1. No category

Co-teaching: A New Framework for
Learning How to Teach
Anne Davidson, Louise Hatala, Jon
Howeiler, Jane Kinyoun, Nancy Place
Overview


Background to Co-Teaching
Examples of Co-Teaching Strategies
Co-Teaching
Co-Teaching is defined as two teachers
working together with groups of students
and sharing the planning, organization,
delivery and assessment of instruction, as
well as the physical space
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Some Important Aspects of Co-Teaching





Both teachers are engaged
A variety of strategies for co-teaching
A scaffolded approach to learning to teach
Gradual shift of responsibility
Reflects a changing definition of classroom
teaching
What are the benefits?



Benefits to students
Benefits to teacher candidates
Benefits to cooperating teachers
K-6 Reading Proficiency



Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment
NCLB proficiency test for Minnesota
Statistically significant findings in all four years
MCA Reading
Proficiency
Co-Taught
Not
Co-Taught
χ²
2004-2005
82.1%
(N=318)
74.7%
(N=1035)
.007
2005-2006
78.7%
(N=484)
72.7%
(N=1757)
.008
2006-2007
75.5%
(N=371)
64.1%
(N=1964)
< .001
2007-2008
80.8%
(N=261)
61.4%
(N=2246)
<.001
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University,
Teacher Quality Enhancement Center
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
K-6 Reading Proficiency



Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment
NCLB proficiency test for Minnesota
Statistically significant findings in all four years
MCA Reading
Proficiency
OVERALL (4 Year
Cumulative)
Co-Taught
Not
Co-Taught
p
78.8%
67.0%
(N=1461)
< .001
(N=6975)
Free/Reduced
Lunch Eligible
65.0%
(N=477)
52.8%
Special Education
Eligible
74.4%
(N=433)
52.3%
English Language
Learners
44.7%
(N=76)
30.4%
< .001
(N=2906)
< .001
(N=2124)
.012
(N=546)
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Reading Proficiency
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment
MCA Reading Proficiency
2005-2006
MCA Reading Proficiency
2004-2005
100
Percent of Students
82.1
75.7
80
65.3
60
Percent of Students
100
78.7
73.5
80
65.0
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
CoTeaching
Candidate
(N=318)
One
Teacher
(N=934)
Traditional
Student
Teacher
(N=101)
χ² (2 df, N=1353) = 12.79, p = .002
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University,
Teacher Quality Enhancement Center
CoTeaching
Candidate
(N=484)
One
Teacher
(N=1597)
Traditional
Student
Teacher
(N=160)
χ² (2 df, N=2241) = 12.54, p = 002
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
7-12 Student Data - Advantages to Co-Teaching
Cumulative Data 2004-2008 (N=1,686)
More help with questions
79.7
Different styles of teaching
68.9
More indiv attention
66.4
Get 2 perspectives
65.8
Teachers build off each other
60.3
More creative lessons
51.2
Assignments graded & returned faster
50.9
More energy between teachers
46.1
Better discussions
45
More in-depth knowledge
43.1
No Benefits
4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Percent of responses
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University,
Teacher Quality Enhancement Center
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
7-12 Student Data – Disadvantages to Co-Teaching
Cumulative Data 2004-2008
N=1,686
Confusing with 2 explanations
18.8%
Confusing who to go to
Grading Issues
Contradicting information
13.5%
13.0%
11.6%
Teachers interrupt each other
8.8%
Candidate too dependent
8.3%
Less material covered
7.1%
0.0%
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University,
Teacher Quality Enhancement Center
25.0%
50.0%
75.0%
Percent of Responses
100.0%
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Benefits to Teacher Candidates
End of Experience Survey (N=157)
Teacher Candidates indicated that Co-Teaching led to:

Improved classroom management skills (95.5%)

Increased collaboration skills (94.9%)

More teaching time (94.6%)

Increased confidence (89.9%)

Deeper understanding of the curriculum through co-planning (89.1%)

More opportunities to ask questions and reflect (88.6%)
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Teacher Quality Enhancement Center
Benefits to Cooperating Teachers
End of Experience Survey (N=279)
Cooperating Teachers indicate that co-teaching led to:
Ability
to reach more students, particularly those with high needs (93.5%)
Better
relationship with their teacher candidate (91%)
Experienced
Enhanced
Hosting
professional growth (89.2%)
energy for teaching (87.8%)
a candidate without giving up my classroom (87.1%)
Teacher
candidate had a better experience than they would have through with a
traditional model (81.7%)
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University,
Teacher Quality Enhancement Center
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Co-Teaching
Co-teaching is not simply dividing the tasks and
responsibilities between two people.
Co-teaching is an attitude – an attitude of
sharing the classroom and students.
Co-teachers must always be thinking –
WE’RE BOTH TEACHING!
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Co-Teaching Options







One Teach, One Observe
One Teach, One Assist
Station Teaching
Parallel Teaching
Supplemental Teaching
Alternative (Differentiated) Teaching
Team Teaching
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
One Teach, One Observe
One teacher has primary instructional
responsibility while the other gathers specific
observational information on students or the
(instructing) teacher.
Copyright 2009, St. Cloud State University, Teacher Quality Enhancement Center:
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
With Your Teaching Partners…

When might you use “One teach one
observe?” Please list and discuss some
possible situations.