Access center webinar co teaching september 14 2006
Download
1 / 59

Access Center Webinar: Co-Teaching September 14, 2006 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Access Center Webinar: Co-Teaching September 14, 2006 Stacia Rush, Ph.D. Amy Klekotka, Ph.D. Defining Co-Teaching

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha

Download Presentation

Access Center Webinar: Co-Teaching September 14, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Access Center Webinar:Co-TeachingSeptember 14, 2006

Stacia Rush, Ph.D.

Amy Klekotka, Ph.D.


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 (Cook and Friend, 1995, pg 1)


Three Major Models

  • Consultant model

  • Coaching Model

  • Collaborative (or Teaming) Model


Most Common Approaches

  • One Teaching, One Drifting

  • Parallel Teaching

  • Station Teaching

  • Alternative Teaching

  • Team Teaching


One Teaching, One Drifting

  • One teacher plans and instructs, one teacher provides adaptations and other support as needed

  • Requires very little joint planning

  • Should be used sparingly

    • Can result in one teacher, most often the general educator taking the lead role the majority of the time

    • Can also be distracting to students, who may also become dependent on drifting teacher


Parallel Teaching

  • Teachers share responsibility for planning and instruction

  • Class is split into heterogeneous groups and each teacher instructs half on the same material

  • Content covered is the same, but methods of delivery may differ

  • Both teachers need to be proficient in the content being taught


Station Teaching

  • Teachers divide the responsibility of planning and instruction

  • Students rotated on pre-determined schedule through stations

  • Teachers repeat instruction to each group that comes through--though delivery may vary according to student needs

  • Approach can be used even if teachers have very different pedagogical approaches

  • Each teacher instructs every student


Alternative Teaching

  • Teachers divide responsibility for planning and instruction

  • The majority of students remain in large group setting, while some students work in a small group for pre-teaching, enrichment, re-teaching or other individualized instruction

  • Allows for highly individualized instruction to be offered

  • Teachers should be careful that the same students are not always pulled aside


Team Teaching

  • Teachers share responsibility for planning and instruction

  • Teachers work as a team to introduce new content, work on developing skills, clarify information, and facilitate learning and classroom management

  • This requires the most mutual trust and respect between teachers, and that they are able to mesh their teaching styles


Sounds good…now what?

Getting co-teaching started at the building and classroom levels


Action Steps

  • Administrators should provide information, encourage proactive preparation from teachers

  • Assess level of collaboration currently in place

  • Pre-plan

  • Implement slowly…baby steps!


Planning Strategies for Effective Co-Teaching Efforts


Pre-Planning

  • 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


2 stages in classroomco-planning

  • Getting to know each other

  • Weekly co-planning


Getting to know each other

  • Ease into working with one another

  • Deal with the “little” things first

  • These typically become the deal-breakers down the road and preventing these road blocks early can make your lives easier


Getting to know each other

  • Important to spend time talking and getting better acquainted with each other’s skills, interests, and educational philosophies

  • Semi structured preliminary discussion can facilitate this process

  • Discuss current classroom routines and rules


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


Collaborative Scheduling

  • Collaborative Scheduling A

  • Collaborative Scheduling B

  • Collaborative Scheduling C


Collaborative Scheduling A

  • Special educator divides teaching time between two different classes in the same day


Advantages

  • 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


Challenges

  • 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 education partner

  • Possibility for disruption to the class routine exists


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


Advantages

  • Similar to 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


Challenges

  • Similar to Scheduling –A

  • 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


Challenges (cont’d)

  • Requires ability by general educator to implement IEP requirements in the absence of the special educator

  • Special educator burn-out is an issue, because of the greater demand of knowledge of general ed. curriculum

  • Requires supervisory judgment regarding which teachers can effectively plan and implement this model


Collaborative Scheduling C

  • The special educator serves as a resource to the interdisciplinary team

  • His/her schedule is established weekly on the basis on instructional activities

  • Requires the greatest amount of flexibility and planning by an interdisciplinary team of teachers


Advantages

  • 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 student needs and schedules


Challenges

  • Requires the highest degree of planning and buy-in by a team of teachers


How Does Co-Teaching Look In the Classroom?


Three stages of co-teaching relationships

  • Beginning stage

  • Compromising stage

  • Collaborative stage


3 stages of co-teaching as they apply to:

  • Physical Arrangement

  • Familiarity with the Curriculum

  • Curriculum Goals and Modifications

  • Instructional Presentation

  • Classroom Management

  • Assessment


Physical Arrangement


Physical Arrangement:Beginning Stage

  • Impression of separateness

    • Students with disabilities vs. general ed students

  • Little ownership of materials or space by special educator

  • Delegated spaces which are rarely abandoned


Physical Arrangement:Beginning Stage(cont’d)

  • Invisible walls

  • A classroom within a classroom


Physical Arrangement:Compromising Stage

  • More movement and shared space

  • Sharing of materials

  • Territoriality becomes less evident

  • Special ed teacher moves more freely around the classroom, but rarely takes center stage


Physical Arrangement:Collaboration Stage

  • Seating arrangements intentionally interspersed

  • All students participate in cooperative grouping assignments

  • Teachers are more fluid in an unplanned and natural way


Physical Arrangement:Collaboration Stage(cont’d)

  • Both teachers control space – like an effective doubles team in tennis – the classroom is always “covered”

  • Space is truly jointly owned


Familiarity with the Curriculum


Familiarity with the Curriculum:Beginning Stage

  • Special educator may be unfamiliar with content or methodology used by the general education teacher

  • General ed teacher may have limited understanding of modifying the curriculum and making appropriate accommodations

  • Creates a lack of confidence in both teachers


Familiarity with the Curriculum:CompromisingCollaborative Stages

  • Special educator acquires a knowledge of the scope and sequence and develops a solid understanding of the content of the curriculum

  • Special educator gains confidence to make suggestions for modifications and accommodations


Familiarity with the Curriculum:CompromisingCollaborative Stages

  • General ed teacher becomes more willing to modify the curriculum and there is increased sharing in planning and teaching

  • Both teachers appreciate the specific curriculum competencies that they bring to the content area


Curriculum Goals and Modifications


Curriculum Goals & Modifications:Beginning Stage

  • Programs are driven by textbooks and standards, and goals tend to be “test-driven”

  • Modifications and accommodations are generally restricted to those identified in the IEP/ little interaction regarding modifications to the curriculum

  • Special educator’s role is seen as “helper”


Curriculum Goals & Modifications:Compromising Stage

  • General educator may view modifications as “giving up” or “watering down” the curriculum


Curriculum Goals & Modifications:Collaborative Stage

  • Both teachers begin to differentiate concepts that all students must know from concepts that most students should know

  • Modifications of content, activities, homework assignments, and tests become the norm for students who require them


Instructional Presentation


Instructional Presentation:Beginning Stage

  • Teachers often present separate lessons

  • One teacher is “boss,” one is “helper”


Instructional Presentation:Compromising Stage

  • Both teachers direct some of the activities in the classroom

  • Special educator offers mini-lessons or clarifies strategies students may use


Instructional Presentation:Collaborative Stage

  • Both teachers participate in the presentation of the lesson, provide instruction, and structure the learning activities

  • The “chalk” passes freely

  • Students address questions and discuss concerns with both teachers


Classroom Management


Classroom Management:Beginning Stage

  • Special educator tends to assume the role of “behavior manager”


Classroom Management:Compromising Stage

  • More communication and mutual development of rules

  • Some discussion for individual behavior management plans


Classroom Management:Collaborative Stage

  • Both teachers are involved in developing a classroom management system that benefits all students

  • Common to observe individual behavior plans, use of contracts, tangible rewards, and reinforcers

  • Development of community-building and relationship-building activities as a way to enhance classroom management


Assessment


Assessment

  • With the current emphasis on high-stakes tests, co-teaching provides an effective way to strengthen the instruction-assessment link

    • Discuss grading before it becomes an issue

    • Consider a variety of assessment options

    • Offer menus of assignments

    • Share the grading load, but be sure your grading styles align


Assessment:Beginning Stage

  • Often 2 separate grading systems, separately maintained by the 2 teachers

  • May be 1 system, exclusively managed by the general educator

  • Measures tend to be objective in nature, only to measure student’s knowledge of content


Assessment:Compromising Stage

  • 2 teachers begin to explore alternate assessment ideas

  • Discussions regarding how to effectively capture students’ progress, not just knowledge of content


Assessment:Collaborative Stage

  • Both teachers appreciate the need for a variety of options when assessing students’ progress


Thank you!We’ll have time for questions now, and please feel free to contact us in the future.Stacy: srush@air.orgAmy: aklekotka@air.org


ad
  • Login