Transcript Together We`re Better: Collaborative Teaming - CTE

Together We’re Better:
Collaborative Teaming
2009 Inclusion
Facilitator Network





Identify three approaches to collaborative teaming
Engage in goal setting with your teaching partner
Name 5 grouping structures associated with coteaching
Self-assess the status of your collaborative
relationship
Develop a plan for enhancing your co-teaching
relationship
Coming together is a beginning.
Keeping together is progress.
Working together is success.
-Henry Ford
Change is:
◦ Risky
◦ Scary
◦ Anxiety provoking
But it can also
be:
◦ Rewarding
◦ Fun
◦ Well worth the
effort
What is Collaboration?
•Shared responsibility
•Reciprocity of ideas
•Interactive communication
•Problem-solving
•Conflict resolution
 Deliberate
 Structured
 Systematic
 Ongoing
Steele, Bell, & George, 2005
Some possibilities:
• Little understanding of curriculum,
instruction, and assessment between
general and special educators
• Collaboration does not occur without a
student-driven reason and a deliberate
structure with resources
General educators begin with the
curriculum first and use assessment to
determine what was learned
 Special educators begin with assessment
first and design instruction to repair gaps in
learning
 No wonder we are talking different
languages

Steele, Bell, & George, 2005



Consultation
Coaching
Co-teaching
List circumstances
where a Consultation
and Coaching
approach may be
more appropriate than
a Co-teaching model





Collaboration 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
Murawski & Dieker, 2004; Dieker, 2002
What is Co-teaching?
Both teachers take part in
1. planning
2. teaching
3. evaluating students ’ performance
Co-Teaching is two or more professionals
delivering substantive instruction to a diverse
or blended group of students in a single space.
Friend & Cook, (1995). Co-Teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on
Exceptional Children
Establishing a co-teaching
relationship



Ease into working with one another
Deal with the “little” things first
These can become the
deal-breakers down the road, and preventing these
road blocks early
can make life easier
Time to
Sharing Hopes, Attitudes, Responsibilities, and
Expectations
1. My hopes for this co-teaching relationship are:
2. My attitude/philosophy regarding teaching
students with disabilities in a general
education classroom is:
3. I would like to have the following
responsibilities in a co-taught classroom:
4. I would like my co-teacher to have the
following responsibilities:

Consider completing a teaching style inventory
◦ Compare how each of you prefers to structure assignments,
lessons,
classroom schedule, etc.

Online
◦
◦
◦
◦
http://www.longleaf.net/teachingstyle.html
Free
Take and score it immediately
Useful tool for dialogue about instructional philosophy and
style
Planning for Instruction
Finding time to plan
Co-teaching teams should have a
minimum of one planning period
(45–60 minutes) per week
 Experienced teams should spend
10 minutes to plan each lesson

Dieker, 2001



Make the weekly planning time
sacred and non-negotiable
Each teacher should review
content in advance of meeting
Maximize the time: stay focused

Guide the session with the following
fundamental questions:
◦ What are the content goals?
◦ Who are the learners and what are their unique
needs?
◦ How can we teach most effectively?



Establish timelines and priorities
Assign preparation tasks to both individuals equitably
◦ Lesson materials
◦ Student accommodations/modifications
Determine how plans will be shared with paraeducators
or other support staff as needed
Adapted from Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
 Supportive Teaching
 Parallel Teaching
 Complementary Teaching
 Station Teaching
 Team Teaching
Benefits
 Extra attention for kids
 Requires less preparation
 Good place to start, esp. if
one teacher is learning
curriculum
Drawbacks
 Doesn’t maximize
professional skills of both
teachers
 “Support” person may feel
less valued
 Research doesn’t support
effectiveness
Benefits
 More opportunities for
interaction and practice
 Can differentiate
presentation
 Both teachers actively
involved
Drawbacks
 Can be noisy
 Both teachers must be
comfortable with content
 Kids may have “unequal”
experiences
 Requires planning for
pacing
Benefits
 Smaller groups – more
interaction and practice
 Both teachers actively
teaching
 Differentiation of
instruction
 Allows for re-teaching,
enrichment, etc.
Drawbacks
 Can be noisy
 Can lead to
“resegregation” by ability
 Requires careful planning
of groupings, pacing, etc.
Benefits
 Opportunities for more
interaction, hands-on
activities
 Movement, variety,
application promote
learning and retention
 Can create more, smaller
groups by adding
“independent” station
Drawbacks
 Can be noisy/busy
 Teachers can focus on a
smaller piece of content
 Groups need to be
designed carefully
 Activities needed to be
planned for pacing, etc.
Benefits
 Kids benefit from
“content” and “strategy”
expertise
 Teachers clarify, model,
etc.
 Both teachers actively
involved
Drawbacks
 Requires extensive
planning and trust
 Doesn’t provide smaller
group interaction
It depends!





For example –
Supportive teaching as a first step
Parallel teaching to practice a new skill
Complementary teaching for enrichment
Stations for end-of-unit review
Team teaching for start of lesson then move to
stations
Work Smarter Not Harder: A tip from the classroom
•General education gives/emails plans in advance
•Collaborative planning time is focused on differentiation and
discussing individual student modifications as needed
•Special educator prepares modifications as needed
 Beginning
 Compromising
 Collaborative
Gately, 2005
Beginning
Familiarity w/
Curriculum
Curric Goals &
Modifications
Instructional
Presentation
-SE unfamiliar with
content/methodology
-Modifications and
accommodations are
generally restricted to those
identified in the IEP; little
interaction regarding
modifications to the
curriculum
-Teachers often present
separate lessons
-GE limited
understanding of
modifying curriculum
-Unfamiliarity creates a
lack of confidence in both
teachers
-SE develops a solid
understanding of the
content of the curriculum
Compromising
Collaborative
Gately &
Gately, 2001
-SE gains confidence to
make suggestions for
modifications and
accommodations
-GE becomes more
willing to modify the
curriculum, increased
sharing in planning &
teaching
-Both appreciate the
specific curriculum
competencies that they
bring to the content area
-One teacher is “boss”; one
is “helper”
-Special educator’s role is
seen as “helper”
-General educator may view
modifications as “giving up”
or “watering down” the
curriculum
-Both teachers direct some
of the activities in the
classroom
-Both begin to differentiate
concepts that all must know
from concepts that most
should know
-Both participate in the
presentation of the lesson
-Modifications of content,
activities, homework, and
tests become the norm for
students who require them
-Special educator offers
mini-lessons or clarifies
strategies that students
may use
-The “chalk” passes freely
-Students address
questions and discuss
concerns with both
teachers
Where is your coteaching
relationship along
each domain?
 What steps can
you take to get to
the collaboration
stage?
