Co-Teaching

Where to Begin: Building Bridges

Walking across the bridge, leaving the familiar ground of working alone, is the first act of collaboration. All parties are in neutral territory, with the security of knowing they can return to land better, stronger, and changed. And perhaps they will return to the same side of the bridge even though they started from opposite sides.

From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

Collaboration Won’t Just Happen

• Deliberate

• Structured

• Systematic

• Ongoing

From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

Why Won’t It Just Happen?

• General educators begin with the curriculum first and use assessment to determine what was learned.

• Special educators begin with assessment first and design instruction to repair gaps in learning.

• No wonder we are talking different languages.From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

How Can We Work With This?

• Provide purpose and structure

• Create baseline and a plan for scaffolded change

• Provide a visual map to guide discussion

• Keep discussions objective and data driven

• Allow many issues to be put on the table for consideration From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

What Have We Learned?

General educators are more receptive to change when they have background knowledge and a chance to participate in the decisions rather than being given a special education mandate to follow.

From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

What Have We Learned? (cont.)

Parent concerns decrease when special and general education practices are aligned and when data is shared and used to identify how students are progressing in the general education domain first.

From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

Aligning Practices Through

Co-Teaching

Co-teaching is becoming one of the fastest growing inclusive school practices.

Despite this rapid increase in popularity, co-teaching remains one of the most commonly misunderstood practices in education.

From Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

Defining Co-Teaching

Co-teaching occurs when two or more professionals jointly deliver substantive instruction to a diverse, or blended, group of students in a single physical space.

Cook & Friend, 1995

Three Major Models

• Consultant Model

• Coaching Model

• Collaborative (or Teaming) Model

Friend & Cook, 2003

Most Common Approaches

One Teaching, One Drifting Parallel Teaching Station Teaching Alternative Teaching Team Teaching

Friend & Cook, 2003

One Teaching, One Drifting

One teacher plans and instructs, and one teacher provides adaptations and other support as needed.

Requires very little joint planning

Should be used sparingly– Can result in one teacher, most often the general

educator, taking the lead role the majority of the time

– Can also be distracting to students, especially those who may become dependent on the drifting teacher

Friend & Cook, 2003

Parallel TeachingTeachers share responsibility for planning and

instruction.

Class is split into heterogeneous groups, and each teacher instructs half on the same material.

Content covered is the same, but methods of delivery may differ.

Both teachers need to be proficient in the content being taught.

Friend & Cook, 2003

Station TeachingTeachers divide the responsibility of planning and

instruction.

Students rotate on a predetermined schedule through stations.

Teachers repeat instruction to each group that comes through; delivery may vary according to student needs.

Approach can be used even if teachers have very different pedagogical approaches.

Each teacher instructs every student. Friend & Cook, 2003

Alternative TeachingTeachers divide responsibilities for planning and

instruction.

The majority of students remain in a large group setting, but some students work in a small group for preteaching, enrichment, reteaching, or other individualized instruction.

Approach allows for highly individualized instruction to be offered.

Teachers should be careful that the same students are not always pulled aside.

Friend & Cook, 2003

Team Teaching

Teachers share responsibilities for planning and instruction.

Teachers work as a team to introduce new content, work on developing skills, clarify information, and facilitate learning and classroom management.

This requires the most mutual trust and respect between teachers and requires that they be able to mesh their teaching styles.

Friend & Cook, 2003

Considerations

Teachers need to volunteer and agree to co-teach.

Co-teaching should be implemented gradually.

Attention needs to be given to IEP setting changes that an inclusive classroom may invoke.

Goals and support services need to reflect the new learning experiences that students will receive in general education classes.

Murawski & Dieker, 2004

Not an All-or-Nothing Approach

Teachers do not have to commit to only one approach of co-teaching.

Teachers do not have to only co-teach.

Co-teaching is not the only option for serving students.

Some students with disabilities may be in a co-taught classroom for only part of the day.

Murawski, 2005

Limitations and Potential Drawbacks

Co-teaching is not easy to maintain in schools.

There may not be enough special educators for a co-teaching program.

Co-taught classrooms may be disproportionately filled with students with disabilities.

Special educators can function more as a teaching assistant than as a co-educator.

Friend & Cook, 2003

Benefits of Collaboration

Shared responsibility for educating all students

Shared understanding and use of common assessment data

Supporting ownership for programming and interventions

Creating common understanding

Data-driven problem solving

Friend & Cook, 2003

The two teachers looked at each other in disbelief. One was a tenured secondary English teacher who had taught for 6 years in this large middle-class, suburban high school. The other was a first year special education teacher who recently received her master’s degree. They had been co-teaching a ninth grade English class for 4 months, and although the beginning weeks were a bit overwhelming, they were rather proud of their cooperative and respectful relationship. They had been co-planning, co-grading, and co-teaching, and they were certain the class would go well. The students responded to the co-teachers’ combined efforts, and both social and academic progress were noted for all students in the class.The teachers were looking at their observation reports. The special education and English chairpersons had decided to observe the co-teaching class at the same time. The special education teacher read her report: It was glowing. Her supervisor recognized the adaptations that were made in the materials, saw that she worked with individual students, observed her contribution to the teaching of the mini-lesson, noted the parity she enjoyed with her co-teacher, and acknowledged the acceptance and respect of her students.The general education teacher held back tears as she read her write-up. How could this be? She had never received an unsatisfactory observation and prided herself on her competency in the classroom. Her supervisors had repeatedly recognized her skills as a teacher. She read through the comments—her chairperson thought there hadn’t been enough time spent developing the content of the lesson and that the student group work detracted from more formal delivery of content. The chair also felt that the general education teacher had relinquished too much of her role as content specialist to the special education teacher and noted there was too much interaction between the co-teachers.

Communicate Administrative Support and Leadership

Principal support, understanding, and involvement serve as pivotal factors in lasting success (Barth, 1990; Pugach & Johnson, 1990).

Effective principals provide vision, recognition, and encouragement during the implementation process (Adams & Cessna, 1991; Barth, 1990; Chalfant & Pysh, 1989; Fullan, 1993).

Select Capable and Willing Participants

Teachers who are viewed as leaders by their colleagues

Willing to make the commitment of additional time and effort

Select capable volunteers for co-teaching assignments

Both members of the team must be capable contributors.

Participants should make a good faith commitmentto work together for a minimum of 2 years.

Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

Establish Balanced Classroom Rosters

School teams need to carefully assess student needs and available resources.

In a class of 25 students, no more than 6 students should have identified disabilities in the mild to moderate range.

Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

Develop Appropriate IEPs

Attention needs to be given to setting changes that an inclusive classroom may invoke.

Goals and support services need to reflect the new learning experiences that students will receive in general education classes.

Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

Case Study: Mr. Clark

A Plan of ActionScene 1

Mr. Clark, the principal of Holmes high school located within the Orange County school district, was considering adopting co-teaching for his school. He realized a lot of preparation is required, so he has assembled an inclusion planning team (IPT) to further discuss the idea and to assist with the implementation of co-teaching.

• At the meeting, Mr. Clark began, “Developing a multilevel team of administrators, teachers, parents, and other important stakeholders in the community helps stimulate input, involvement, and support for co-teaching. I’ve invited all of you here today to assess the school’s level of readiness for co-teaching. Take a look around: we have three special education teachers, two active parents in the Parent Teacher Association, a general educator, the ESE specialist, the general education counselor, and a co-teaching consultant. As you can see, we have a lot to do.”

• “Where do we start?” asked one parent, Anita Long. “I’m not sure I even understand what co-teaching is.”

Observing and EvaluatingCo-Teaching Teams

Critical Components for Evaluating a Co-Taught Classroom

What makes a good lesson?

Are there components of a co-taught lesson that require unique perspectives in order to be evaluated effectively?

Wilson, 2005

What Makes a Good Lesson?

Lessons that are student-centered

Recognition of diverse learning styles of students

Questions that tap high-order thinking

Engagement of students and evidence that students are not on task

Wilson, 2005

What Makes a Good Lesson (cont.)

Makes use of materials that are useful and available

Pays attention to motivation

Incorporates awareness of transitions

Contains aims that are open-endedWilson, 2005

What Makes a Good Lesson (cont.)

Summarizes at the middle and end of the lesson

Provides activities that apply the information

Makes connections to students’ experiences

Fosters positive student–teacher relationships

Wilson, 2005

What Makes a Good Lesson (cont.)

Makes appropriate use of technology

Adheres to state standards

Reinforces previously learned and new material

Promotes positive teacher–teacher relationships

Wilson, 2005

Best Practices Checklist: Examples

We blend each other’s abilities, values, preferences, teaching styles, educational philosophies, and cultural perspectives.

We discuss and agree on our program’s objectives, curricula; assessment, teaching, and classroom management techniques; classroom schedules; and grading criteria.

We employ a range of cooperative teaching instructional arrangements that are based on the lesson’s goals, the type of the material to be taught, and the needs of students.

Best Practices Checklist: Examples (cont.)

We vary our roles and share the workload so that all team members perform meaningful activities that are recognized by others.

We have sufficient time to communicate, assess the effectiveness of our program, and revise the program.

We receive the planning time and administrative support to work successfully.

We address all of our differences immediately and directly.

Evaluating the Co-Teaching Model

Evaluation

Teachers and administrators should evaluate co-teaching situations at least once per year.

The rule that assessment informs instruction should also apply to co-teaching: As co-teachers continue to assess their situation, they must ensure that they are improving their instruction to best meet students’ needs in an inclusive classroom.

Murawski & Dieker, 2004; Friend & Cook, 2003

“It could be argued with a good deal of persuasiveness that when one looks overthe history of man the most distinguishing characteristic of his development is the degree to which man has underestimated the potentialities of men” (Blatt & Kaplan, 1974, p. 107).