MSU, Mankato Co-teaching

1. MSU, MankatoCo-teaching February 8, 2011

2. Co-Teaching – General Definition • When 2 or more teachers deliver substantive instruction to a diverse group of students in a single classroom. May be general ed. + special ed. OR interdisciplinary content OR work with specialists • They address diverse and specific needs, including individualized instruction in general education settings.

3. Co-Teaching – MSU Student Teaching Definition • When 1 Cooperating Teacher + 1 Teacher Candidate deliver substantive instruction to a diverse group of students in a single classroom. • They address diverse and specific needs, including individualized instruction in various education settings.

4. Co-teachers.. • Jointly decide how to best offer instruction – engage in substantive co-planning. • Consider The Adults, The Students, & The Curriculum Content as they co-plan. • Use a range of approaches/models. • Collaborate for best results. • Have strong administrative support. • Discuss logistical issues to improve teaching and learning.

5. Overview of MSU Program • Why are we using the Co-teaching Model?

6. Research & Experience Support • Student teaching hasn’t changed much in 80 years! • Teacher to K-12 Student ratio • Increased instructional options  student achievement • Teacher professional development • MSU Student mentoring

7. Past co-teaching research data • Enhanced instructional options available for diverse K-12 student learning • Increased teacher and Univ. student reflection on teaching and results • St. Cloud State TQE results = K-6 reading & math gains as compared to teacher only or traditional student teacher model AND increased teaching skills gained (Teacher & Univ. Student)

8. So – what has happened? • Cooperating Teacher & MSU Teacher Candidate trainings • 45 co-teaching pairs in 5 PDS districts – Spring ‘10; 55 pairs in 7 PDS districts – Fall ’10; 100 pairs in Spring ‘11 • TOSA & university supervisor observations

9. Research data gathered • Written survey – beginning, middle, and end of semester: Cooperating Teachers & Teacher Candidates • Interview/Focus Group Questions – from Teacher Candidates & Cooperating Teachers. Gathered via TOSAs/Supervisors & or email • Observational information – from TOSAs/Supervisors • Co-teaching planning/teaching log • Final Student Teaching Evaluation form

10. MSU Research results, to date – Survey – values: education & social student improvement w/co-teaching

11. Survey – Planning: co-teachers Need to jointly plan & evaluate for students

12. Survey – Teaming: vary our roles & sharing of workload w/students

13. Survey – Communication: discuss & agree on classroom & teaching aspects

14. Focus Group Questions • Values – CT: “This model is excellent for student teaching. It allows the student teacher to get involved immediately – yet not so intensive so they feel “overwhelmed.” • TC: “Co-teaching is beneficial for the students, because if I ever forget to mention anything, or if the students need an additional example, or a different way to go about something my cooperating teacher jumps right in and offers up other examples, or a different way to go about something or visa versa if he is teaching (then we end up team teaching!) I also have learned a lot by co-teaching and getting someone else’s perspective. Two heads is truly better than one!” 

15. Focus group questions • Planning – CT: “I love having a new set of eyes on my curriculum and the students will benefit from different types of lesson plans. There are so many different ways to use technology while teaching, and I love learning these things.” • TC: “We plan as a grade level team, so we usually go over the week in general with the team, then again just the two of us to talk more specifically how each lesson will look in our room as we apply the co-teaching model.. It’s been very successful, largely due to the effort and work ethic my CT and I have. We are always willing to learn something new and go above and beyond the curriculum if it’s best for the students.”

16. Focus group questions • Teaming – CT: “It’s a good model. I think students learn more. In the comments that students wrote about it, they said it was nice to have two different perspectives. They also said that the teachers seemed happier because they had a “buddy” in the room. I think both are true and both were helpful to students.” • TC: “In my experience I think co-teaching can be very beneficial to both the teaching pair and their students. It gives both the teachers a chance to share their knowledge and experiences with the students and each other. I have learned a lot from both my teachers and their years of experience in the classroom. I think they have also gained new ideas from myself.”

17. Focus group questions • Communication – CT: “The easiest has been the being able to flow from one teacher to another, to be able to change an activity that is not going well, and incorporate the other teacher seamlessly in the change. We communicate really well together and so, co-teaching has been pretty easy all together.” • TC: “One of my strengths is communication. I would rather people know too much than too little. I feel as though I tell Stephanie everything that happens within the day, and I know she enjoys that, but sometimes I think to myself if she really needed to know it all. Communication with parents has been great this semester. I feel that if I communicate with parents, they will know that I truly care about their child and that we are on the same page.”

18. What’s to Come? • Continual increase of co-teaching pairs across all PDS sites + Aldine, TX • Continued inclusion of co-teaching in curricula and experiences in all teacher preparation programs • Continued research with current methods + new data gathering on K-12 student engagement and achievement in co-taught and traditional student teaching models