Presentation on theme: "TEACHER-INTERN PARTNERSHIPS TEACHER-INTERN PARTNERSHIPS Co-Teaching as Transformative Practice in ECE Clinical Settings OCTEO Spring Conference Deborah."— Presentation transcript:
TEACHER-INTERN PARTNERSHIPS TEACHER-INTERN PARTNERSHIPS Co-Teaching as Transformative Practice in ECE Clinical Settings OCTEO Spring Conference Deborah J. Ranz-Smith -- Qiuping Cao -- Lynn Kline with Barb Trube and Pam Owens
Introduction In 2010, the Blue Ribbon Panel Report recommended clinical practice as the focus of teacher preparation. Simultaneously, Co-teaching, since the late nineties, was continuing to emerge as an intentional practice to advance students’ learning in all classrooms. 2010
CO-PLANNING CO-INSTRUCTIONCO-ASSESSMENT COLLABORATIVE PRACTICES EMERGED within the CO-TEACHING MODEL...
Questions emerged... What does co-teaching look like? What does it sound like within the Early Childhood classroom? How is it structured? Is it just for partnering with Special Educators and Instructional Assistants?
Intention of the Pilot Study Q: To what degree are Ohio’s pre-service candidates being invited into the co-teaching model— or are they not included? Q: IF included, how do mentor teachers accomplish this?
Co-Teaching Working Definition From the Teacher Quality Enhancement Center : Co-teaching is defined as “two or more teachers working together with groups of students, sharing the planning, organization, delivery, and assessment of instruction as well as the physical classroom space” Bacharach, Heck, & Dahlberg, 2010, p. 3
Strategies of Co-Teaching further defined... Bacharach, Heck, and Dahlberg (2010), Friend and Cook (2003), and Villa, Thousand, & Nevin (2008) One Teach, One Observe - One teacher has primary responsibility while the other gathers specific observational information on children or the teacher who instructs the children. One Teach, One Assist - One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other assists children with their work, monitors behaviors, or corrects assignments. Center/Station Teaching - The co-teaching pair divides the instructional content into parts - Each teacher instructs one of the groups, groups then rotate or spend a designated amount of time at each center/station - often an independent station will be used along with the teacher led stations. Parallel Teaching - Each teacher instructs half the children. The two teachers are addressing the same instructional material and presenting the material using the same teaching strategy. Supplemental Teaching - This strategy allows one teacher to work with children at their expected grade level, while the other teacher works with those children who need the information and/or materials retaught, extended or remediated Alternative (Differentiated) Teaching - Alternative teaching strategies provide two different approaches to teaching the same information. The learning outcome is the same for all children, however, the avenue for getting there is different. Team Teaching - Well planned, team taught lessons, exhibit an invisible flow of instruction with no prescribed division of authority. Using a team teaching strategy, both mentor teacher and teacher candidate or intern are actively involved in the lesson. From the children's perspectives, there is no clearly defined leader - as both individuals share instruction, are free to interject information, and available to assist children and answer questions.
CO-TEACHING RANGE OF BEHAVIORS AAABABCDEFGHIJ One Teach One Teach One Teach Center / Station Teach Parallel Teachin g Supple- mental Teaching Altern- ative Teaching Team Teach One Teach One Engage One Prepare One Tutor or Assess One Observe One Assist One Demo One Transi- tion One Facili- tate ONE TEACHER LEADS AS ONE SUPPORTS TEACHERS EACH ENGAGED IN SIMILAR ROLES SIMULTANEOUSLY TEACHERS EACH LEAD IN DIFFERENT ROLES
The Research Protocol for the Pilot Participants: Eighty-two P-3 teachers from rural, suburban, urban, public, private, federal programs and typical and developmental delayed inclusion programs. The respondents worked with eight campuses: four universities and four regional campuses Instrument: Qualtrics Survey: 34 items including Nine statements about co-teaching Nice open-ended prompts about co-teaching Four prompts related to transformative practices
The Findings & Discussion – 1 Co-Teaching Practices The following forms of co-teaching were practiced by over 50% of respondents One Teach, One Observe (68.5%) One Teach, One Assist (78%) Center/Station Teaching (73%) Supplemental Teaching (64.5%) Team Teaching (50%)
The Findings & Discussion – 2 Co-Teaching Practices The following forms of co-teaching were practiced by less than 50% of the respondents: One Teach, One Demonstrate (31%) Parallel Teaching (36%) Alternative (Differentiated) Teaching (43%)
The Findings & Discussions—3 Transformational Practices Forty-seven respondents (55%) indicated some transformational practices in teaching with their teacher candidates and professional interns Forty-five teachers indicated some form of co-teaching as transformational practices. Station/Center Teaching, Alternative teaching and team teaching were considered to be most transformational followed by “One Teach, One Observe”, “One Teach, One Assist”, and “Supplemental Teaching”.
The Findings & Discussions—4 Transformation in Teacher Candidates or Professional Interns A total of 23 participating teachers provided examples of transformation they perceived in a teacher candidate or intern under their mentorship. Examples include: Proving more opportunities [for students] to work in smaller groups on skill levels in reading. When we do this together, we are able to meet the needs of more students on a regular basis. Students that need more practice on a daily basis will receive it every day, and the typical and higher reading skilled students will not miss out on their time as well. We co-planned the lesson and developed what we would do. This allowed reflection as we planned, and the candidate could experience what I did as a mentor when planning lesson. We then reflected afterwards together. During math while using the alternative teaching approach, student teacher was able to focus on struggling learners, pinpoint the error and help correct students. Post-tests indicated growth and understanding of number sense. Student teacher did an excellent job of getting students to direct their own work and check it for errors and completion Through team teaching, the teacher candidate in my room is confident in planning and carrying out lessons she plans on her own with just a little guidance from me. One student teacher I had found research on the Internet and incorporated it into her teaching to help her with discipline since she felt this could be an area of improvement. This demonstrated to me that she was a self-motivated learner.
The Findings & Discussions—5 Transformation in Himself/Herself Mentor teachers (21) also indicated their own transformation as a result of working with teacher candidates or interns in a co-teaching arrangement. Selective examples include: I have realized and begun to be able to give up some power in the classroom. By doing this with the student teacher, I think I may be better able to let my students make more of their own decisions, too. While hosting teacher candidates in my room, I have embraced new ideas and learned how to sue technology as I work with students and curriculum. Team teaching—seeing how other people approach instruction. I believe mentoring students helps me to reflect on my own teaching. “One teach, one observe” has really helped me look at my classroom on both a larger and smaller scale. I can brainstorm and relate with the student who needs more practice paying attention, and what that child needs to do, or how they can be more readily involved in their own learning. By stepping back from the “front line” I am able to really look, listen, and get to know my students on a deeper level which in tern enables my relationship to grow.
The Findings & Discussions—6 Transformational for Student Learning Those who responded seemed to point out the impact of co-teaching on student learning. One summed this up by stating: “shared classroom = better learning for all students”
The Findings & Discussions—7 Closer Relationship Mentor teachers suggest that with co-teaching, teacher candidates are able to form closer relationship with their mentor teachers because they stay longer in the classroom instead of just completing their college assignments. Longer time and close relationships also lead to teacher candidates being involved in various areas of teaching Once close relationships are established, the nature of teaching and learning for all involved transforms into mutual support, collaboration, and trust This close relationship becomes reciprocal and teacher candidates develop ownership of the classroom practice and are more empowered to take criticism and suggestions from mentor teachers for improvement of student learning.
Limitations of the Study 1)Small sample size 82 participants, not all responded to all items (mean 54; mode 70) 2)Redesign tool to enable participants to select more than one strategy that they believe to be transformative practice. Perhaps a Q mythology that would force respondents to rank responses. 3)A few participants noted they would have chosen several options of co-teaching strategies if they had the option. 4)Multiple choice items did not include the options of One teach, one prepare or one teach, one tutor or assist; however, participants included these strategies in their comments.
. Strengths of the Research Findings – 1 st Co-teaching in its many forms has the potential to transform! Learning Opportunities For All Children: Careful observation affords educators the time and prospective to design and delivers learning opportunities that meet the needs of all learners.
Strengths of the Research Findings – 2 nd Co-teaching in its many forms has the potential to transform! Reexamination of Instructional Practice Of Novice And Veteran Teachers: Co-teaching fosters critical self-reflection to revise assumptions, ways of interpreting the experience and perspectives.
Strengths of the Research Findings – 3 rd Co-teaching in its many forms has the potential to transform! University- School Partnership: It empowers the mentor teacher to have an active role in the partnership. Beyond completing university requirements, the mentor’s professional decisions guide the novice through practices that are meaningful to the specific teaching pair.
Possibilities for Future Research – 1 st This research looks at the synergistic relationship between the veteran mentor teacher and the pre- service candidate teacher, but what about the impact on student learning? We often look at the academic support these partnerships provide for individual students but, what about the emotional support provided?
Possibilities for Future Research – 2nd When co-teaching strategies are used in an inclusion setting, can they foster the children’s ability in organizing tasks, time management, flexibility, and goal-directed persistence?
Possibilities for Future Research – 3 rd The notion of distributed leadership and negotiation of who leads and who follows was not explored in this study. How does this notion impact teaching and learning in co-teaching contexts? Does the flexibility of roles enhance the novice or mentor’s sense of teacher efficacy?
REFERENCES Austin, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs about co-teaching. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 245-255. Bacharach, N., Heck, T., & Dahlberg, K. (2010). Changing the face of student teaching through coteaching. Action in Teacher Education, 32(1), 3-14. Beninghof, A. M. (2012). Co-teaching that works: Structures and strategies for maximizing student learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning (2 nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Diana, T. J. (2014). Co-teaching: Enhancing the student teaching experience. 76-80 Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2003) Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Friend, M., Reising, M. & Cook, L.,( 1993). Co-teaching: An overview of the past, a glimpse at the present, and considerations for the future. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 37(4), 1 – 6. DOI: 10.1080/1045988X.1993.9944611 Marilyn Friend, Monica Reising & Lynne Cook, 16 Jul 2010. Gargiulo, R. M. & Metcalf, D. J. (2010). Teaching in today’s inclusive classrooms: A universal design for learning approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Lichtman, M. (2010). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers. Mahoney, M. (1997). Small victories in an inclusive classroom. Educational Leadership, 54(7), 59-62. Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 28(2), 100-110. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2010). Transforming teacher education through clinical practice: A national strategy to prepare effective teachers. Report to the Blue Ribbon Panel on clinical preparation and partnerships for improved student learning. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from http://www.ncate.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zzeiB1OoqPk%3D&tabid=715 http://www.ncate.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zzeiB1OoqPk%3D&tabid=715
References, continued... Nevin, A. I., Thousand, J. S., & Villa, R. A. (2009). Collaborative teaching for teacher educators: What does the research say? Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 569-574. Ostrosky, M., & Sandall, S. (2001). Teaching strategies: What to do to support young children’s development. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Parke, B. N. (2003). Discovering programs for talent development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Perkins, D. N. (2014). Future wise: Educating our children for a changing world. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Pugach, M. C., & Winn, J. A. (2011). Research on co-teaching and teaming: An untapped resource for induction. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1), 36-46. Potts, E. A., & Howa, L. A. (2011). How to co-teach: A guide for general and special educators. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Pub. Co. Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392-416. Strieker, T, Shaheen, M., Hubbard, D, Digiovanni, L, & Lim, W. (2014). Transforming clinical practice in teacher educaton through pre-service co-teaching and coaching. The Rennaisance Group 2(2) 39-62. Retrieved from www.academia.edu. Van Hoorn, J. L., Nourot, P. M., & Alward, K. R. (2015). Play at the center of the curriculum. Boston, MA. Pearson. Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., & Nevin, A. I. (2008). A guide to co-teaching: Practical tips for facilitating student learning (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.