Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Problem  Co-teachers often receive little to no professional development. Solution The Designing Quality Education Program offers intensive ongoing.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Problem  Co-teachers often receive little to no professional development. Solution The Designing Quality Education Program offers intensive ongoing."— Presentation transcript:

1

2

3 Problem  Co-teachers often receive little to no professional development. Solution The Designing Quality Education Program offers intensive ongoing professional development based on best practices.

4  Definitions  Acronym Glossary  Reauthorization of Individuals With Disabilities Act and No Child Left Behind Act  The Need for Inclusive Education  How Effective is Inclusive Education?  Challenges with Co-teaching  The Designing Quality Inclusive Education Program  Grant Proposal

5  IDEA- Individuals with Disabilities Education Act  ICT- Integrated Co-teaching  IEP- Individualized Education Plan  LRE- Least Restrictive Environment  NCLB- No Child Left Behind  PD- Professional Development  DQIE- Designing Quality Inclusive Education

6 Co-teaching is a service delivery option. It is a means through which students with IEPs receive some or all of their specialized instruction and related services in the context of the general education classroom.  Two or more professionals with equivalent licensure or status are co-teachers, one who is a general educator and one who is a special educator or specialist.  Both professionals participate fully, although differently, in the instructional process. General educators maintain primary responsibility for the content of the instruction; special educators hold primary responsibility for facilitating the learning process. Instruction employs evidence-based practices and accountable differentiation. (Friend 2008)

7  Now interest in co-teaching has intensified considerably. One key factor contributing to this interest is the NCLB Act of 2001, including the requirements that all students, including those with disabilities, access the general curriculum; be taught by highly qualified teachers; and be included in professionals’ accountability for achievement outcomes. Chamberlain, Cook, Friend & Shamberger 2010

8

9 A second key factor is the renewed increased emphasis on educating students in the least restrictive environment embodied in the most recent reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act of Chamberlain, Cook, Friend & Shamberger 2010

10 The (NCLB) of 2001and the reauthorization of the IDEA of 2004 set two requirements that build a presumption of teacher and other professional collaboration: (a) that students with disabilities access the general curriculum and (b) that they do so in the LRE increasingly determined to be the general education classroom.

11  “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

12  Students in co-taught classrooms performed significantly better on state assessments as compared with students in similar general education classrooms without co-teaching.  Students with disabilities enjoyed school more, learned more, and felt better about themselves when they received special education services in a co-taught general education classroom as compared with a self-contained special education setting Walsh 2012

13  For general education students, inclusion supports an increased awareness and sensitivity for students with disabilities Winter 2007

14  Reduction of student teacher ratio  Greater support for all students  Teachers offer professional support to one another  Children with exceptionalities have access to general education curriculum  Reduces stigma often associated with “pull- out” model  Promotes positive self-esteem  Helps build stronger peer relations  Enhances academic performance

15 Sit back and watch N-MY

16  Dysfunctional Partnerships/ lack of effective collaboration  Unclear roles and responsibilities  Differences in teaching philosophies/ lack of flexibility  Lack of mutual professional respect (regarding teaching partner as a subordinate teacher)  Coordinating schedules to plan together

17

18

19

20  Effective Inclusion programs for students with disabilities require a culture of collaboration as both special education and general education teachers face a myriad of issues as they implement quality inclusion. Carpenter, Dyal & Shumack  Effective teamwork…will enhance the development of the child with special needs. On the other hand lack of teaming results in insufficient results for key players’ and perhaps even harmful service delivery. Tannock 2009

21  What is clear is the strong need for a continued dialogue concerning the theory of collaboration for school professionals, its translation into appropriate practices and its impact on outcomes for students with disabilities. Cook & Friend 2010  Much of the current teaching workforce has little co-teaching preparation for co-teaching roles. The implication is that high-quality professional development related to co-teaching is urgently needed Chamberlain, Cook, Friend & Shamberger 2010  Effective professional development must be sustained, intensive and collaborative. Walsh 2012

22  Personal compatibility is consistently reported as a key factor in the success of a co-teacher (Pugach & Winn 2011)  Lack of collaborative planning time led to increased conflicts (Tannock 2009)  Teachers report that sustained and intensive professional development has a greater effect on changing practice than shorter professional development (Opfer & Pedder)

23  Instructional leaders play a vital role in the success of the consultative model and must provide resources and support for this approach to work. They should support the consultative process with effective classroom appraisal and resources to develop effective practices in the classroom. Dyal, Carpenter & Shumack 2012

24 “I don’t think I’d like to work in this type of program again. She felt like a visitor in my classroom, and we never connected personally. We struggled because of differences in roles, teaching and communication styles, and philosophy. The students also were confused. They felt that I was the teacher and she was my aide. I felt like she was always watching me and judging me. We didn’t know how to do it and received little support from our principal.” Salend, Gordon, & Lopez-Vona, 2008

25 DQIE is a professional development program which addresses the needs of co-teachers and students in inclusive classrooms

26  Teachers receive continuous professional development: coaching and training followed by classroom observations and relative feed back  Individualized professional development (differentiation strategies to meet the needs of their individual students)  Administration are informed on how to best support co-teachers and what to look for when they observe the teachers in their classrooms

27

28

29

30 Designing Quality Inclusive Education Program 25,000 Substitute Teachers9,000 Materials900 Breakfast/Lunch800


Download ppt "Problem  Co-teachers often receive little to no professional development. Solution The Designing Quality Education Program offers intensive ongoing."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google