Successful Co-Teaching

in the

Science Classroom by Leslie Forbes and Stacy Billet

C

o-teaching has become a popular concept in the field of education, especially as related to special education. Students with exceptionalities in cotaught classes have been found to improve in academics, behavior, social skills, and self-esteem as compared to those taught solely in a special education classroom (Murawski and Hughes 2009). There are five main forms of co-teaching: lead and support, station teaching, parallel teaching, alternative teaching, and team teaching. As with any teaching technique, there are pros and cons to each. A description of the forms, the pros and the cons of co-teaching, and its effectiveness in the science classroom will be examined. While these forms of co-teaching can be used in a variety of ways, in these examples the two instructors are a special education and a regualr education teacher. In our study, we have collected data for three years to demonstrate the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of co-teaching in the science classroom.

Lead and support One of the most common co-teaching models implemented in the secondar y and middle school classroom is Lead and Support. Lead and Support

is when one member of the team takes the lead role and the other member rotates among students to provide support. There are two subtypes of Lead and Support: One Teach, One Obser ve; and One Teach, One Drift. Each of these types will be explained further. One Teach, One Observe is a beneficial method for when a special educator wishes to gather data. It also works well when there is a student on a behavior plan. At times in education, data are needed for a variety of purposes. If a student is on a behavior plan and the frequency and duration of a behavior needs to be documented, this co-teaching style provides the opportunity. This method can be used to show the relationship between students who are working in class and the better grades they receive: The teacher who is observing can see which students are staying on task and gather that data. Then the teachers can compare the grades of on-task students to students who were not on task. One Teach, One Drift is useful for providing unobtrusive assistance to students as needed. The teacher who “drifts” helps students when they are at their seats during instruction time, checks for understanding when the other person is teaching, and keeps students on task by proximity.

S e p t e m b e r 2 012

61

successful co-teaching

Station teaching In this method, teachers keep their own classrooms but divide the content and have students move between classrooms. After teaching to one group, the teachers switch groups and teach to the other group. The content being taught in this method is different in each group. In other words, the teachers teach predetermined, different parts of the lesson. This technique may be more difficult at the secondar y and middle school levels due to the following reasons: Teachers’ classrooms are not near each other and time is wasted in switching classes; content area builds on itself and it is hard to chunk content; and some learning support teachers are not certified in a specific area and may not feel comfortable teaching the content.

Parallel teaching In this approach, teachers are teaching the same information, but they divide the class and teach simultaneously in different classrooms; the content being taught is the same in each group. This is a great method for reinforcement and reteaching activities. While the class is split in half, each teacher has some learning support students and some regular education students. This method is good if you have enrichment periods in your schedule to assist students who need more help with a subject. This is also beneficial when one of the teachers is absent. It is helpful if the special education teacher has an individual classroom to take students to. We have used this strategy when we assigned group projects; the class was split and instruction was the same.

Alternative teaching This method is used when several students need specialized attention. For Alternative Teaching, one teacher teaches the large group and the other teaches the smaller group. This method works well with learning support

62

SCIENCE SCOPE

students or any student who may be struggling. Alternative Teaching is a great method for differentiated instruction. The learning support students receive adaptations to the course work and assessments as per their IEP. One teacher can take students needing more help with a topic and reteach to them while the other teacher teaches the other students advanced information.

Team teaching This technique, which is also known as “tag-team” teaching or “one brain in two bodies,” is used when two teachers deliver the same information at the same time in the same classroom. Students feel like

There are a variety of ways teachers can signal to each other that one teacher is going to stop instruction so the other can begin, or “tag in.” They include, but are not limited to, slapping hands, raising a hand if one teacher is behind students, and jumping in when the other teacher pauses.

successful co-teaching

Figure 1

Science teacher and special education teacher methods for calculating formulas

Science teacher method

Special education teacher method

(C6H12O6 × 2) − H2O = C12H22O11

(C6H12O6 + C6H12O6) = C12H24O12 C12H24O12 – H2O = C12H22O11

they have two content teachers in the room rather than one content teacher and one learning support teacher. This method helps lessen the stigma of being a learning support student. There are a variety of ways teachers can signal to each other that one teacher is going to stop instruction so the other can begin, or “tag in.” They include, but are not limited to, slapping hands, raising a hand if one teacher is behind students, and jumping in when the other teacher pauses. The learning support teacher feels more valuable and helpful in the classroom in regard to being a vital component of the instructional process. When an instructional strategy is explained by one of the teachers, it can be clarified or explained in another learning style by the other so that all students can grasp the concept. This technique also allows the special educator to ask questions of the general educator to help clarify information that students may be apprehensive to ask about. We have implemented this method most frequently during class discussions and lectures. For example, the day we discussed digestion (during the biochemistry unit), each of us had beneficial information to provide students to assist them in grasping a complex concept. In addition, we tag-team taught the concept of calculating disaccharide and polysaccharide formulas; we each had a different way of teaching this concept, and through this instructional method, all students understood it. If they did not get it with one method, they got it with the other method. Figure 1 demonstrates both types of strategies.

Pros and cons There are both positive and negative attributes to co-teaching. The physical presence of two teachers means a reduction of the student-teacher ratio, which allows the teachers to provide professional support for one another (Magiera and Zigmond 2005). This is ver y evident if the learning support

teacher provides constructive criticism regarding a lesson that might need to be modified to help with better clarification. The opportunity for another colleague to be in the classroom and give professional support provides feedback on a lesson and what changes would help students grasp the complex concepts. Additionally, if a student has a personality conflict with one teacher, there is another teacher from whom that student can seek academic and emotional support. There is also at least one person in the room who is an expert with regard to special education laws, policies, and procedures, which are constantly evolving. Several researchers have found significant positive academic gains for students with disabilities in co-taught classes under idealized conditions (Magiera and Zigmond 2005). According to a study completed by Dahlberg and Hoover, the presence of two educators in the classroom decreases the number of disruptions and dangers in the learning environment (2003). One of the drawbacks to team teaching is time restraints, including the lack of time co-teachers have within the school day to collaborate about lesson planning, lesson designs, and classroom-management issues. Effective co-teaching requires the co-teachers to collaborate outside of the school day, which may mean evenings and weekends. Another drawback is the lack of common planning time, which is not only needed for lesson planning, but also to plan and discuss students’ needs. This is where administrative support comes into play. The role of the administrator in effective coteaching is to recognize the need for common time to prep and collaborate, even if for just one period every five or six days. Another potential drawback is personality conflicts that may arise between co-teachers. Co-teaching can be ineffective if the two teachers cannot reach an agreement when collaborating or differ on teaching philosophies or classroom behavior expectations.

S e p t e m b e r 2 012

63

successful co-teaching

Not all schools can afford to have inclusion in the science classrooms. Our school tries to cover the core subjects for inclusion: The learning support teacher is not with the regular education teacher all day, but may be in three different content-area classrooms in a single day, each semester. Typically, learning support teachers travel to a variety of content-area classrooms throughout the school day or teach resource classes to learning support students, rather than remaining with the same content teacher all day long. In addition, because the school we work at follows the block schedule, the schedules for the content teacher and support teacher change each semester. These drawbacks can affect the success of co-teaching and the success of the learners in the classroom.

Conclusion Although the research on co-teaching is limited, it is growing, and what is available is generally positive (Murawski and Hughes 2009). One of the key components of effective co-teaching involves the general education teacher being willing to take constructive criticism. Usually, the special education teacher can provide direction and advice about explaining, reinforcing, or modifying a specific lesson to make it more effective for all students. This can be applicable to special education teachers, as content teachers can provide insight and advice, as well, when they feel confident in the content-specific subject matter and lead the lesson. The special education teacher will feel more useful when co-teaching, instead of being in the room and taking the same notes as students. Through co-teaching in the science classroom, special education teachers are able to improve their knowledge about specific content areas and the content teacher can assist the special education teacher in being highly qualified. It provides the opportunity to accept and give constructive criticism, and to work with another teacher to make a classroom run smoothly. One of the biggest challenges for the content teacher is building trust in the classroom. The content teacher has to trust that the special education teacher knows the information he or she is providing to students when instruction is handed over. The content teacher allows the special education teacher the opportunity to explicitly instruct students. In ad-

64

SCIENCE SCOPE

dition, the content teacher also has to be willing to accept constructive criticism, especially regarding specific lessons that students might be struggling to learn. Our three-year study has only begun, and we will continue to collect data to determine if coteaching is beneficial and effective for all students and teachers involved. n

References Dahlberg, K.A., and J. Hoover. 2003. The effects of coteaching on K–6 student discipline and attendance. St. Cloud, Minnesota: St. Cloud University. Magiera, K., and N. Zigmond. 2005. Co-teaching in middle school classrooms under routine conditions: Does the instructional experience differ for students with disabilities in co-taught and solo-taught classes? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 20 (2): 79–85. Murawski, W.W., and C.E. Hughes. 2009. Response to intervention, collaboration, and co-teaching: A logical combination for successful systemic change. Preventing School Failure 53 (4): 267–77.

Resources Ashton, T.M. 2003. What are teachers’ greatest co-teaching concerns? Academic Exchange Quarterly 7 (3). http:// findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3325/is_3_7/ai_ n29051751/?tag=content;col1. Austin, V.L. 2001. Teachers’ beliefs about co-teaching. Remedial and Special Education 22 (4): 245–55. Council for Exceptional Children—www.cec.sped.org. Murawski, W.W., and L.A. Dieker. 2004. Tips and strategies for co-teaching at the secondary level. Teaching Exceptional Children 36 (5): 52–58. Ripley, S. 1998. Collaboration between general and special education teachers. Journal of Early Education and Family Review 5 (4): 16–20. Walther-Thomas, C. 1997. Co-teaching experiences: The benefits and problems that teachers and principals report over time. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30 (4): 395–407.

Leslie Forbes ([email protected]) is a biology, anatomy, and physiology teacher in the science department and Stacy Billet ([email protected]) is a learning support teacher, both at Dover Area High School in Dover, Pennsylvania.