Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Communicating and Collaborating with Other Professionals and Families

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Communicating and Collaborating with Other Professionals and Families"— Presentation transcript:

1 Communicating and Collaborating with Other Professionals and Families
Sped 518: Survey of the Exceptional Learner Fall 2011 Portland State University

2 Agenda Break up into groups of three.
Review what you learned about the students in your class from doing the class profile. How did this knowledge change your practice? Presentation on Co-Teaching Discussion on Autism Video What You Can Do in the Classroom

3 "Fairness is not giving everyone the same thing
"Fairness is not giving everyone the same thing. Fairness is giving each person what they need to succeed."

4 Background 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. This slide can be presented as follows: This one is really self-explanatory, isn’t it? No one likes being told what to do. We can minimize any negative feelings or feelings of resistance by explaining the needs of kids with disabilities to general educators. The key is capitalizing on everyone’s knowledge about kids and how they learn. Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

5 Background (cont.) Special educators have developed a tendency to “own” students on individualized education plans (IEPs), which decreases the “voice” and participation of classroom teachers in collaborative problem solving. Similar to the previous slide: We really love our students, which should be encouraged, as long as we allow others to love them too. Being too possessive of students is counterproductive to working collaboratively. Although we may know more about the students that we’ve worked with, that knowledge should be shared and communicated effectively. Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

6 Collaborating with Other Professionals
Consultation “a voluntary process in which one professional assists another to address a problem concerning a third party” (Friend and Cook, 2007) Collaboration “Interpersonal collaboration is a style for direct interaction between at least two coequal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision making as they work toward a common goal” (Friend and Cook, 2007) Co-teaching “two or more professionals jointly delivering instruction to a diverse, or blended, group of students in a single physical space” (Friend and Cook, 2007)

7 Five Step Procedure for Peer Collaboration
Initiation or facilitation Clarifying questions Summarization Interventions and predictions Evaluation

8 Ways to Resolve the Need for Resources Needed for Collaboration
Administrators designate a common time for collaborating professionals School boards pay professionals for one extra time period each week to collaborate or meet with parents School districts provide early dismissal for students one day a week so team members have a common planning time Teachers schedule brief focused planning periods with one another

9 Collaboration Issues and Dilemmas
Concerns about co-teaching Student ownership Individual versus class focus Content versus accommodation Real world versus student’s world

10 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. Share the following: Teaching is a very isolated profession. We can shut our classroom doors and make it our own safe haven. To open your door is the first step, and an important one that should be recognized and valued. It takes some courage to be willing and open to the possibility of sharing your classroom with another professional. Also, ground rules must be in place. To feel safe walking out the door and onto the bridge, we have to know that the bridge is safe territory. It has to be clear that no one is going to try to shake us off or to force us to retreat, nor will we do that to anyone who joins us on the bridge. And if it doesn’t work out or if it’s just not comfortable, we can always go back to safe ground—no harm done. But hopefully we can get both parties to the same side of the bridge and to work together. Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

11 Collaboration Won’t Just Happen
Deliberate Structured Systematic Ongoing Share the following about the points on this slide: Collaborative teaching isn’t something that you can just start doing tomorrow. It should be a careful, thoughtful, gradual process that continues to grow over time. In some cases, we’ve heard of the process taking 2 years to get to a comfortable, collaborative relationship. What does this mean? Simply, don’t give up and don’t worry. It is going to take time, and no one does it perfectly. Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

12 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. Make the following points about this slide: If we start from different places, no wonder our paths are different as well. Rarely are we working with the same curriculum—more confusion. Steele, Bell, & George, 2005

13 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 disproportionally filled with students with disabilities. Special educators can function more as a teaching assistant than as a co-educator. Mention the following points: Co-teaching has traditionally meant that both teachers remain in the room for the entire lesson. While this is obviously advantageous for students with disabilities, it has been difficult to maintain in schools. (If you think about the ratio of special educators to general educators in your school, you can see why). De facto assignment of the special educator to the role of an assistant can be minimized through the implementation of some strategies that we will discuss shortly. Friend & Cook, 2003

14 Effective Co-Planning
Part IV. Effective Co-Planning Approximate time: 40 minutes Mention the following points: Adequate planning time is among the top concerns for co-teaching teams. This is an additional concern for special educators who work with more than one general educator. The need for planning time is a systemic barrier, requiring administrative action at the school and/or district level.

15 VIDEO: Co-Planning

16 Pre-Planning Co-teaching requires thoughtful planning time.
Administrative support is essential. Here is where the alignment of special and general education occurs Make this time as focused as possible Take turns taking the lead in planning and facilitating Share the following: As we talk about pre-planning and planning, I realize that it may cause some stress or anxiety in terms of how to fit it all in. However, although it may be some extra work at the beginning, if you do it, it WILL make your life easier down the road. Planning is essential. Planning should center on determining which instructional techniques are going to be the most effective in helping students meet content standards. The general educator can provide an overview of the content, curriculum, and standards to be addressed before the planning meeting. The special educator should provide an overview of any student IEP goals, objectives, and needed accommodations or modifications that have to be incorporated into the lessons. Planning sessions should focus on what is going to be taught (the content) and how it will be taught. Student-specific concerns should be saved for the end of the planning session. Several premade co-teaching plan books are commercially available and may be helpful to structure lessons. Include days when the special educator will take the lead in planning. Murawski & Dieker, 2004; Dieker, 2002

17 Provide Weekly Scheduling Co-Planning Time
Co-teaching teams should have a minimum of one scheduling/planning period (45–60 minutes) per week. Experienced teams should spend 10 minutes to plan each lesson. Share the following: Believe it or not, research has shown, and we have seen, that 10 minutes really will become all you need to co-plan a lesson. Dieker, 2001; Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

18 Weekly Co-Planning Effective weekly co-planning is based on regularly scheduled meetings, rather than “fitting it in.” Important to stay focused Review content in advance of meeting Make the following points about this slide: “Fitting it in” planning doesn’t work for a couple of reasons: We tend to not actually end up fitting it in anywhere because we are pressed for time or have more immediate concerns (kind of like me and going to the gym). Hallway conversations are never the most effective—they tend to end up going like this: One teacher sees another in the hallway and is reminded of something he/she needs to tell that teacher. “Oh, there’s Mrs. Smith, I’ve been meaning to talk to her about _______ (insert kid’s name).” Why is this not ideal? First, only one teacher is prepared for this conversation to happen. Secondly, there is limited time in the hallway. We often have only 5 minutes to get coffee, use the restroom, etc., let alone have a detailed and worthwhile conversation. Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

19 Weekly Co-Planning (cont.)
Guide the session with the following fundamental issues: What are the content goals? Who are the learners? How can we teach most effectively? Make the following points about this slide: We want our planning meetings to be structured and purposeful. Some things to think about: Where do we want our students to be? What are the biggest bumps going to be along the way? How can we work together to make the road less bumpy? Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

20 Two Stages of Classroom Co-Planning
Getting to know each other Weekly co-planning Share that there are two stages for co-planning, and then say: We will discuss how to effectively get to know each other, and then how to begin the daunting task of carving out co-planning time. Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

21 Getting to Know Each Other
Consider completing a teaching style inventory Compare how each of you prefers to structure assignments, lessons, classroom schedule, etc. Example Briefly mention the points on this slide and then share: The materials at the following Web addresses are examples of structured teaching style inventories that will allow you and your co-teaching partner the opportunity to systematically evaluate and collaborate based on your differing styles.

22 Effective Classroom-Level Planning
Co-teachers should show a shared commitment and enthusiasm. Both teachers’ names should be posted on the door and in the classroom. All meetings and correspondence with families should reflect participation from both co-teachers. Skilled planners trust the professional skills of their partners. Make the following points about this slide: When co-teaching, we really want to present ourselves as a unified front! As trust develops, everything gets easier—in terms of planning, instruction, and management. Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

23 Effective Classroom-Level Planning (cont.)
Effective planners design learning environments for their students and for themselves that demand active involvement. Effective co-planners create learning and teaching environments in which each person’s contributions are valued. Effective planners develop effective routines to facilitate their planning. Planning skills improve over time. Briefly mention each point on this slide. Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996

24 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. This has become the most widely accepted definition in the literature. Go over handout 1 (H1): “Co-Teaching, What it IS, what it is NOT.” This handout is shown on the next slide to help participants locate it in their packets. Allow 5 minutes to discuss this handout. Interestingly, co-teaching originated in the field of general education and has only recently been applied as a way to provide services to students with disabilities. Cook & Friend, 1995, p. 1

25 Video: Co-Teaching

26 Co-Teaching Co-Teaching Co-Planning Grading
Occurs when general and special education teachers work together to coordinate curriculum and instruction to teach heterogeneous groups of students. Lesson co-teaching Co-Planning Long-range co-planning Lesson co-planning Grading Questions about grading at various grade levels General v. special education students

27 What is Co-Teaching Two (or more) educators or other certified staff
Contract to share instructional responsibility For a single group of students Primarily in a single classroom or workspace For specific content (objectives) With mutual ownership, pooled resources, and joint accountability

28 Why Co-Teach Co-teaching is one way to deliver services to students with disabilities or other special needs as part of a philosophy of inclusive practices. As a result, it shares many benefits with other inclusion strategies, including a reduction in stigma for students with special needs, an increased understanding and respect for students with special needs on the part of other students, and the development of a sense of heterogeneously-based classroom community.

29 Regular Class Special Teacher One Teach / One Monitor new students
Data Collection Present Instruction and check for understanding Circulate, observe, collect data One Teach /One Assist Proximity control Individual Assistance Monitor and assist students Parallel Teaching- same content Reduce t/s ratio Increase interactions Divide students Teach to different learning styles Instruct part of class and check for understanding Center Teaching Skill practice Instruct small group Alternative Teaching- modified lesson or assistance Workshops Instruct large or small group Supplementary Teaching Addressing Student Skill Deficits Manage Classroom or Instruct Small Group Manage Classroom Instruct Small Group Team Teaching Direct Instruction Cooperative Groups New Content Present Instruction with a partner to the whole group Deliver instruction to whole group with a partner, take notes, create visual graphic organizer, Illustrate content, present alternative method of problem solving.

30 Station Teaching Divide and Concur Students rotate around stations

31 Station Teaching Advantages Disadvantages Separate responsibilities
Both teachers are active and equal Low student-teacher ratio Disadvantages Noise level Lots of movement Does the order matter? Pacing

32 Parallel Teaching Joint planning
Slip the class into two heterogeneous groups Diversity in both groups

33 Parallel Teaching Advantages Lower student- teacher ratio
Teach in two groups and bring together for discussions Joint planning Disadvantages Joint planning Cannot be used for initial instruction Noise level Lots of movement Pacing

34 1 Teach, 1 Observe 1 professional instructs, 1 professional observes & collects data Roles should not be static Teachers should create systematic method for taking down observations

35 1 Teach, 1 Observe Disadvantages
Requires little Joint Planning Time Allows both teachers to focus attention, rather than spreading selves to thin Separate Responsibilities, less conflict with teaching style Disadvantages If used exclusively, can lead to one teacher being seen as the “assistant”

36 Alternative Teaching Small Group of students receive separate instruction Teachers’ roles should not be static Small Group membership and composition should be fluid

37 Alternative Teaching Advantages
Students can receive highly intensive instruction within general education classroom Students have opportunity for more small group/1:1 interaction with teachers Allows for peer modeling – having positive class models work alongside of students with behavior disorders Disadvantages Students with disabilities may be stigmatized because of being frequently pulled into small group If students are given opportunity to come to back table for assistance, many students in need of assistance may not come for fear of being embarrassed

38 Teaming Both teachers are responsible for planning and share in the instruction of all students.

39 Teaming Advantages Disadvantages Both educators have equal status.
Teachers can play off of each other (role play, trade ideas during instruction, one can speak while the other models.) Results in a synergy that enhances students participation (and also invigorates professionals) Disadvantages Requires a great level of trust and commitment Requires a lot of planning Teaching styles must mesh (if teachers differ in their use of humor, pacing or instructional format the “flow” of the lesson in often unsuccessful.)

40 One Teaching, One Assisting
One teacher teaches while the other supports in instructional process

41 One Teaching, One Assisting
Advantages Requires little joint planning Gives a role to special services provider if they do not feel competent in the subject area Disadvantages Sometimes becomes the sole or primary co-teaching approach when planning time is scarce. Teacher probably takes the lead role and the special services provider becomes the assistant (special services- denied an active teaching role, undermines credibility) Assisting teacher can become a distraction (both visually- walking around and auditory- whispering) Risk of students becoming dependent learners

42 Co-Teaching Advantages
Lower teacher – student ratio Classroom of diverse learners Teachers can respond effectively to varied needs of students Another professional can provide different viewpoints and more ideas for instruction. Teachers can be motivational for one another. Co-teaching can positively affect the general educator’s instructional behavior.

43 Barriers/Disadvantages to Success
Lack of administrative support Lack of shared planning time Need for in-service training Personality matches – the relationship between co-teachers is critical to success. Misguided perceptions and / or lack of communication Poorly defined roles / unclear expectations Dividing the class based on SPED and non-SPED students

44 Scheduling Co-Teaching
Part V. Scheduling Approximate time: 40 minutes Scheduling Co-Teaching

45 Collaborative Scheduling
Collaborative Scheduling A Collaborative Scheduling B Collaborative Scheduling C Introduce this section in the following way: So, now that we’re ready with our co-teaching partners, how can we work it into the day? We are going to talk about three different approaches to collaborative scheduling. Perhaps one of these, or a combination of parts of them, will meet your specific needs. Small group activity: Divide the group into three small groups, assigning each group to either Collaborative Scheduling A, B, or C. Ask each group to become familiar with their assigned scheduling format and report back to the large group. Allow 5 minutes for small group work and 10–15 minutes for reporting back and having a discussion with the large group. Show Slides 56–66 as the participants report back about each collaborative schedule. Be certain that the points in the facilitator’s notes on each of the slides (56–66) are emphasized if they are not mentioned by the participants. Walsh & Jones, 2004

46 Collaborative Scheduling A
Special educator divides teaching time between two different classes in the same day. This model ensures the availability of direct support from a special educator for critical parts of the instructional programs. It does require careful planning by the co-teaching teams, because the special educator might be on two teams. Walsh & Jones, 2004

47 Advantages of Collaborative Scheduling A
Enables students with disabilities to access a broader range of general education classrooms, including AP and honors Ensures the availability of direct support from a special educator for critical parts of the instructional programs Improved ratio of students with disabilities to students without disabilities Slide 58 is self-explanatory. Ask for any personal reflections of similar scheduling models. Walsh & Jones, 2004

48 Challenges of Collaborative Scheduling A
Requires effective consulting skills on the part of the special educator Larger danger that the special educator will not be seen as an equal partner to the general educator Could possibly disrupt the class routine Slide 58 is self-explanatory. Ask for any personal reflections of similar scheduling models. Walsh & Jones, 2004

49 Collaborative Scheduling B
The special educator divides time between two different classes. The involvement of the special educator varies by days of the week, not within classes in the same day. The advantages and challenges of Collaborative Scheduling B are similar to Collaborative Scheduling A. While the special educator may still be on two different teams, he/she has the advantage in Collaborative Scheduling B of staying with the same teacher for an entire day, thus involving less disruption to his/her schedule and the students’ day. Walsh & Jones, 2004

50 Advantages of Collaborative Scheduling B
Advantages are similar to Collaborative Scheduling A. Co-teachers report an ability to implement a full range of co-teaching models because of the planned involvement of both teachers in complete classes on certain days of the week. On days when both teachers are in attendance for the full day, teachers can plan differentiated activities (led by both teachers) and team teaching strategies for the entire class period. Walsh & Jones, 2004

51 Challenges of Collaborative Scheduling B
Challenges are similar to Collaborative Scheduling A. Teachers need to be cognizant of the presence of two teachers on only certain days of the week. Students with specific support and accommodation requirements have to be well aligned to the schedule. Emphasize the second and third points, and again, ask for personal reflections. Walsh & Jones, 2004

52 Challenges of Collaborative Scheduling B (cont.)
Requires general educator to be able to implement IEP requirements in the absence of the special educator Special educator burnout is an issue because of the greater demand of knowledge of the general education curriculum. Requires supervisory judgment regarding which teachers can effectively plan and implement this model This slide needs no further discussion, beyond emphasizing each point. Walsh & Jones, 2004

53 Collaborative Scheduling C
The special educator serves as a resource to the interdisciplinary team. His/her schedule is established weekly on the basis of instructional activities. Requires the greatest amount of flexibility and planning by an interdisciplinary team of teachers The team of teachers identifies the essential opportunities for IEP instruction and support throughout the school day and week, and a schedule is established accordingly. Walsh & Jones, 2004

54 Advantages of Collaborative Scheduling C
Special educator is present when needed most for instructional support. Instructional need dictates the cooperative teaching role, not the calendar or time of day. Most responsive to students’ needs and schedules. Ask the participants to discuss a “typical day” or “typical week” if this model was chosen. Walsh & Jones, 2004

55 Challenges of Collaborative Scheduling C
Requires the highest degree of planning and buy-in by a team of teachers Following the discussion of these three scheduling models, ask the participants if they have had experiences with other scheduling models that have been successful or unsuccessful. Walsh & Jones, 2004

56 Co-Teaching Scenarios
Part VII. Co-Teaching Scenarios Approximate time: 40 minutes These scenarios can be presented in two ways: One way is to simply present each slide, emphasizing each point. A second way is to present it as an optional small group activity, by following these suggestions: Divide the group into three small groups. Give each group the assignment of familiarizing themselves with the scenario, including what worked and what didn’t, and have each group report back to the large group. If you choose to use this as a small group activity, print two copies of Slides 105–117, one for the elementary group and one for the middle school group. Remind the groups that they will need to differentiate between the elementary and middle school classrooms as they study and present each specific scenario. Allow 5 minutes for small group work and 5–10 minutes for reporting back.

57 Activity Directions Each group will read and discuss their scenario.
Be prepared to report back to the group with a summary of the scenario, including: Comments about pros and cons Personal insight into why the example was a positive or negative experience for the co-teachers If you choose to explore the case studies as a small group activity, then leave these directions on the screen for the participants to see while they are working. If you choose the small group activity, then consider consolidating Slides 105–117 as a handout for group 1 and Slides as a handout for group 2.

58 Upper Elementary and Middle School Earth Science
This scenario should be treated as two separate ones: an elementary classroom and a middle school classroom. Share this information with the small groups that are discussing these two scenarios: Qualitative data was collected to evaluate the effectiveness of the co-teaching practices. Classroom observations ranged from one semester to 2 years. The co-teaching teams consisted of one general and one special educator. All teachers had teaching experience (except one seventh-grade teacher, who was a beginning teacher) and credentials in their fields. Fourth grade consisted of 25 students (5 with disabilities: LD, cognitively disabled, physical disability). Seventh grade consisted of 25 students (7 with disabilities: LD, hearing impaired). The observations were conducted during a hands on unit on ecosystems. The units were highly similar across both grades, except the depth and breadth of coverage was greater in the seventh-grade unit.

59 Working Relationships
Elementary team volunteered; middle school team was assigned. Both teams were upbeat and able to interject appropriately during the lesson and displayed mutual respect. Both teams indicated a genuine trust and respect for their partners. As you go through this slide, it is helpful to emphasize the positive components that point to an eventually successful co-teaching team. Mastropieri et al., 2005

60 Strengths as Motivators
Both teachers on both teams claimed ownership for all of the students who were enrolled. Teachers emphasized importance of enthusiastic teaching while maintaining effective behavior management. Make the following point about this slide: Clearly, this team is “sharing the chalk,” and “covering the court equally.” Mastropieri et al., 2005

61 Time Allocated for Co-Planning
Elementary team did not have time allocated for co-planning: Met before/after school and at lunch Because they enjoyed each other’s company, lack of scheduled co-planning time did not appear to be a barrier to effective instruction. Mentioned that it would have been easier if the administration had allowed them time for co-planning It is appropriate at this point, and engaging, to ask the participants for personal examples of the “trials and tribulations” and successes of co-planning time. Mastropieri et al., 2005

62 Time Allocated for Co-Planning (cont.)
Seventh-grade team had a common free period for planning during which time they could: Review where they were in the content Determine what needed to be covered and by when Develop optimal ways to present information and complete activities Be certain to emphasize the importance of the points on this slide as the small group is reporting back. Mastropieri et al., 2005

63 Appropriate Curriculum
Both teams used a hands-on, activity-based approach to instruction: Made content more concrete Lessened the language and literacy demands of tasks Be certain that the team reporting back includes the following: Both the elementary and middle school teams incorporated effective instructional strategies into their lessons. These strategies, such as hands-on and activity-based lessons, have become a hallmark of co-taught classrooms, incorporating the strengths and expertise of both teachers. Mastropieri et al., 2005

64 Appropriate Curriculum (cont.)
Activity-based instruction lends itself very well to co-teaching: Teachers can share more equitably in instruction. In fact, teachers appear to be more likely to share instruction in a hands-on approach. Be certain that the team reporting back makes the following point: It is important to note that both students with disabilities and students without disabilities benefited from this approach. Mastropieri et al., 2005

65 Effective Instructional Skills
Both teams used effective instructional skills: Framework of daily review, presentation of new information, guided and independent practice activities, and formative review Effective classroom management, including good behavior as a prerequisite for participation in activities, such reinforcers as positive comments, and tangibles Be certain that the team reporting back makes this point: Both of these teams were able to effectively incorporate instructional presentation and behavior management into a model that worked well for all types of students. Mastropieri et al., 2005

66 Disability-Specific Teaching Adaptations
Both teams planned for individual student performance within the unit and how to handle individual differences: Reduced language and literacy requirements Special educator worked with students who required adaptations. Be certain that the team reporting back makes the following point: The addition of the special educator into the classroom enhanced the individualization of all instruction and helped to meet the specific needs of students with disabilities. Mastropieri et al., 2005

67 Disability-Specific Teaching Adaptations (cont.)
Seventh-grade team used PowerPoint presentations for supplemental review. Special educator adapted tests by reducing amount of written language in questions. Be certain that the team reporting back emphasizes this point: It is important to keep in mind modifications and accommodations that are necessary for students with IEPs. In this case, the seventh-grade team adapted the amount of written language on tests that were taken by students with IEPs. Mastropieri et al., 2005

68 Expertise in the Content Area
In fourth grade, both teachers deferred to each other during instruction so all students would benefit: Teachers frequently exchanged roles as presenters. Be certain that the team reporting back emphasizes this point: Especially in the elementary classroom in these case studies, both teachers appeared to be comfortable as the person who was primarily responsible for instructional presentation. Mastropieri et al., 2005

69 Expertise in the Content Area (cont.)
In seventh grade, the division between the content and the adaptation experts was more pronounced: General educator appeared to have an advantage over the special educator with respect to content knowledge. Special educator viewed this as an advantage (i.e., giving him/her an opportunity to learn the curriculum). During lessons, special educator more frequently assumed the role of assisting individuals and small groups than the general educator. Be certain that the team reporting back emphasizes this point: Content knowledge becomes a more difficult issue after elementary school. It is easy for the team in middle schools and high schools to slip back into a model of a primary teacher and an “assistant.” Mastropieri et al., 2005

70 Middle School Social Studies
Summarize this scenario as follows: The co-teaching team consisted of a general and special educator. The classroom was an eighth-grade government and civics class. Observations were conducted during an entire academic year. Both teachers had several years of teaching experience and credentials in respective areas. The co-teaching team was mandated by the school administration. The classroom consisted of 30 students (8 with disabilities).

71 Co-Planning Both teachers had allocated planning time; however, this was also their individual planning time. One period per week was allocated for co-planning. Planned for: Curriculum issues (in general), scheduling for curriculum sequence, and types of assignments and activities Ways to divide the teaching responsibilities Be certain that the team reporting back emphasizes these points: Parent conferences and IEP meetings, among others, were also scheduled during the common planning time. Efforts to divide the teaching responsibilities began congenially. However, when time tensions began to emerge, the general educator and special educator continued to maintain ownership of both their students and their areas of instructional specialty. Mastropieri et al., 2005

72 Co-Planning (cont.) Lack of planning was an obstacle to co-teaching
Resulted in lessons that were too advanced for all students Left one of the team members feeling trapped in an unworkable situation As tensions mounted, teachers began to split the class into two small groups and moved them into separate rooms for many of the activities. At this point, ask for personal experiences of co-planning “gone bad.” Try to turn the discussion into a positive one, by asking for possible solutions to the co-planning struggles. Mastropieri et al., 2005

73 Teaching Styles Each teacher had a distinct style of instruction:
One teacher was very relaxed and casual; the other was more structured and formal. In the beginning, these styles seemed to complement each other. Students appeared to adapt to the differences in styles and expectations. As the year progressed, the extreme styles contributed to the deterioration of the team. Be certain that the team reporting back mentions the points on this slide. Ask the participants: What teaching styles might be more likely to conflict in this setting? How can these differences be addressed? Mastropieri et al., 2005

74 Behavior and Classroom Management
Little structure was in place in the beginning. No specific class behavior rules were posted. Teachers implied that schoolwide behavior policies were the expectations for the class. The loosely structured classroom behavior structure suited one teacher but not the other. This was a contributing factor to the eroding of the team—the final straw. Be certain that the team reporting back briefly discusses the points on this slide. Ask the participants for personal experiences and/or insights into classroom management options that can be implemented in a co-teaching setting. Mastropieri et al., 2005

75 Working with Families Summarize this scenario as follows:
The co-teaching team consisted of a general and special educator. The classroom was an eighth-grade government and civics class. Observations were conducted during an entire academic year. Both teachers had several years of teaching experience and credentials in respective areas. The co-teaching team was mandated by the school administration. The classroom consisted of 30 students (8 with disabilities).

76 Parents Rights in the Educational Decision-Making Process
Working with Parents Parents Rights in the Educational Decision-Making Process Parents should be notified and their permission obtained before identification, evaluation, and placement of child Parents may request an evaluation when they think child needs special education or related services Parents may request an independent evaluation at public expense when they disagree with the school evaluation Parent may request a reevaluation when they think their child’s placement is no longer appropriate Parents may request their child to be tested in his or her primary language Parents may participate in development of the an IEP or IFSP Parents may request a due process hearing to resolve differences Parents should be informed of child’s progress at least as often as parents of children without disabilities

77 Family Collaboration Two forces contributing to increased engagement of parents and family Increased parent advocacy Research on the impact of family involvement Over representation of minorities Home-school communication is a two-way street

78 Six Factors of Successful Partnerships
Communication Commitment Equality Skills Trust Respect

79 Family Adjustment: Five Categories of Needs of Families
Information exchange Consumer and advocacy information Home/community program implementation Counseling, therapy, and consultation Parent-coordinated service programs

80 Planned Conferences: Preparation
Review the student’s materials, grades, and work progress Meet with and learn the perspectives of other professionals who work with student Review the student’s folder, portfolio, and previous assessment information Obtain samples of student’s most recent work Make an outline of topics to discuss

81 Parent Conference Considerations
Welcome parents and make them feel comfortable Review the outline and ask parents for other items to discuss Begin and end with positives about the child Try not to use technical language that would intimidate or insult parent Communicate any concerns in straightforward and sensitive manner Solicit parent reactions and recommendations to address concerns Summarize any decisions or plan made at the end of the conference Set a target date for follow-up

82 Unplanned Conferences
Avoid temptation to resolve complex issues in an impromptu meeting Arrange a time to discuss parent’s concerns in a more appropriate setting

83 School-to-Home Communication
Beginning of year letter or bulletin “Good News” notes Student-written learning logs Weekly and monthly calendars Newsletters Phone calls Face-to-face conferences Websites Classroom web pages Parent interviews or surveys

Download ppt "Communicating and Collaborating with Other Professionals and Families"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google