Pds Enhancing Student Teaching Though Co Teaching

Download Pds Enhancing Student Teaching Though Co Teaching

Post on 13-Jan-2015

2.592 views

Category:

Documents

1 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

  • 1. Enhancing Student Teaching Through Co-TeachingTeresa Washut HeckNancy BacharachBeth MannSt. Cloud State University

2. St. Cloud State University Located in Minnesota 60 miles northwest of Minneapolis18,000 students400+ teacher candidates a year Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 3. Our Goals1. Provide an overview of co-teaching in studentteaching. 2. Describe the essential elements for co-teaching. 3. Establishing buy-in for co-teaching.4. Implementing a co-teaching model. 5. Discuss how to get others supportive of andtrained in a collaborative co-teaching model. Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 4. Co-TeachingCo-Teaching is defined as twoteachers working together in a classroom with groups of students; sharing the planning, organization,delivery and assessment ofinstruction as well as the physical space. Both teachers are actively involved andengaged in all aspects of instruction. Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 5. Co-Teaching is an AttitudeAn attitude of sharing the classroom and students.Co-Teachers must always be thinkingWERE BOTH TEACHING! 6. Why SCSU Chose Co-Teaching Student Teaching hasnt changed much in 80 years! Re-examination of student teaching. Growing resistance from teachers to take teacher candidates with high emphasis on NCLB testing. Pressures from NCATE and other accreditation agencies.Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 7. History of Co-Teaching ! PL94 142; Now IDEA ! Least Restrictive Environment ! Special and General Education teachers needed to work together ! 1993 Walsh and Snyder ! 1995 Landmark research by Cook and FriendCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 8. Co-Teaching at SCSU At SCSU Our Program Impacted by: ATE Presentation Michael Perl (1999) ATE Presentation Mid-Valley Consortium (2000) Visit to Virginia - (2000) Co-Teaching Workshops - (2000-01) Applied for Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant Received Grant, October 2003 Utilized Cook and Friend research Developed Program & Collected Data Disseminated our research and program Train the Trainer Program 150+ faculty from other institutions Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 9. At The Heart of Co-Teaching Building Better Relationships Communication/Collaboration Co-Teaching/Co-Planning Active vs. Passive Use Expertise of Cooperating Teacher Attitude Best Way to Meet Student NeedsCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 10. Key Elements Co-teaching workshop for cooperating teachers and university supervisors Co-teaching instruction incorporated in teacher preparation curriculum Workshop for matched pairs One teacher candidate per classroom Clearly defined expectations, including lead and solo teaching time for candidates Designated planning time for co-teaching each weekCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 11. " One teach, one observe " One teach, one assist " Station teaching " Parallel teaching " Supplemental teaching " Alternative (differentiated) teaching " Team teachingCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 12. Things We Kept Solo teaching time Placement procedures Total time in classroom Evaluation forms Individual lesson planningCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 13. Things We Added Support and Training Co-Planning Permission for Cooperating Teacher to Stay Enhanced Collaboration and Communication Focus on Differentiation Increased Opportunities for Teacher Candidate to Bring Ideas Professional Development Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 14. Why Co-Teach? " Increase instructional options for all students " Reduce student/teacher ratio " Address diversity and size of todays classroom " Enhance classroom management " Increase student participation and engagement " Enhance collaboration skills Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 15. Results Improved Math & Reading Achievement for students in Grades 1-6 Benefits to 7-12 learners Benefits to Cooperating Teachers Benefits to Teacher Candidates Improved Relationships with Partner Schools Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 16. Reading Proficiency Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment Compares Non Co-Taught (traditional) and Co-Taught student teaching settings Significance between Co-Taught and Non Co-Taught (traditional) student teaching NonMCA ReadingOne LicensedCo-TaughtCo-Taught P Proficiency TeacherStudentTeaching OVERALL 64.0% 78.8% (N=1461)67.2% (N=6403) < .001 (4 Year Cumulative)(N=572)Free/Reduced49.5% 65.0% (N=477) 53.1% (N=2684) < .001 Lunch Eligible (N=222)Special Education 46.4% 74.4% (N=433) 52.9% (N=1945) < .001 Eligible (N=179)English Language 44.7% (N=76) 30.7% (N=515) 25.8% (N=31) .069 LearnersCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 17. Math Proficiency Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment Compares Non Co-Taught (traditional) and Co-Taught student teaching settings Significance between Co-Taught and Non Co-Taught (traditional) studentteaching Non MCA MathOne LicensedCo-TaughtCo-Taught P Proficiency TeacherStudentTeaching OVERALL 72.9% (N=1519)63.7% (N=6467) 63.0%(N=597) < .001 (4 Year Cumulative) Free/Reduced Lunch 54.2% (N=513) 47.3% (N=2778) 45.7%(N=232).032 Eligible Special Education 72.0% (N=472) 54.7% (N=1906) 48.9% (N=180)< .001 Eligible English Language 30.5% (N=118)28.8% (N=671)26.8%(N=41).656 Learners Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 18. Co-Teaching & School Partnerships Strengthened our partnerships withdistricts Teachers felt a part of the teacherpreparation program More cooperating teachers then teachercandidates (in most areas) Schools now want our candidates Over 900 area teachers trained in co-teaching Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 19. Getting StartedCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 20. University Level Buy-In Administrative and Faculty Provide Basic Information Secure Dean Support Secure Departmental Buy-In Identify Key Faculty Within Departments Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 21. University Supervisor Buy-InUniversity Supervisors: Need co-teaching training Clarification of expectations andobservation keys On-going support Resources Supervisor meetings 2-3x/semester Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 22. District Buy In High Level District Support Initial presentations to administrative teams Multiple methods of information sharing Present updates to administrative groups andschool board Grass Roots Support Present to individual schools Identified building contactsMemorandums of Understanding Formal agreements with each districtsuperintendent prior to involvementCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 23. Implementing 24. Recommendations Develop a clear vision and scope Determine leadership team Design evaluation plan Identify institutional and community Barriers Supports ResourcesCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 25. Recommendations Faculty buy-in cross departmental District buy-in Develop communication plan Implementation Plan Preparation Planning Expectations Ongoing Support Have FUN!!! Infuse EnergyCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 26. What Former Candidates are Saying Comfortable and capable of collaboratingeffectively with colleagues Equipped to deal with classroom management issuesas they arise Eager to receive feedback and seek outopportunities for internal and external reflection Able to effectively differentiate instruction tobetter meet the needs of their students Knowledgeable in ways to maximize the humanresources that might be available, includingparaprofessionals, volunteers and parents. Copyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center: Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 27. Whats Next? 28. Support Materials Train the Trainer Workshop Two day training Materials DVD - Changing Student TeachingThrough Co-Teaching: Collaboration ThatMakes A Difference Co-Teaching Handbook MentoringTeacher Candidates Through Co-Teaching:Collaboration That Makes A DifferenceCopyright 2010, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant 29. St. Cloud State University, College of EducationTeacher Quality Enhancement Center Dr. Teresa Washut HeckCoordinator of Co-Teaching twheck@stcloudstate.edu320-308-1742Dr. Nancy BacharachTQE Project Directornlbacharach@stcloudstate.edu 320-308-4885Ms. Beth Mann Co-Teaching Specialistbjmann@stcloudstate.edu www.stcloudstate.edu/coe/tqe

Recommended

View more >