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

2. Contents Part 1 What is Co-Teaching? Part 2 Rationale for Co-Teaching
Part 3 The Evidence
Part 4 The Challenges
Part 5 Implementation Considerations
This presentation will cover five topics regarding co-teaching: a) what is co-teaching, b) the rationale for co-teaching, c) the evidence that indicates that co-teaching is an effective approach, d) the challenges as identified by teachers and administrators who have been involved with co-teaching, and e) some implementation considerations.

3. Part 1 What is Co-Teaching?
We will start our presentation with a brief overview of what co-teaching is.

4. Co-teaching is defined as
What is Co-Teaching?
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
Different authors use different definitions, but this definition by Cook and Friend contains the essential elements of co-teaching.
(Read the slide)

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
There are essentially four key elements to co-teaching:
1. First, it includes two or more professionals working together in a classroom. Villa, Thousand, and Nevin, suggest that it can be anyone with an instructional role within the classroom. However, most authors refer to a general education teacher and a special education teacher working together.
2. The second element is that the instruction occurs with the same physical space, which is typically the general education classroom. Both the general educator and special educator are present in the classroom. Patricia Popp refers to co-teaching as a “keep-in” rather than “pull-out” model.” Co-teaching is considered a new variation of the team teaching concept which is typically characterized as two general education teachers working with the same group of students.
3. The third element is the sharing of teaching responsibilities. This means that both educators fully participate, although it may be different, in planning, instruction, and student assessment. Both t eachers assume responsibility for the education of all students in the classroom. In essence, co-teaching is a blending of the teaching expertise of both a general educator and a special educator. It is expected that the presence of these two educators in a classroom will provide a wider range of instructional alternatives that will enhance the participation of students with disabilities and improve performance outcomes for all students (Magiera, et al., 2006);
4. The last element is that instruction is provided to a heterogeneous group of students. This means that both educators work with students with disabilities and with those who do not have disabilities; they share responsibility for the outcomes for all students.

6. What is Co-Teaching?
A service delivery model that is based on the philosophy of inclusion and supports collaborative practice among professionals.
Co-teaching is a service delivery model. It has gained quite a bit of attention in the United States in the last few years as they attempt to meet the legislative requirements of NCLB and IDEA. This legislation emphasizes that students will special needs should have access to the general education curriculum and be taught by highly qualified teachers.
Co-teaching is a model that is based on the philosophy of inclusion. This philosophy believes that all students can learn and should be welcomed and accepted members of a learning community. It supports students with disabilities being educated along side their non-disabled peers.
Co-teaching also supports collaboration among professionals, in this case between general educators and special educators. There is a great deal of literature that suggests that collaboration among professionals (i.e.., learning communities) has significant potential for improving student outcomes. In fact, Friend and Pope say…(turn to next slide)

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
(Read the slide).
Villa, Thousand, and Nevin state that … (turn to next slide)

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
(Read the slide).

9. Co-Teaching Approaches
Supportive
Teaching
One teacher leads and the other observes or offers assistance
Parallel
Teachers work with groups and present the same information.
Complementary
A teacher enhances the instruction provided by the other teacher (i.e., mini lesson)
Team
Both teachers share the planning and the instruction in a coordinated fashion.
There are a number of different approaches to co-teaching that can be used in a classroom.
Different authors refer to slightly different names for the categories, but there is significant similarities in the combination of approaches that can be used.
The four approaches listed here are the ones that Villa, Thousand, and Nevin refer to in their book, “A Guide to Co-Teaching: Practical Tips for Facilitating Student Learning.”
With the supportive teaching approach, one teacher leads the instruction and the other observes or assists students. This approach is often overused as it requires the least amount of change. This approach also does not capitalize on the expertise and talents of both teachers.
Parallel teaching involves both teachers presenting the same content to different groups of students. While the content is the same, there may be somewhat different adaptations or modifications for each of the groups. A variation on this approach is called “Station Teaching”. In this case, each teacher presents different content to small groups of students. Students rotate through the stations provided by each teacher. One of those stations may require students to work on their own. This approach provides more individualized support and allows students to receive content from two different teachers. It can, however, create an increase in the noise level and some students may find it distracting.
The complementary approach involves one teacher enhancing the instruction of another. This can be accomplished by performing a demonstration or providing a mini-lesson within a lesson. This approach capitalizes on the teaching strengths of both teachers, but requires more planning time, more flexibility, and a higher degree of trust than the first two approaches. A variation on this approach is what is called “alternative teaching”. With this approach one teacher teaches the whole class, while the other pre-teaches, re-teaches, or enriches the lesson to a small group of students. This approach can provide greater individualized instruction, but if the same students are always in the small group you’ve really just created a special education class in the back of the room.
Teach teaching involves both teachers sharing in the planning and the delivery of the instruction in a coordinated fashion. Lessons could be be divided based on each teacher’s strengths or both teachers could instruct simultaneously in an almost conversational manner. This approach requires a good working relationship between the teachers and a high level of trust.
Teachers can decide to use one approach for an entire lesson or use more than one approach within a lesson.
Villa, Thousand, and Nevin suggest that no one co-teaching approach is better than another.
These authors advise teachers who are just starting out to perhaps consider beginning with supportive and parallel teaching, and as they develop confidence and trust, move to complementary and team teaching.

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
We end part one, with this quote from Marilyn Friend. (Read the slide).
Many authors in the area of co-teaching suggest that co-teaching is not for every student with special needs. It does, however, provide another option beyond the traditional pull-out model.
While the pull-out model has advantages for some students with special needs, it also has its disadvantages. The pull-out model can create significant fragmentation for students with special needs as they move between two classrooms. There is the social stigma that some students feel as they are pulled away from their peer group for more intensive instruction. And some general educators do not actively engage in the education of students with special need, assuming that the students are getting all their needs met by the special educator and/or teacher assistant.
Co-teaching provides another alternative to meeting students’ needs and does so within the general education classroom.

11. Rationale for Co-Teaching
Part 2
Rationale for Co-Teaching
Part 2 of this presentation deals with the rationale, or reasons, for providing the co-teaching service delivery option.

12. Rationale for Co-Teaching
It promotes principles of inclusion and collaborative practice among teachers
It provides a number of benefits for students, teachers, and organizations
There are two major reasons for considering the implementation of co-teaching as a model for meeting the needs of students.
The first reason, which we discussed in part 1, has to do with promotogn of principles of inclusion and collaborative practice.
The second reason has to do with the benefits that co-teaching can provide for students, teachers, and organizations.
Let’s take a look at some of these benefits, as outlined in the literature.

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
The literature identifies a number of benefits for students with special needs, such as … (read the list)
Many of these benefits have been identified through interviews with teachers and students who have been involved in a co-teaching classroom.
The literature also suggests that students who are not identified as special needs may benefit from being in a co-taught classroom. They have access to two teachers working in the classroom, they witness to a model of collaborative teamwork, and they gain an appreciation for diversity within their learning and social community.

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
The literature also identifies a number of benefits for both the general education teacher and the special education teacher.
Again, this information was gathered from interviews/surveys with teachers involved in co-teaching. (Read the slide).
The special educator and the general educator often bring different, but complementary knowledge and skills to the the co-teaching experience.
Teachers report that they benefit both personally and professionally from the experience of working closely with another professional to meet students’ needs.
So not only does co-teaching have the potential to enrich the educational experience for students, but teachers have a tremendous opportunity for professional growth by working closely with another colleague.

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
There are also benefits for organizations (schools and school divisions) for implementing a co-teaching model.
As previously stated co-teaching supports the inclusive philosophy. And linked to this, is the sense of community that is developed in both classrooms and schools, as students with special needs are educated along side their non-disabled peers.
Some of the literature suggests that when students with special needs are involved in a co-taught classroom, there are fewer referrals for special education services. This may be due, in part, to the classroom teacher feeling more confident in addressing the needs of these students or the student feeling more comfortable within the general education classroom.
When parents were asked about their child’s involvement in a co-taught classroom, no parent turned down the invitation.
And when special and general educators work together, they tend to gain a greater appreciation for the expertise and knowledge of the other. This in turn creates a more united staff.

16. Part 3
The Evidence
We’ll now move to part three and look at the evidence to support co-teaching as an effective option.

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.
In terms of quantitative data, there are two points that need to be made.
First, there are very few quantitative studies on co-teaching. This could be due to the fact that co-teaching is still a relatively new approach, as well as to the fact that schools do not always participate in research that results in solid quantitative evidence.
This being said, the most frequently cited quantitative study on the effects of co-teaching comes from the meta-analysis of the research conducted by Murawski and Swanson in 2001.
These authors reviewed 89 articles, but only found six that provided enough information in which to calculate an effect size.

18. Effect Size
“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
An effect size is defined by Joyce et al. … (read quotation). We use effect size to estimate the impact of a particular model, strategy, or approach on students’ learning.
As you can see an effect size of 0.08 and above is considered a large effect size; 0.50 is a moderate effect size; and 0.20 or less a small 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)
From the six studies, Murawski and Swanson were able to calculate a total effect size of This would fall within the estimate for moderate impact on student learning.
The authors also attempted to calculate effect sizes for other categories (read through the other points on the slide). You will note that even fewer studies were used for these calculations.

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 included in Murawski and Swanson’s meta-analysis occurred within the 90’s and all but one took place over one academic year. The exception was a three week study.
There was significant variability among the six studies, which further complicates our ability to obtain indisputable evidence.
As you can see, the studies used different samples sizes, grade levels, and measured different outcomes.
Only three of the studies actually reported on the number and types of disabilities within the classroom.
So while this data provides some interesting information, it does have its limitations.

21. Murawski & Swanson’s Conclusion
“The limited data suggest that co-teaching can have a positive impact on student achievement.”
Nonetheless, Murawski and Swanson make the following concluding statement regarding their review of six articles that produced quantitative data on the effects of co-teaching. (Read the slide).
It should also be noted, that while effect size provides very helpful information in determining whether an approach has the potential for creating successful student learning, there are other considerations that should be figured into the decision. For example, a strategy may have a small or moderate effect size, but may create stronger student independence and enhanced feelings of self-esteem.

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
I need to also point out that there are some authors who have expressed concern with the co-teaching model.
Some of these question whether the intensity of the instruction is sufficient with the co-teaching model.
Fuchs makes this point, in the following quotation … (read the slide). He believes that there isn’t enough evidence to indicate that it promotes satisfactory student achievement.

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.
That being said, let me conclude with this statement … (read the slide).
It is clear that more research is required.
Many authors, including Murawski and Swanson would agree with this statement.
There are indications that co-teaching has great potential, but stronger research is required to make definitive statements.
Marilyn Friend makes the point that before you can measure student outcomes, you must ensure that the quality of the implementation has been established. Of course this is true with research associated with all innovations in education.
It would appear that what is needed is for schools to implement co-teaching as it is intended and to open their classrooms for researchers to conduct informative studies.

24. Part 4
The Challenges
Part 4 outlines some of the challenges that teachers and administrators have identifies as issues associated with the co-teaching model.

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
This slide outlines the most common challenges identified in the literature. Again, this was gathered through interveiw with teachers and administrators.
1. Teachers who have been involved with co-teaching most often mention the difficulty with finding common planning time as the greatest challenge. Teachers need time together to plan lessons, to evaluate student work, to determine classroom procedures, and to discuss the co-teaching relationship.
2. Another concern expressed by teachers is the lack of administrative support. The principal needs to have an understanding of the co-teaching model so that he/she can provide teachers with support in implementing this significant change in practice.
3. With all new change, professional development seems to be the key. There is a definite need for training for both co-teaching partners and administrators.
4. Relationship factors that can sometimes escalate into unresolved conflict can destroy the potential for success with co-teaching. Teachers are used to working on their own and the co-teaching partnership can be challenging for those who are insistent on doing things their way. Any successful partnership requires flexibility, accommodation, and a genuine regard and respect for the other person. Co-teaching partners need to develop a trusting relationship that employs excellent communications skills.
The last challenge is the fact that the special educator will not be able to co-teach in every general education classroom. Therefore, it becomes necessary to be selective in this aspect.
The next part on implementation considerations offers some solutions to these challenges.

26. Implementation Considerations
Part 5
Implementation Considerations
That takes us to our last part, implementation considerations.

27. Implementation Considerations
The teaching partnership
Pre-planning
Selecting & scheduling teachers
Selecting & scheduling students
Co-teaching approaches
Professional development
Common planning time
Assessment
Administrative support
A number of factors need to be considered when a decision has been made to implement co-teaching. Here is a list of some of these factors (read the slide).
The next few slides will briefly address each of these factors.

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
When implementing co-teaching it absolutely critical to attend to the partnership between the co-teachers.
Co-teaching involves a whole new way of working together and can fail if the relationship is not solid.
It is absolutely essential that the teaching partners not only develop plans for student learning, but develop their working relationship so that they can be effective and find joy in working together.
This particular quotation identifies many of the key elements to developing a positive and rewarding collegial relationship: trust, communication, sharing the workload, taking time to celebrate, resolving conflict in positive ways - so important to a well-functioning partnership.
A good relationship will not only make the work more enjoyable for the two teachers, but will also provide students with an excellent model of teamwork.

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
Much of the literature makes reference to various ways to build and maintain positive relationships.
Some authors have checklists that teachers can use to evaluate their relationship and then set goals for improvement. I will refer to some examples of such resources near the end of this presentation.
Five factors related specifically to building and maintaining positive relationships include:
1. Trust and respect. Any good relationship will require trust and respect between the partners. Trust and respect are often developed over time as the partners fulfill commitments to one other and share the workload, resources, and their expertise.
2. Commitment to team goals. The teaching partners need to commit to team goals and maintain a focus on these goals. This often means letting go of one’s own preferences and finding new ways of doing things together.
3. Effective interpersonal, collaborative, and conflict resolution skills. Some of the professional development for teachers regarding co-teaching needs to include skill development in these areas.
4. Understanding self and partner. It is important to understand yourself and your partner on a number of levels. Kolher-Evans recommends that partners spend time discussing what bugs them, their pet peeves, their struggles, their victories etc. Knowing yourself will help you get your needs met. Knowing your partner will help you to assist them in meeting their needs.
5. Continuous investment of time. Relationships need an investment of time. If you shortcut this area, you can do irreparable damage to the relationship between colleagues, the climate in a classroom/school, and the co-teaching movement (no one else is going to want to try it).

30. Stages to Co-Teaching Beginning Stage Compromising Stage
Collaborative Stage
There is a developmental nature associated with the teaching partnership.
Bauwen and Hourcade identify three co-teaching stages - the beginning stage, the compromising stage, and the collaborative stage.
These authors suggest that teaching partners recognize the developmental nature of the co-teaching relationship and strive to reach the collaborative stage.
In the beginning stage, for example, communication is guarded, often one teacher teaches and the other assists, and one teacher is typically designated the behavior manager.
In the compromising stage, communication is more open and interactive, planning is shared, both teachers are involved in the instruction through mini-lessons, and there is a mutual development of rules and routines for students.
In the collaborative stage, effective communication is modeled for students, planning is continual both outside and during instruction, both teachers participate simultaneously in presenting the lesson, and the teachers have a co-developed classroom management system that includes individual behavior plans.

31. Obstacles that Impede Teamwork
Low self-esteem
Burnout
Fear of conflict
Dealing with anger poorly
Lack of shared vision
Self-righteousness
Poor communication
Sofield suggests that it is essential that teams confront the main obstacles that impede teamwork and identifies these as … (read the list).

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
An important aspect of the teaching partnership is having a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of each teacher.
Some authors advocate for a total sharing of all teaching responsibilities on an equal basis. Others suggest that equitable tasking is not a precondition for a genuine co-teaching relationship.
The decision on the roles and responsibilities will likely need to be based on the expertise of each teacher, the amount of time the partners spend in planning the lesson, and the developmental stage of the teaching partnership.
When making this decision, it might be helpful to determine who is doing what “before”, “during”, and “after” the lesson.
There are two key points to keep in mind with respect to roles and responsibilities:
1. It is important that the students view the teachers as equals, or they will tend to only accept help from the teacher who plays the dominate role.
2. It is important to fully utilize the skills, strengths, and expertise of each teacher. This will ensure that the educational experience for students is enhanced and that both teachers remain motivated in using this approach.

33. Pre-Planning Eight Components:
Interpersonal communication
Physical arrangement
Familiarity with the curriculum
Curriculum goals and modifications
Instructional planning
Instructional presentation
Classroom management
Assessment
The second variable to consider in the implementation of co-teaching is the importance in pre-planning.
In preparing for co-teaching it is critical that the co-teachers spend time together discussing and developing common approaches to classroom situations.
In fact Mitchell suggests that teachers begin preparing for co-teaching the year before they expect to implement.
Gately and Gately present these eight components as essential areas for co-teachers to discuss in pre-planning for co-teaching (read the slide).
Some authors include ready-made templates to facilitate the discussion and planning for co-teaching. I will share some of these resources near the end of the presentation.

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
An important decision to consider when implementing co-teaching is the selection and scheduling of teachers.
A key issue regarding the selection of teachers is whether they should be allowed to volunteer for co-teaching or be assigned to a co-taught classroom.
Some authors advocate for allowing teachers to volunteer for co-teaching. They believe that this increases teacher buy-in and leads to fewer conflicts between the teaching partners.
There are others who maintain that if co-teaching is an appropriate option for students, then teachers should be prepared to accept the professional obligation to work together.
Marilyn Friend, for example, suggests that the culture of the school should be such that it views co-teaching as a standard of practice that is integral to reaching all students.
Villa, Thousand, and Nevin suggest that perhaps it is appropriate to use a volunteer approach during the early stages of co-teaching.

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.
Another key issue has to do with scheduling teachers
Since there will be a lack of special education teachers to cover all general education classes, schools will need to determine which classes and how many classes that the special education teacher will co-teach in.
This decision will likely need to be based on the special educator’s experience with co-teaching, the size of the caseload that they are required to work with, and other role responsibilities, such as assessment and parent meetings.
A number of authors suggest that the special educator limit their co-teaching to one or two classrooms per year.
Lynne Cook, for example, recommends starting in only one classroom the first year.
Marilyn Friend suggests limiting co-teaching to certain grade levels or subject areas.

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
The literature is unclear as to which students with disabilities are best suited for a co-teaching classroom.
There appears to be more reference to those who have mild-to-moderate disabilities as being the best candidates for co-teaching, but the research is really not definitive on this matter.
This quotation suggests that while co-teaching may be an effective approach for some students with disabilities, it is not a panacea for all students with special needs.

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?
Rather than focusing on the type of disability that may be best served within a co-teaching model, perhaps a more appropriate approach is to base the decision upon each student’s individual needs.
Using criteria such as the list here, may be a better way of deciding which students would most likely benefit from being in a co-taught classroom (read the slide).
When selecting students for attendance in a co-taught classroom, the school must be careful not to create an imbalance of students with special needs in the classroom. This can be overwhelming for the teacher(s), as well as the other students.
Another consideration, is that a student may attend a co-taught classroom for the entire day or for a portion of the day. Again, it is based on what is best for the student.

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.
Read the slide.

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
It is clear form the literature that the greatest complaint of teachers with the co-teaching model was the lack of common planning time.
Planning time is needed to plan lessons, to determine curricular and instructional adaptations/modifications, to establish classroom procedures and expectations, to assess student work, and for assessing and working on the co-teaching relationship.
Each school will have to determine the options for common planning time that work best for it.
Some examples of ways to increase common planning time include … (read the slide).

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
Villa, Thousand, and Nevin make the point that in addition to finding adequate common planning time, it is equally important to use that time effectively and efficiently.
They suggest the use of a meeting agenda format to record the outcomes of the meeting and to clearly identify who is accountable for which task.
Teachers may also want to use a common template for lesson planning purposes and there are a number of such templates available.
Lisa Dieker, for example, has a book called “Co-Teaching Lesson Plan Book” for this very purpose. I’ll give you the reference for that when we talk about the resources for co-teaching.

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
The literature is clear that professional develop is required for creating and sustaining co-teaching.
This slide represents some of the essential topics that need to be part of the professional development for co-teachers (read the slide).
Administrators also need to participate in professional development so they have an understanding of the theory and practice of co-teaching.
In addition to attending traditional workshop formats, co-teachers should consider visiting other co-teaching partners to learn from their experiences.
Villa, Thousand, and Nevin suggest that “people who co-teach are in an ideal situation to spur their own professional growth through dialogue with their co-teachers.” You will recall that many teachers identified professional growth as an important benefit of being involved in co-teaching.

42. Assessment Student assessment Assessing the co-teaching relationship
Two aspects of assessment must be considered: student assessment and assessing the co-teaching relationship.
Student Assessment
In the early stages, co-teachers will need to discuss how they will assess students and the manner in which this information will be communicated to students and their parents.
Of particular concern for students with special needs is how assessment will be adapted/modified to meet their needs and how the goals of IEPs will be reflected in the evaluation process.
There are a few ways that the co-teachers can share the grading of assignments: (1) split the assignments in two between the two teachers; (2) one teacher evaluates the modified assignments and the other evaluates the rest; and (3) one teacher evaluates all the assignments for one project, while the other teacher evaluates the next project.
In order to achieve consistency in the marking process, teachers should consider spending time determining evaluation criteria and evaluation rubrics.
Another process that may assist in developing greater consistency is having each teacher grade a few assignments and then switch assignments and have the other teacher re-grade those assignments. The discussion following should help to refine the assessment process.
Assessing the Co-Teaching Relationship
In addition to determining how to assess students, co-teachers will need to designate time to reflect and assess the co-teaching relationship on an ongoing basis.
This process allows the teachers to communicate concerns, to celebrate successes, and to set goals for improvement. It may indeed, help to avoid unnecessary conflict.
Magiera and Simmons have a quality indicator model that identifies five categories of quality indicators and can be found in their book “Guidebook for the Magiera-Simmons Quality Indicator Model of Co-Teaching.”
Villa, Thousand, and Nevin also have a scale that they call the “Are We Really Co-Teachers Scale.” This can be found in their book, “A Guide to Co-Teaching : Practical Tips for Facilitating Student Learning”.
I will be referring to these titles and authors in just a few minutes for those of you who are wanting to record these.

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 power of administrative support for instructional change can not be underestimated.
(Read the slide).
So many authors, like Fullen and Elmore, write about the importance of leadership when implementing change.
Some authors suggest that it is impossible to achieve success without good educational leadership, others suggest it might be possible, but it is certainly much more difficult.
Much of the literature regarding school improvement focuses on the importance of the principal’s leadership role.
Less has been written about the leadership provided by central office, but there appears to be agreement that good leadership must be exercised by all levels of the organization.

44. Essential Elements to the Change Process
Common Vision
Incentives
Knowledge and Skills
Resources
Action Plan
Result No
Yes
Confusion
Resistance
Anxiety
Frustration
Treadmill
Change
You may be familiar with this chart that identifies the key elements to the change process.
This chart outlines the variables that administrators need to attend to in order to affect positive change.
In the first row, you can see that if there is not a common vision for change, then confusions results. In terms of co-teaching, the common vision could reflect beliefs such as: all children can learn and that they have the right to an education with their peers in their community’s school.
Without incentives - such as planning time, training, encouragement, and special opportunities - teachers often resist change.
Anxiety results when teachers do not feel that they have the knowledge or skills to implement the change. Thus the need for professional development.
When appropriate resources are not provided - including technical, material and organizational resources - people often feel frustrated with the change initiative.
People feel like they’re on a treadmill if they do not have a sense of the action plan that is driving the change. An action plan provides a sense of direction.
So if administrators attend to a common vision, incentives, knowledge and skills, resources, and an action plan, they are more likely to affect positive change.
That completes all five parts of the presentation. I would like to take just a few minutes to share some resources associated with co-teaching that you may find useful.
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).
This list of books provides some very practical tools for teachers and administrators.
The first book by Villa, Thousand, and Nevin contains a number of ready-made templates, such as: Are We Really Co-Teachers Scale, co-teaching roles and responsibilities matrix, co-teaching planning meeting agenda format, administrator actions to promote co-teaching, and examples of co-teaching lesson plans.
Basson and McCoy’s book also contains teacher templates, such as: a co-teaching lesson plan, worksheet for pre-planning purposes, evaluation form, and observation form.
Lisa Dieker’s book contains templates specifically related to lesson planning.
The last book contains the QI model that I referred to as a tool for evaluating the co-teaching process.
The first three books can be found at Amazon.com. In terms of the last book, if you goggle the title of the Magiera-Simmons book, you’ll get ordering information from excelsior.

46. Co-Teaching Resources
Articles
Gately, S.E. & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding coteaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 40-47
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),
I recommend the following three articles.
The first two articles contain some practical tools for teachers.
Gately and Gately discuss the eight components (that I referred to earlier in the presentation) that they believe teachers need to address in pre-planning for co-teaching.
This article also contains co-teaching rating scales - one for the special education teacher and one for the general education teacher. It is an excellent article that teachers should consider reviewing if they are going to work together in a co-teaching arrangement.
The article by Noonan and colleagues includes a full discussion on the co-teacher relationship scale. This scale focuses on attitudes, beliefs, and personal characteristics of co-teachers and may be useful for matching co-teaching partners.
The last article by Murawski and Swanson is the article that contains the quantitative evidence that was referred to earlier in the presentation. It outlines the results of the six studies that were the focus of the review.

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
A number of videos/DVDs exist the could be useful for professional development purposes.
I’ve included the website address where you can find these resources.
You don’t need to take down the titles, as you will find them all at this website under the topic, “co-teaching/collaboration”.

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
I would like to end this presentation with two quotations that speak to why co-teaching has the potential to be a powerful option to meeting the needs of students..
(Read the slide).

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
(Read the slide).