Co-Teaching

Co-teaching Features

Co-Teaching is defined as two teachers working together with groups of students, sharing the planning, organization, delivery of instruction, assessment of student learning, and physical space.

There are many differences between a traditional model of student teaching and co-teaching. These include:

· Involvement. One clear distinction between a traditional and a co-taught student teaching experience is the level of involvement of the participants. In a traditional model, often one teacher is passive while the other is leading instruction. In co-teaching, both teachers are actively involved and engaged.

· Preparation. In a traditional model of student teaching, while there might be some initial training provided to mentor teachers, there is rarely preparation of the mentor teacher/candidate dyad. In co-teaching, we not only prepare mentor teachers to host a candidate, we recommend that the pair come to a workshop where they begin to practice the communication and collaboration skills that are necessary for the co-teaching partnership to be effective.

· Leading & Full-Time Instruction. Almost all teacher education programs have identified minimum requirements for both the length of the student teaching experience and the number of days or weeks the candidate should take over the entire classroom. In a co-teaching experience, however, the mentor teacher and candidate share the role of lead teacher. All candidates are allowed opportunities to solo teach, but through the combination of solo and co-teaching, candidates prepared using this model often teach far more than candidates prepared using the traditional model of student teaching.

· Introductions & Welcoming. A critical element in the success of any student teaching experience is how the candidate is viewed by the students. In co-teaching mentor teachers are instructed to introduce their candidate as a candidate or co-teacher, so the first word the students hear is teacher. Mentor teachers are encouraged and expected to incorporate the candidate into the classroom routines and instruction from the very first day.

· Planning. In a traditional student teaching experience, candidates generally plan lessons in isolation, presenting them to their mentor teacher in advance of delivering the lesson. In co-teaching, however, the pair is expected to identify a specific planning time where the primary focus includes the details of how, when, and which co-teaching strategies will be used for upcoming lessons. Candidates will spend additional time planning for their part in each lesson. In the early stages of the experience the mentor teacher leads the planning. As the term progresses the candidate assumes more responsibility, ultimately taking the lead in planning. Pairs of mentor teachers and candidates are not expected to use co-teaching for every lesson, but determine when and which strategies would be most useful in assisting student learning.

· Modeling and Coaching. Often in traditional student teaching, mentor teachers expect candidates to be skilled in various instructional strategies, lesson planning, and classroom management techniques; possessing the ability to take over all aspects of the teaching day after weeks of observation. In the co-teaching experience, mentor teachers are taught to provide modeling and coaching, making invisible skills visible to the candidate. Co-teaching allows candidates the time to practice instructional and management strategies with the help and support of their mentor teacher.

· Power Differential. In any student teaching model, a power differential between the mentor teacher and candidate exists. This power differential is rarely addressed in a traditional student teaching experience. In a co-teaching model, however, mentor teachers and candidates are taught to address issues of parity and gain experience in how to work as a team. Candidates are empowered to find their voice and contribute to the partnership while mentor teachers are encouraged to be open to the ideas and contributions of the candidate. The attitude that “we are both teaching” is pivotal to the success of the pair.

From Heck, T., Bacharach, N., & Dahlberg, K. Co-teaching: Enhancing the Student Teaching Experience

Eighth Annual IBER & TLC Conference Proceedings 2008 Las Vegas, NV, USA 2

What are the components of co-teaching?

The following model breaks co-teaching into 4 components: co-planning, co-instructing, co-assessing, and co-reflecting.

Co-planning:

Co-planning can take on many forms, including face-to-face during prep time, meeting outside of school that are convenient for both, email correspondence, and exchange of documents. What is important about co-planning is that

· Candidates have input from mentors on the thoroughness and applicability of their lessons

· Candidates have insight into the thought process behind planning followed by master teachers

· Candidate and mentor participate in deciding what will be taught.

That being said, co-planning should be implemented in whatever ways are comfortable and efficient for both candidate and mentor. It does not have to mean taking every planning period, everyday, if that doesn’t work; flexibility is key. It also does not imply that every lesson/unit should be co-taught. What should be considered is that candidates are novice at planning and need access to the insights of their mentor.

Mentor teachers should be prepared to support candidates develop skills to:

· Unit plan (goals, objectives, standards, unit assessments, etc.)

· Lesson plans (objectives, tasks/activities, instructional strategies, accommodations, formative assessments, etc.)

· Create both formative and summative assessments (see below)

Co-instructing:

There are many ways to co-teach. Mentors and candidates should choose from the variety of approaches (see chart) based on what would work best for the students in your classes and add value to their experiences while also modeling for candidates what good teaching practices look like. The approaches should be integrated within lessons in ways that make sense to both teachers and enhance student learning. Co-teaching approaches do NOT need to be implemented every day. In addition, they do NOT exclude solo teaching time.

Solo teaching gives candidates valuable experience and should be built into candidate fieldwork along with co-teaching. The choice of when to “solo” should be made in collaboration with the university coach, depending on candidate readiness and the particulars of what is to be taught, and how. It might make sense that a particular group of lessons or unit is chosen to be solo taught. This is absolutely appropriate and expected. The expectation in solo teaching is that:

· Candidates in some way remain engaged in working with students while solo teaching is taking place.

· Mentors may or may not be in room (but when leaving, consider video-recording the candidate teaching or returning before the end of the class period)

*Please see attached chart for a description of co-teaching approaches.

Mentor teachers should be prepared to support candidates develop skills to:

· Collect appropriate materials for instruction (directions, necessary copies, etc.)

· Facilitate small group instruction

· Facilitate whole class instruction

· Manage logistics of classroom (attendance, filing, IEPs, etc.)

· Implement effective classroom management strategies (and try new ones out)

Co-assessing:

The multiple facets of assessment are critical for candidates to understand throughout the process of developing, implementing, and evaluating student learning. That is, in order to plan for instruction, teachers are always considering student work. Through co-planning, modeling instruction, and co-reflecting, mentor teachers should be prepared to support candidates to:

· Create both formative and summative assessments

· Develop rubrics and grading criteria

· Manage time as they:

• Grade a variety of assessments

• Enter grades, provide feedback to students, consider legalities and issues with online grading programs, etc.

Co-reflecting:

Key to the co-teaching model is the ability for candidates to not only plan alongside experienced teachers, but to also debrief lessons and consider next steps in instruction. The mentor teacher should be prepared to support candidates to:

· Analyze student work

· Use student work to develop lesson plan objectives

· Consider issues in classroom management and next steps to increase student engagement

· Reflect on instruction to determine need for modifications in other classes/next day’s lesson

What are Co-planning/Co-reflecting in Action?

Co-planning/co-reflecting is a joint enterprise. It is a process of sharing ideas between a Candidate and their Mentor teacher that builds on each other’s expertise and strengths. Co-planning/co-reflecting can be summarized by actions and opportunities:

Actions: What co-planning looks like in practice

· An opportunity for constructive development of unit/lesson plans in which candidates and MTs recognize and/or build upon each other’s expertise and blend ideas.

· Use of a skeleton plan to make lesson planning decisions together and agree upon the goals/outcomes of a given lesson or unit.

· MTs and candidates are engaged in joint problem solving and disciplinary discussions about the most appropriate strategies for teaching content and roles in implementation.

· A collaborative process to build on each other’s strengths and ideas to construct lessons that address students’ needs.

· Meta-cognitive process of constructing an action plan, implementing the lesson and guiding the candidate to reflect on how things went and share each other’s thought processes.

Opportunities: Co-planning as an opportunity

· Co-planning can be a building block of co-teaching.

· A chance for teaching teams to share strategies, experiences, perspectives and strengths.

· A space for trying out new ideas and going outside of one’s comfort zone; During de-brief, MTs can model expert teacher’s reflective thought processes for candidates.

· Space for candidates and MTs to identify areas in the lesson in need of further research, knowledge and/or targeted strategies for specific students.

· An opportunity for candidates and MTs to learn from one another and draw upon their strengths and expertise to develop a lesson that is personalized for students and the teaching context.

· An opportunity to outline a division of labor for co-teaching that is grounded in a collaborative, constructive development process.

Menu of Co-Teaching Strategies

*Adapted from OSPI Assessment Conference (2010)

*The strategies listed are not hierarchical – they can be used in any order and/or combined to best meet the needs of the student in the classroom

1. One Teach, One Drift

· EX: While one teacher has the instructional lead, the other teacher assists by moving around the room supporting and formatively assessing students, interjecting during the lesson to clarify, restate, reinforce, or be the “voice” for the students when they don’t understand.

2. One Teach, One Observe

· EX: One teacher observes students for their understanding of content while the other leads.

3. Station Teaching

· EX: Teachers divide the instructional content and the students. Each teacher focuses on their portion of the instruction and their group of students. Student groups may or may not rotate.

4. Parallel Teaching

· EX: Each teacher instructs half the class using the same instructional material.

5. Supplemental

· EX: One teacher works with students who need re-teaching while the other teacher works with the rest of the class.

6. Alternative/Differential Instruction

· EX: Teachers teach the same content but in alternative ways based on the needs of the students in their groups.

7. Team Teaching

· EX: Both teachers share the instruction, are free to interject information, and are available to assist students and answer questions.

8. Solo Teaching

· EX: The candidate leads the class and is videotaped while the MT is out of the room. Later, the MT debriefs portions of the video with the candidate.

What a candidate should do when co-teaching:

As much as possible (but only at appropriate times and in a respectful manner), ask your mentor teacher to share their “teacher thinking” about what you see. Be sure to frame your questions as honest inquiry.

Early on (Aug/Sep), ask about things such as:

• How s/he tries to build relationship with students on these first days?

• Why are the tables/desks arranged the way they are?

• How s/he sets behavior/academic expectations at the start of the year?

• Why the homework policy (or late-work policy) is designed the way it is?

To build your lesson planning skills, ask your mentor teacher if s/he would be willing to participate in an observation-to-lesson-plan activity. Be sure you frame this activity as a chance for you to improve your recognition of “teacher thinking” by using a tool to push/guide your observations and your discussion after the observation

To do this activity, take the STEP lesson plan template (found in your handbook), and try to fill it in DURING (or AFTER) an observation of your MT teaching. What did you see? After this step, sit down with your MT and look at what you wrote together. What gaps can your MT fill in? How can s/he help you understand the intellectual work that goes into teaching?

A crucial part of co-teaching is feeling comfortable interjecting during a lesson. This may feel like an interruption or a sign of disrespect for you as the candidate. It is best to bring this up directly early on in your relationship with your MT. You might ask questions such as… How do you feel about me interjecting during a lesson? Are there certain times when you would prefer me to or prefer me NOT to interject? Would a non-verbal signal (at least at first) be a helpful tool to communicate when I have a comment or question that I think might be helpful for students?

It is also important for candidates to recognize that MTs offer suggestions for student success and that feedback is not personal, but rather intended to address student needs. Feedback may take place in planning as well as during instruction.

Co-Teaching Dilemmas and Solutions

Mentor teachers and candidates worked together to generate dilemmas that could arise in implementing a co-teaching model and possible ways to work through those challenges.

How do we manage our time and stay organized? How do we share physical and mental space?

· Being flexible; continuous engagement; balancing levels of comfort between candidate and MT

· Give candidate their own work space (desk, chair, shelf)

· Establish planning time – but keep scheduling FLEXIBLE - Planning time is essential so a formal consistent time each week is critical for planning, debriefing, communicating, questioning, and problem-solving together.

· Use technology (email, phone, etc.) if needed to create/preserve planning time

· Prioritize obligations (meetings, etc.) at school to ensure success of co-teaching

· Having enough time to co-plan -- This is the most important part of teaching; if you don’t have time….?

· Communicate openly and honestly about what your needs are (re: alone time vs. collaborative time)

· MT can advocate for candidate to assist in acclimation process – access to resources such as keys & computer log-ins, password permissions

How do we find balance between over- & under- utilizing candidates?

· Refer to documents/timelines in handbook

· Balance is important because of UW obligations

· Be aware of candidates abilities (how long it takes to plan lessons) > communication

· Honesty (is candidate overwhelmed, etc.)

· Flexibility

· Make sure candidates are aware of classroom policies, procedures

How do we establish clear communication in light of dynamic evolving role of candidate?

· Clear expectations from the beginning and continue evolving them (when? Accommodating schedules; agenda; what if expectations are not met?)

· Skype

· Shared doc (ex: Google Doc of unit plan)

· Assign roles

· Be open & kind to each other

· Share what is being learned in UW courses

· Use planning/prep/conference period to accomplish tasks for preparing for next class, grading, corresponding with families, etc.

· Ask questions (why am I doing this?)

How do you blend two teaching styles/personalities within one classroom and content area to best serve the students and avoid conflicts in teaching styles/achieve a middle ground?

· Putting yourself in shoes of students to determine style of lesson that works

· Differentiated teaching

· Open negotiating in direction of lesson

· Establishing common goals beforehand

· Candidate & mentor teacher could be open to new ideas – even if they didn’t work for the mentor teacher in the past

· Having time to debrief & reflect with mentor teacher & candidate

· Professionalism - open discussion of concerns and engagement with the reasoning

· Recognizing personality differences and intentionality

· Codeword: HELP! – wiggle room to fail & learn from that experience

How do we establish classroom leadership role of candidate when kids might not respect the candidate as much as the mentor teacher?

· The candidate should:

o Be a warm demander

o Act like you belong there

o Be consistent in checking behavior and communicate with mentor teacher so you are both consistent; be clear

o Dress professionally

o Take attendance

o Attend staff meetings

o Respond to students’ needs; be responsive

o Know mentor teacher’s classroom management policies

· The candidate and mentor teacher should:

o Reflect on a regular basis

o Have good communication between them and with students

o Model respect to students (by treating each other with respect)

o Establish both teachers as leaders in the classroom (through introduction, roles in instruction, names on door, agenda, etc.)

How do we define candidates’ and mentor teachers’ role in day-to-day operations and assign responsibility? How do we balance nurturing vs. independence?

· By winter, more solo-teaching (reality)

· Mentor teacher supports/backs up what candidate does/says in the moment

· Make space for reflection/debriefing/providing feedback on a daily basis

· Start from day 1

· Develop classroom procedures together

· Disciplining responsibilities well-defined

· Excellent communication – with all staff/candidate included in all administrative

Realistically, how does co-teaching work when one teacher in the equation is “weak”? How beneficial is it to learn a co-teaching model when we will most likely be solo-teaching?

· Have explicit times/opportunities to ensure it happens (debrief)

· Give and accept constructive feedback (both mentor teacher/candidate)

· Everyday there should be feedback; good, open communication to aid in knowing what you’re doing and what you could be doing better

· Learn to collaborate

· Get to know the students as individuals

· Work with challenged/ing students one-on-one

· Apprentice > Master

· Interdisciplinary skills

· Giving the candidate a realistic teaching experience

How do we transition through various co-teaching approaches and into lead teaching smoothly?

· Communication – non-verbal code

· Pre-planning

· Introduction – students should perceive both as teachers

· Knowing each other and students

· Both teachers taking on both roles

How do we create opportunities for the candidate to try out methods when the mentor teacher does not practice methods taught in the teacher education program?

· Mentor teacher should be open to new ideas

· Use the content coach to help in planning

· Prepare materials thoroughly so that mentor teacher is clear on the method

· Justify rationale for new ideas with data

· Focus efforts where strengths exist

· Consider timing of presenting new ideas

How do we reconcile two different approaches to teaching, especially when you have strong-willed individuals? What happens when mentor teacher and candidate disagree on approaches?

· Candidates MUST value and be flexible with different styles/methods of teaching different from what they have learned

· Communication; talk about approaches as early as possible

· Figure it out before/after class, NOT in class; avoid conflict during class

· Open to listening to mentor teacher experience

· Don’t take things personally!

· Clear expectations up front! Go both ways!

· Flexibility!!!

How do we manage different expectations for students’ behavior and performance between candidates and mentor teachers?

· Know the school’s inflexible rules

· Develop norms together before school starts

· Reflect if those norms are working in the first week with each other & students

· Figure out who has a lower or higher behavior threshold

· Have clarity on amount of candidate ownership and mentor teacher support; open and flexible communication about roles in classroom management