Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Co-TeachingCo-Teaching A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Co-TeachingCo-Teaching A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education."— Presentation transcript:

1 Co-TeachingCo-Teaching A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education

2 ContentsContents Part 1 Part 1What is Co-Teaching? Part 2 Part 2Rationale for Co-Teaching Part 3 Part 3The Evidence Part 4 Part 4The Challenges Part 5 Part 5 Implementation Considerations Part 1 Part 1What is Co-Teaching? Part 2 Part 2Rationale for Co-Teaching Part 3 Part 3The Evidence Part 4 Part 4The Challenges Part 5 Part 5 Implementation Considerations

3 Part 1 Part 1 What is Co-Teaching? Part 1 Part 1 What is Co-Teaching?

4 Co-teaching is defined as “two or more professionals delivering substantive instruction to a diverse or blended group of students in a single physical space.” Cook & Friend, in Murawski & Swanson, 2001, p. 258 Co-teaching is defined as “two or more professionals delivering substantive instruction to a diverse or blended group of students in a single physical space.” Cook & Friend, in Murawski & Swanson, 2001, p. 258

5 What is Co-Teaching?  Involves two or more professionals, typically a general educator and a special educator  Instruction within the same physical space  A sharing of teaching responsibilities  Instruction provided to a heterogeneous group of students  Involves two or more professionals, typically a general educator and a special educator  Instruction within the same physical space  A sharing of teaching responsibilities  Instruction provided to a heterogeneous group of students

6 What is Co-Teaching? A service delivery model that is based on the philosophy of inclusion and supports collaborative practice among professionals.

7 “Educators must pull together by sharing their work through collaboration; too much knowledge and too many skills are needed for any single professional to keep up with and master all of them.” Friend & Pope, 2005, p. 59 “Educators must pull together by sharing their work through collaboration; too much knowledge and too many skills are needed for any single professional to keep up with and master all of them.” Friend & Pope, 2005, p. 59

8 “Co-teaching provides a vehicle for school communities to move from feelings of isolation to feelings of community and collaboration. Another way of saying this is that the ‘lone arranger’ model of teaching is replaced with a co- teaching model.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, xv “Co-teaching provides a vehicle for school communities to move from feelings of isolation to feelings of community and collaboration. Another way of saying this is that the ‘lone arranger’ model of teaching is replaced with a co- teaching model.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, xv

9 Co-Teaching Approaches SupportiveTeaching One teacher leads and the other observes or offers assistance ParallelTeaching Teachers work with groups and present the same information. ComplementaryTeaching A teacher enhances the instruction provided by the other teacher (i.e., mini lesson) TeamTeaching Both teachers share the planning and the instruction in a coordinated fashion.

10 What is Co-Teaching? “Coteaching arrangements … are one promising option for meeting the learning needs of the many students who once spent a large part of the school day with special educators in separate classrooms.” Friend, 2007, p. 48 “Coteaching arrangements … are one promising option for meeting the learning needs of the many students who once spent a large part of the school day with special educators in separate classrooms.” Friend, 2007, p. 48

11 Part 2 Part 2 Rationale for Co-Teaching Part 2 Part 2 Rationale for Co-Teaching

12  It promotes principles of inclusion and collaborative practice among teachers  It provides a number of benefits for students, teachers, and organizations  It promotes principles of inclusion and collaborative practice among teachers  It provides a number of benefits for students, teachers, and organizations

13 Benefits for Students  Access to general education curriculum and classroom teacher  Minimizes instructional fragmentation  Reduces social stigma associated with the “pull-out” model  Positive effects on self-esteem  Enhances academic performance  Stronger peer relationships  Increases individualized instruction  Access to general education curriculum and classroom teacher  Minimizes instructional fragmentation  Reduces social stigma associated with the “pull-out” model  Positive effects on self-esteem  Enhances academic performance  Stronger peer relationships  Increases individualized instruction

14 Benefits for Teachers  Opportunity for professional growth  Increases job satisfaction  Sharing of knowledge, skills, and resources  Reduces student-teacher ratio  Special educators increase their understanding of general education curriculum and classroom expectations  General educators increase their ability to adapt/modify lessons  Improves communication between special and general education teachers  Opportunity for professional growth  Increases job satisfaction  Sharing of knowledge, skills, and resources  Reduces student-teacher ratio  Special educators increase their understanding of general education curriculum and classroom expectations  General educators increase their ability to adapt/modify lessons  Improves communication between special and general education teachers

15 Benefits for Organizations  Promotes and sustains inclusive practices  Enhances sense of community within general education classrooms  Fewer referrals for special education services  Parent satisfaction  Staff more united  Promotes and sustains inclusive practices  Enhances sense of community within general education classrooms  Fewer referrals for special education services  Parent satisfaction  Staff more united

16 Part 3 The Evidence Part 3 The Evidence

17 Quantitative Data  There is very little quantitative data regarding the effects of co-teaching.  Most frequently cited quantitative research is the meta-analysis conducted by Murawski & Swanson (2001). Their review resulted in six studies with sufficient quantitative information to calculate an effect size.  There is very little quantitative data regarding the effects of co-teaching.  Most frequently cited quantitative research is the meta-analysis conducted by Murawski & Swanson (2001). Their review resulted in six studies with sufficient quantitative information to calculate an effect size.

18 “We use the concept of ‘effect size’ to describe the magnitude of gains from any given change in educational practice and thus to predict what we can hope to accomplish by using that practice.” Joyce, Weil, & Calhoun, 2004, p. 402  0.08 and above = large effect size estimate  0.50 = moderate effect size estimate  0.20 and less = a small effect size estimate “We use the concept of ‘effect size’ to describe the magnitude of gains from any given change in educational practice and thus to predict what we can hope to accomplish by using that practice.” Joyce, Weil, & Calhoun, 2004, p. 402  0.08 and above = large effect size estimate  0.50 = moderate effect size estimate  0.20 and less = a small effect size estimate Effect Size

19 Murawski & Swanson’s Results  The six studies revealed an average total effect size of 0.40 for the co-teaching approach  An average effect size for reading and language arts of 1.59 (three/six studies)  An average effect size for mathematics of 0.45 (three/six studies)  An average effect size for social outcomes of 0.08 (one/six studies)  The six studies revealed an average total effect size of 0.40 for the co-teaching approach  An average effect size for reading and language arts of 1.59 (three/six studies)  An average effect size for mathematics of 0.45 (three/six studies)  An average effect size for social outcomes of 0.08 (one/six studies)

20 Murawski & Swanson’s Review  All six studies occurred in the 90s ( )  All but one study occurred over one academic year  The sample sizes varied from 59 to 706  The studies included different grade levels i.e., K-3, 3-6, and 9-12  The studies focused on different outcomes from academic achievement to social benefits  All six studies occurred in the 90s ( )  All but one study occurred over one academic year  The sample sizes varied from 59 to 706  The studies included different grade levels i.e., K-3, 3-6, and 9-12  The studies focused on different outcomes from academic achievement to social benefits

21 Murawski & Swanson’s Conclusion “The limited data suggest that co- teaching can have a positive impact on student achievement.”

22 Contrary Research Perspectives “Co-teaching often times involves teachers not working with one kid for sustained periods in a sustained manner [but] working with kids fleetingly in the back of the room or with groups of kids. … Many kids need individualized services.” Fuchs in Lawton, 1999, p. 4 “Co-teaching often times involves teachers not working with one kid for sustained periods in a sustained manner [but] working with kids fleetingly in the back of the room or with groups of kids. … Many kids need individualized services.” Fuchs in Lawton, 1999, p. 4

23 Concluding Remark While many authors support the use of co-teaching as a promising option for meeting the needs of students with disabilities, they also agree that more experimental and quantitative research is required to fully substantiate co-teaching as an effective option.

24 Part 4 The Challenges Part 4 The Challenges

25 Common Challenges  Finding common planning time  Providing administrative support  Need for ongoing training  Relationship factors  Special education teachers restricted to teaching in only a few general education classrooms  Finding common planning time  Providing administrative support  Need for ongoing training  Relationship factors  Special education teachers restricted to teaching in only a few general education classrooms

26 Part 5 Implementation Considerations Part 5 Implementation Considerations

27  The teaching partnership  Pre-planning  Selecting & scheduling teachers  Selecting & scheduling students  Co-teaching approaches  Professional development  Common planning time  Assessment  Administrative support  The teaching partnership  Pre-planning  Selecting & scheduling teachers  Selecting & scheduling students  Co-teaching approaches  Professional development  Common planning time  Assessment  Administrative support

28 The Teaching Partnership “Partners much establish trust, develop and work on communication, share the chores, celebrate, work together creatively to overcome the inevitable challenges and problems, and anticipate conflict and handle it in a constructive way.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, p. 3 “Partners much establish trust, develop and work on communication, share the chores, celebrate, work together creatively to overcome the inevitable challenges and problems, and anticipate conflict and handle it in a constructive way.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, p. 3

29 Building and Maintaining Positive Relationships  Trust and respect  Commitment to team goals  Effective interpersonal, collaborative, and conflict resolution skills  Understanding of self and partner  Continuous investment of time  Trust and respect  Commitment to team goals  Effective interpersonal, collaborative, and conflict resolution skills  Understanding of self and partner  Continuous investment of time

30 Stages to Co-Teaching  Beginning Stage  Compromising Stage  Collaborative Stage  Beginning Stage  Compromising Stage  Collaborative Stage

31 Obstacles that Impede Teamwork  Low self-esteem  Burnout  Fear of conflict  Dealing with anger poorly  Lack of shared vision  Self-righteousness  Poor communication  Low self-esteem  Burnout  Fear of conflict  Dealing with anger poorly  Lack of shared vision  Self-righteousness  Poor communication

32 Roles and Responsibilities “The biggest challenge for educators is in deciding to share the role that has traditionally been individual: to share the goals, decisions, classroom instruction, responsibility for students, assessment of student learning, problem solving, and classroom management. The teachers must begin to think of it as our class.” Ripley, in Cramer, 2006, p. 13 “The biggest challenge for educators is in deciding to share the role that has traditionally been individual: to share the goals, decisions, classroom instruction, responsibility for students, assessment of student learning, problem solving, and classroom management. The teachers must begin to think of it as our class.” Ripley, in Cramer, 2006, p. 13

33 Pre-Planning Eight Components: 1.Interpersonal communication 2.Physical arrangement 3.Familiarity with the curriculum 4.Curriculum goals and modifications 5.Instructional planning 6.Instructional presentation 7.Classroom management 8.Assessment 1.Interpersonal communication 2.Physical arrangement 3.Familiarity with the curriculum 4.Curriculum goals and modifications 5.Instructional planning 6.Instructional presentation 7.Classroom management 8.Assessment

34 Selecting Teachers  Issue:Volunteer for co-teaching versus assigned to co-teaching “Administrators need to understand that a teacher’s initial reluctance to co-teach is not necessarily a permanent barrier to implementing co-teaching or any other innovation. … McLaughlin (1991) found that teacher commitment to an innovation (e.g., co- teaching) only comes after teachers have acquired initial competence in the new skills necessary to implement the innovation.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, p. 122  Issue:Volunteer for co-teaching versus assigned to co-teaching “Administrators need to understand that a teacher’s initial reluctance to co-teach is not necessarily a permanent barrier to implementing co-teaching or any other innovation. … McLaughlin (1991) found that teacher commitment to an innovation (e.g., co- teaching) only comes after teachers have acquired initial competence in the new skills necessary to implement the innovation.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, p. 122

35 Scheduling Teachers  Issue: Special education teacher not able to co-teach in every general education classroom A number of authors suggest that the special educator limit their co-teaching to one or two classrooms per year.  Issue: Special education teacher not able to co-teach in every general education classroom A number of authors suggest that the special educator limit their co-teaching to one or two classrooms per year.

36 Selecting Students “One size does not fit all. Although co-teaching seems to be a promising practice, this does not mean that every student can have his/her educational needs met this way.” Kohler-Evans, 2006, p. 3 “One size does not fit all. Although co-teaching seems to be a promising practice, this does not mean that every student can have his/her educational needs met this way.” Kohler-Evans, 2006, p. 3

37 Selecting Students Possible Criteria:  Can the goals of the IEP be met within the general education class?  Will inclusion in the general education class be motivating for the student?  Is the student likely to benefit from the instruction provided by two teachers?  Will the student’s learning be enhanced by attending a co- taught general education class?  What effect will the student’s presence have on the rest of the students in the class?  Can the goals of the IEP be met within the general education class?  Will inclusion in the general education class be motivating for the student?  Is the student likely to benefit from the instruction provided by two teachers?  Will the student’s learning be enhanced by attending a co- taught general education class?  What effect will the student’s presence have on the rest of the students in the class?

38 Scheduling Students  Co-teaching can be used with any grade level - preschool to high school.  Co-teaching can be used with any subject area, although the literature refers most often to language arts and mathematics.  Co-teaching can be used with any grade level - preschool to high school.  Co-teaching can be used with any subject area, although the literature refers most often to language arts and mathematics.

39 Common Planning Time  Schedule co-teachers prep time together  Provide substitute coverage a few times during the year  Use school-wide activity days  Plan before and after school  Combine two classes and release teacher  Release teachers from some committee responsibilities  Administration cover classes from time to time  Schedule co-teachers prep time together  Provide substitute coverage a few times during the year  Use school-wide activity days  Plan before and after school  Combine two classes and release teacher  Release teachers from some committee responsibilities  Administration cover classes from time to time

40 “The real issue is not just about adding or manipulating time, but changing the fundamental way that teachers do business when they do sit down face-to-face to plan.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, p. 80 “The real issue is not just about adding or manipulating time, but changing the fundamental way that teachers do business when they do sit down face-to-face to plan.” Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004, p. 80

41 Professional Development  An understanding of co-teaching  Development of interpersonal, collaborative, and conflict resolution skills  Instructional strategies  Knowledge and skills for differentiating instruction  Characteristics of learners with different learning needs  An understanding of co-teaching  Development of interpersonal, collaborative, and conflict resolution skills  Instructional strategies  Knowledge and skills for differentiating instruction  Characteristics of learners with different learning needs

42 AssessmentAssessment  Student assessment  Assessing the co-teaching relationship  Student assessment  Assessing the co-teaching relationship

43 Administrative Support “The findings of several studies … involving collaborative activities share a theme that school administrators are highly influential in shaping the school culture and are often looked to as a source of leadership necessary to cause systemic change.” Sharpe & Hawes, 2003, p. 3 “The findings of several studies … involving collaborative activities share a theme that school administrators are highly influential in shaping the school culture and are often looked to as a source of leadership necessary to cause systemic change.” Sharpe & Hawes, 2003, p. 3

44 Essential Elements to the Change Process Common Vision IncentivesKnowled ge and Skills Resource s Action Plan Result NoYes Confusion YesNoYes Resistance Yes NoYes Anxiety Yes NoYesFrustration Yes NoTreadmill Yes Change Adapted from Knosler, in Pearl, n.d.

45 Co-Teaching Resources  Books  A Guide to Co-Teaching: Practical Tips for Facilitating Student Learning (Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004)  The Co-Teaching Manual (Basson & McCoy, 2007)  Co-Teaching Lesson Planning Book (Dieker, 2007)  Guidebook for the Magiera-Simmons Quality Indicator Model of Co-Teaching (Magiera & Simmons, 2005).  Books  A Guide to Co-Teaching: Practical Tips for Facilitating Student Learning (Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004)  The Co-Teaching Manual (Basson & McCoy, 2007)  Co-Teaching Lesson Planning Book (Dieker, 2007)  Guidebook for the Magiera-Simmons Quality Indicator Model of Co-Teaching (Magiera & Simmons, 2005).

46 Co-Teaching Resources  Articles  Gately, S.E. & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding coteaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4),  Noonan, M. J., McCormick, L., & Heck, (2003). The co- teacher relationship scale: Applications for professional development. Education & Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(1),  Murawski, W. W. & Swanson, H. L. (2001). A meta-analysis of co-teaching research: Where is the data? Remedial and Special Education, 22(5),  Articles  Gately, S.E. & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding coteaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4),  Noonan, M. J., McCormick, L., & Heck, (2003). The co- teacher relationship scale: Applications for professional development. Education & Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(1),  Murawski, W. W. & Swanson, H. L. (2001). A meta-analysis of co-teaching research: Where is the data? Remedial and Special Education, 22(5),

47 Co-Teaching Resources  Videos/DVDs:  The Power of 2 - M. Friend  Complexities of Collaboration - M. Friend  Collaborative Planning and Teaching - R. Villa  How to Co-Teach to Meet Diverse Student Needs - ASCD  Teacher Collaboration: Opening the Door Between Classrooms - The Master Teacher  Videos/DVDs:  The Power of 2 - M. Friend  Complexities of Collaboration - M. Friend  Collaborative Planning and Teaching - R. Villa  How to Co-Teach to Meet Diverse Student Needs - ASCD  Teacher Collaboration: Opening the Door Between Classrooms - The Master Teacher

48 “The practice of co-teaching has the potential to be a wonderful strategy for meeting the needs of all students. Working in partnership with another teacher, bouncing ideas off of one another, planning and orchestrating the perfect lesson, having two pair of eyes and four hands, creating something that is better than that which each partner brings …what better way to teach?” Kohler-Evans, 2006, p. 3 “The practice of co-teaching has the potential to be a wonderful strategy for meeting the needs of all students. Working in partnership with another teacher, bouncing ideas off of one another, planning and orchestrating the perfect lesson, having two pair of eyes and four hands, creating something that is better than that which each partner brings …what better way to teach?” Kohler-Evans, 2006, p. 3

49 “If the goal is for all students to be fully included in the mainstream of school life, then co-teaching is a strategy that should be considered. … Co-taught classrooms foster an atmosphere where diversity is accepted as having a positive impact on all students, where labels are avoided, and where everyone is thought of as a unique individual with gifts and needs.” Mitchell, 2005, p. 17 “If the goal is for all students to be fully included in the mainstream of school life, then co-teaching is a strategy that should be considered. … Co-taught classrooms foster an atmosphere where diversity is accepted as having a positive impact on all students, where labels are avoided, and where everyone is thought of as a unique individual with gifts and needs.” Mitchell, 2005, p. 17


Download ppt "Co-TeachingCo-Teaching A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education A Literature Review Saskatchewan Ministry of Education."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google