Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Principles of Effective Collaboration Success Strategies in the Inclusive Classroom Module 2

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Effective Collaboration Effective collaborative is a professional partnership between two or more educators that erases traditional boundaries and allows them to make informed decisions when designing, communicating, and monitoring effective instruction through reflective teaching. – Whitten & Hoekstra, 2002

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Why collaborate? Collaboration:  Increases instructional options  Increases grouping flexibility in order to provide student with individualized instruction and diverse learning experiences  Reduces stigma for children  Increases professional support  Meets the mandates of IDEA: Least Restrictive Environment

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Four Principles that Promote Effective Collaboration 1.Respect of Knowledge/Skill 2.Established Communication System 3.Common Understanding of the Classroom Environment 4.Co-Accountability

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education 1. Respect of Knowledge/Skill  Recognition that each educator brings a set of knowledge and skills  Both educators take an active role in supporting student learning  Mutual trust How is this illustrated? What does it look like?

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education 2. Established Communication System  Designated time to discuss student learning goals, accommodations, and instructional tools and strategies  Communication about teacher roles and responsibilities  Interpersonal awareness and comfort with discussing the professional relationship What examples of an effective communication system have you seen in action?  Listening to understand the perspectives of your professional partner…

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education 3. Common Understanding of the Classroom Environment  Shared understanding about classroom management, grading, the physical arrangement, familiarity with the curriculum, and implementing accommodations  Mutual ownership and expectations for student learning  High acceptance for all students Describe an instance when a common understanding of the classroom environment was not established?

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education 4. Co-Accountability  Shared sense of responsibility to ensure access, involvement, and progress in the general education curriculum  Joint implementation of accommodations  Co-planning, co-preparation, co-evaluation Classroom Scenario… How would a team demonstrating co-accountability respond to this situation? How would their response differ from a team that does not practice co-accountability?

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Typical Role of the Special Educator  Learning strategist for all students  Motivational techniques  Curriculum adaptations  Knowledge IEP’s and student disabilities

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Typical Role of the General Educator  Content knowledge  District and state curriculum Indicators and objectives Pacing  Content development  Classroom management for a standard class size

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Typical Role of Paraprofessionals  Check the students’ progress  Provide individual or small-group tutorial assistance  Assist the classroom teacher  Report back to the special education teacher

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Venn Diagram Activity  Role of special educator  Role of general educator  Where the roles overlap

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Consultation Model  Students are grouped heterogeneously.  General Educator presents instruction.  Special Educator adapts instructional materials as needed according to student’s needs. Other services include assessment, observation, and planning meetings.  Special Educators and General Educators make time to discuss students’ needs and services.

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Consultation Model  Strengths  Challenges

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Collaborative Teaching  Students are grouped heterogeneously.  General Educator and Special Educator collaborate in the same classroom setting. Collaborative Teaching Models  One Teaching, One Assisting  Station Teaching  Parallel Teaching  Alternative Teaching  Team Teaching

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education One Teaching, One Assisting  Both educators are present with one taking a clear lead in the classroom while other observes and assists students. Click the icon to view the video

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education One Teaching, One Assisting Strengths  Limited teacher planning  Provides basic support to students with diverse needs Challenges  The “assist” teacher may feel like a glorified teacher’s assistant  Students may question the “assist” teacher’s authority Consider having the general educator and special educator alternate roles between support teacher and lead teacher.

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Station Teaching  Teachers divide instructional content into several segments and present the content in separate stations around the classroom.  With two stations, the General Educator and Special Educator each teach their half of the content and then switch groups. Alternatively, both teachers may move between groups in order to provide support.  If students are able to work independently with content, a third station may be established. Click the icon to view the video

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Station Teaching Strengths  General Educator and Special Educator maintain equal status  Co planning allows for both the General Educator and the Special Educator to provide input in their area of expertise Challenges  This approach requires significant pre-planning in order to divide up the content  The content in Station Teaching lessons cannot be dependent on the order in which content is being presented due to the student rotation

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Parallel Teaching  General Educator and Special Educator plan instruction jointly, but each delivers instruction to a heterogeneous group consisting of approximately half the class. Click the icon to view the video

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Parallel Teaching Strengths  Lowers student to teacher ratio  Allows for increased student interaction and/or student to student interaction  Allows the teacher to monitor individual student progress and understanding more closely Challenges  General Educator and Special Educator need to coordinate teaching so that students receive essentially the same instruction within the same amount of time  Noise levels may be high

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Alternative Teaching  One teacher works with a small group while the other teacher interacts with the larger group.  Small groups can be pulled for pre-teaching, re-teaching, enrichment, interest groups, special projects, make-up work or assessment groups. Click the icon to view the video

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Alternative Teaching Strengths  All students, including students with disabilities, benefit from small group instruction.  If the General Educator and Special Educator alternate roles, equal status is maintained. Challenges  Be careful to pull small learning groups that span various purposes. The small learning groups should not always be your Students with Special Needs. Consider having the general educator and special educator alternate roles between support teacher and lead teacher.

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Team Teaching  Both the General Educator and the Special Educator share the instruction of students.  One teacher may lead discussion while the other models or demonstrates.  Team teaching affords the ability to model quality team and interpersonal interactions. Click the icon to view the video

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Team Teaching Strengths  Allows both teachers to blend their teachings styles and expertise Challenges  Requires more planning  Requires high levels of trust and commitment

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education How do teachers decide which model to implement?  Lesson objectives…

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education “Much like the effective doubles team in tennis, when one teacher moves to the left of the room, the other moves more to the middle of the room so that the classroom is always effectively covered.” – “Understanding Co -Teaching Components”, CEC, 2001

Johns Hopkins University Center for Technology in Education Additional Resources on Co-Teaching  Common Co-Teaching Issues. Retrieved from  Co-Teaching. Retrieved from  Gately, Susan and Frank Gately. (March/April2001) Understanding Coteaching Components. The Council for Exceptional Children. Retrieved from RAPR2001_TEC_Article6.pdf RAPR2001_TEC_Article6.pdf