begin to meet some of this need (Kelly, et al., 2020).

Conclusion
The teachers in this research identified that IPC in education involves a teacher working with another professional around a learner or learners. How effective collaboration with another professional was experienced by the teachers in this research was clearly identified as something which was immediate, with readymade resources that could be put into instant use and wouldn't take additional time. There was a strong sense that time was synonymous with a continuum of effectiveness for teachers in the current research, with resources which were more time efficient being identified as more effective.
Despite the focus on immediacy as synonymous with effective regarding IPC in education, there was no indication if this immediacy led to better outcomes for learners or was the best approach for learners. All the teachers in the current research did agree however that the measurement of effective collaboration was through learner outcomes. It is unclear what aspects of IPC in education result in better learner outcomes from the current research.
The classroom is the space from which the teachers in the current research viewed interprofessional collaboration, and the strategies or resources that they found most beneficial were those that supported the management of the classroom.
The overall picture provided in the current research was that IPC in the primary classroom setting remains a siloed entity done in addition to and exclusive from the rest of school business. A tension appears to exist between teacher autonomy and collaboration. Given that a teaching mostly consists of working independently from others, it is unsurprising that individual work seems to be structurally and culturally embedded. Collaboration within schools and professional communities may be challenging for teachers who perceive a loss of autonomy, an increased workload and an obligation to conformity with the majority (Vangrieken et al., 2017).
Strategies to assist with delivering learning support in education such as UDL and He Pikorua will require system-wide cooperation to move from a siloed model of support between a teacher and a professional and a preference for support which does not add to teacher's existing workloads. Development of IPC may also benefit from further IPE professional development for primary teachers. IPC will need to be integrated into a system-wide approach of learning support if He Pikorua is to be successful rather than added onto existing workloads and practices.
Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.