Co-Teaching as Best Practice in Student Teaching

Co-Teaching as Best Practice inStudent TeachingDataCollectionInformation

1

1Sowhat can this do for you?2

St. Cloud Data CollectionP-12 LearnersAcademic Achievement (1-6)7-12 SurveyFocus GroupsTeacher CandidatesSummative AssessmentEnd of Experience SurveyFocus GroupsCooperating TeachersEnd of Experience SurveyFocus Groups

33Co-Teaching in P12 Classrooms826 Pairs2004-2005179 Pairs2005-2006203 Pairs2006-2007231 Pairs2007-2008243 Pairs

Co-Teaching has impacted over 25,000 P-12 students in Central Minnesota

34 Pre-K classrooms601 Elementary (K-6) classrooms120 Secondary (5-12 & 7-12) classrooms71 Special Education classrooms

44Measuring Achievement5Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA)Woodcock Johnson III- Research Edition (WJIII)Reading/Math Grades 3-5-7

Reading/Math Grades K-12Group AdministeredIndividually Administered

Compares cohortsCan use as pre/post intervention

Results reported as scale score, index points and proficiencyResults include raw score and standard score, but can also compute gain scores

51-6 Reading GainsWoodcock Johnson III- Research EditionIndividually AdministeredPre/Post TestStatistically significant gains in all four years

6Woodcock Johnson III Research Edition W Score GainsCo-TaughtNot Co-TaughtP2004-200515.7N=2219.9N=99.0012005-200624.4N=22518.7N=124.0242006-200714.8N=32211.8N=172.0102007-200819.6N=24514.8N=182.00161-6 Reading ProficiencyMinnesota Comprehensive AssessmentNCLB proficiency test for MinnesotaStatistically significant findings in all four years

7MCA Reading ProficiencyCo-TaughtNot Co-Taughtx2004-200582.1%N=31874.7%N=1035.0072005-200678.7%N=48472.7%N=1757.0082006-200775.5%N=37164.1%N=1964.0012007-200880.8%N=26161.4%N=2246.00171-6 Math GainsWoodcock Johnson III- Research EditionIndividually AdministeredPre/Post TestStatistically significant gains in all four years

8Woodcock Johnson III Research Edition W Score GainsCo-TaughtNot Co-TaughtP2004-200517.2N=22113.9N=99.0392005-200620.3N=20617.4N=143.0752006-200714.3N=31312.1N=182.0452007-200817.9N=25016.0N=177.08981-6 Math ProficiencyMinnesota Comprehensive AssessmentNCLB proficiency test for MinnesotaStatistically significant findings in all four years

9MCA Reading ProficiencyCo-TaughtNot Co-Taughtx2004-200582.3%N=31775.3%N=1035.0092005-200668.9%N=52464.1%N=1831.0412006-200769.0%N=36461.5%N=1984.0072007-200874.5%N=31459.9%N=2217.0019Type of Classroom Reading ProficiencyMCA Reading Proficiency2004-2005MCA Reading Proficiency2005-20061010Type of Classroom Reading ProficiencyMCA Reading Proficiency2006-2007MCA Reading Proficiency2007-20081111Type of Classroom Math ProficiencyMCA Math Proficiency2004-2005MCA Reading Proficiency2005-20061212Type of Classroom Math ProficiencyMCA Math Proficiency2006-2007MCA Math Proficiency2007-20081313Cumulative DataReading ProficiencyMinnesota Comprehensive AssessmentCompares Co-Taught and Not Co-Taught student teaching settings

14MCA Reading ProficiencyCo-TaughtOne Licensed TeacherNon Co-Teaching CandidatePOVERALL(4 year cumulative)78.8%N=146167.2%N=640364.0%N=572.001Free/ReducedLunch Eligible65.0%N=47753.1%N=268449.5%N=222.001Special Education Eligible74.4%N=43352.9%N=194546.4%N=179.001English Language Learners44.7%N=7630.7%N=51525.8%N=31.06914Cumulative DataMath ProficiencyMinnesota Comprehensive AssessmentCompares Co-Taught and Not Co-Taught student teaching settings

15MCA Reading ProficiencyCo-TaughtOne Licensed TeacherNon Co-Teaching CandidatePOVERALL(4 year cumulative)72.9%N=151963.7%N=646763.0%N=597.001Free/ReducedLunch Eligible54.2%N=47247.3%N=277845.7%N=232.032Special Education Eligible72.0%N=47254.7%N=190648.9%N=180.001English Language Learners30.5%N=11828.8%N=67126.8%N=41.656157-12 Survey Cumulative Data2004-2008 (N= 1686)16167-12 Survey Drawbacks of Co-Teaching

Cumulative Data 2004-2008 (N= 1686)1717Benefits to K-12 StudentsFocus Groups (N= 546)Increased student engaged timeAble to work in smaller groupsReceive more individual attentionGet questions answered fasterGet papers and grades back fasterStudents behave betterFewer class disruptions (for passing out papers, having projects checked, other housekeeping tasks)1818Teacher Candidate Evaluations2005-2008StandardCo-Teaching MeanN=408Non Co-Teaching MeanN= 728PSubject Matter3.373.36.55Student Learning3.323.25.39Diverse Learners3.093.09.95Instructional Strategies3.313.29.68Learning Environment3.283.28.94Communication3.323.32.98Planning Instruction3.353.34.98Assessment3.063.06.82Professional Develop.3.473.40.08Partnerships3.403.33.08Prof. Dispositions*3.613.51.0119*Statistically significant19Benefits to Teacher CandidatesEnd of Experience Survey (N= 157)Teacher Candidates indicated that Co-Teaching led to:Improved classroom management skills (95.5%)Increased collaboration skills (94.9%)More teaching time (94.6%)Increased confidence (89.9%)Deeper understanding of the curriculum through co-planning (89.1%)More opportunities to ask questions and reflect (88.6%)2020Benefits to Teacher CandidatesFocus Groups (N= 136)Additional benefits of co-teaching:Being seen as a real teacherEqual partnershipSharing resourcesMutual support and learning2121Benefits to Cooperating TeachersEnd of Experience Survey (N= 279)Cooperating Teachers indicated that Co-Teaching led to:Ability to reach more students, particularly those with high needs (93.5%)Better relationship with their teacher candidate (91%)Experienced professional growth (89.2%)Enhanced energy for teaching (87.8%)Hosting a candidate without giving up my classroom (87.1%)Teacher candidate had a better experience than they would have through a traditional model (81.7%)2222Benefits to Cooperating TeachersFocus Groups (N= 92)Additional benefits of Co-Teaching:Ability to do projects more successfullyClass time is more productiveModeling and participating in teamworkCandidates become competent more quickly23231st,2nd, & 3rd Year TeachersCo-Taught in Student TeachingFocus Groups (N= 18)Comfortable and capable of collaborating effectively with colleagues.

Equipped to deal with classroom management issues as they arise.

Eager to receive feedback and seek out opportunities for internal and external reflection.24241st,2nd, & 3rd Year TeachersCo-Taught in Student TeachingFocus Groups (N= 18)Able to effectively differentiate instruction to better meet the needs of their students.

Knowledgeable in ways to maximize the human resources that might be available, including paraprofessionals, volunteers, and parents.2525Thoughts from Teacher CandidatesI think this is a great model for teaching; it is very empowering for the student teacher and creates a great relationship and future mentor. -Teacher Candidate

We both were leaders in our own respects and at different times. - Teacher Candidate

Certain lessons work really well when they are co-taught. It is a good feeling to pump out a great lesson cooperatively, knowing that the lesson would not have been as dynamic if it had not been co-taught. -Teacher Candidate

There is more creativity because you are able to talk ideas through and make them great by having the two perspectives. - Teacher Candidate

2626Thoughts from K-12 StudentsThey work together. If one gets tired of teaching, the other takes over, they help each other in tight situations. Its a lot different that past student teachers. I like this much better. -Elementary Student

I think we learn more because there are two different teachers in the room-which means they teach different ways-which means they know different facts-which means youre going to learn a lot more. -Elementary Student

While one is teaching, the other comes around and asks if we need help. It makes it easier to get around to everybody. -High School Student Double the teachers, double the learning. - Middle School Student

2727Thoughts from SCSUThe use of a co-teaching model of student teaching has made placing student teachers SO much easier.

Kathy Watson, Assistant Director Coordinator of Student Teaching PlacementsOffice of Clinical Experiences, SCSU2828JSU Co-Teaching Project and Timeline for 2012-201329JSU Co-Teaching Project Goals and Timeline for 2013-201430JSU Data CollectionCooperating Teachers and Teacher CandidatesPretest and Posttest QuestionnaireFocus GroupsBuilding Administrators and P-12 StudentsPosttest QuestionnaireDistrict Test CoordinatorsStudent Assessment Data3131