Search

Co-teaching may be a promising strategy to improve inclusive secondary mathematics education in rural schools. Professional development (PD) aids in special and general education teachers’ co-teaching implementation, yet little empirical research examines how to effectively train and support co-teachers. In this study, we describe one U.S. state’s PD model for secondary mathematics co-teaching, evaluate outcomes of the PD on co-teachers’ behaviors and beliefs, and examine the impact of co-teaching on students’ mathematics achievement. We examined data from observations, surveys, and students’ pre/post assessments across nine classes within seven U.S. school districts, including three rural school districts, over 3 years. We report data from a total of 19 teachers and 281 students in sixth through ninth grades. The PD participants implemented effective co-teaching strategies and reported positive viewpoints toward co-teaching. Additionally, students with and without disabilities improved their mathematics scores. We present key findings for rural schools to guide future implementation and research.

As co-teachers tackle the unique challenges of instructing in remote, hybrid, and socially distanced brick-and-mortar settings they can increase their success by incorporating technology solutions into their shared classrooms. Technology can facilitate co-teachers’ implementation of small-group instruction, increase options for student engagement and participation, and establish instructional consistency through clear communication. The result can be enhanced student learning and more efficient and effective delivery of the specially designed instruction that students with disabilities must receive.

A shared sense of responsibility for the education of students with disabilities can have positive effects on both teachers and students. When special education (SE) and general education (GE) teachers work together, this collaborative relationship is a positive variable in teacher satisfaction and retention. Furthermore, teacher collaboration and an inclusive delivery of SE services in the GE classroom can foster increased student achievement, motivation, self-esteem, and social growth. In this study, the researcher conducted individually administered surveys with 35 teachers in two rural districts to further explore the variable of a shared sense of responsibility: what tasks, how, and where responsibilities were shared. Following the presentation of the survey results is a description of the professional development that was provided to teachers in collaboration and co-teaching. Barriers and benefits to increasing teacher collaboration and co-teaching are discussed, including outcomes for students in one co-taught classroom over a 2-year period.

In 2016, researchers from two educator preparation programs (EPPs) in two differing states (southeast and west) chose to examine the intervention of co-teaching during student teaching that had been in place for 3 years in each of their locals. The researchers wanted to (a) identify and articulate the co-teaching model within the context of each location, (b) begin to learn why this approach may be beneficial as a culminating pre-service experience, and (c) explore next steps in how to better operationalize the co-teaching experience within the pre-service programming, regardless of context. Co-teaching during student teaching was examined at one elementary program (southeast) and one secondary program (west). Results indicate co-teaching during student teaching to be a viable option for pre-service training and mentor development for both the elementary and middle school experiences. Teacher candidates (TCs) identified co-teaching strategies based upon the needs of teachers, students, and content taught. This was seen as a unique finding not reported in existing literature. Other findings indicate the model promoted increased confidence and comfort in TCs’ teaching, supported increased differentiation and instructional time, facilitated currency in MTs’ knowledge of and experience with technology, and helped TCs learn to manage human resources with increased intentionality. Recommendations for future research and suggestions for faculty of EPPs interested in implementing co-teaching during student teaching are provided.

The Project CALI (Content Area Literacy Instruction) instructional framework is designed to enhance reading comprehension for all students, those with disabilities as well as their typically developing peers, in inclusive co-taught middle school content-area classrooms. For students with and at-risk for disabilities, even well-designed, research-based, and whole-class instruction often leads to inadequate improvement in reading comprehension and thus learning of content material. In CALI, teachers use student data to determine which students need more support and targeted, individualized instruction, and by contrast, which students may benefit from opportunities to extend their learning with more challenging texts and student-managed work. This article provides guidance for designing and implementing customizable lessons using station-teaching to individualize instruction. The Project CALI student support model is the final instructional piece of the CALI instructional framework.

High school co-teachers prepare students with and without disabilities to earn content credits for graduation, with instructional effectiveness influenced by multiple factors. In this study, teacher self-efficacy and personal compatibility were examined as potential predictors of active involvement in instruction. The moderating effect of personal compatibility on the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and active involvement in instruction was also examined. One hundred twenty-seven co-teachers of students with learning disabilities and other high-incidence disabilities participated. Active involvement in instruction was significantly higher for general educators than for special educators. Results of Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) analyses revealed teacher self-efficacy was predictive of active involvement in instruction for general educators but not for special educators. Results of APIM with moderation found personal compatibility did not significantly moderate the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and active involvement in instruction for general or special education co-teachers. Implications for co-teaching practices are provided.

With continued emphasis on inclusive practices, paraeducators are increasingly relied upon as an integral part of instructional service delivery for students with disabilities. However, research consistently reveals that the effective use of paraeducators depends largely on teacher leadership and supervision. Currently, few teacher preparation programs offer meaningful coursework pertaining to managing paraeducators, leaving teachers unprepared for their supervisory role upon entering the field. Incorporating paraeducators into the instructional planning and delivery process requires that several considerations be made. This column shares several recommendations with teachers for designing, implementing, and evaluating the effectiveness of lesson plans that incorporate paraeducators in the inclusive setting. A lesson plan template is provided and discussed, and guidance is provided for teaching paraeducators evidence-based practices (EBPs) using behavioral skills training and supporting them in using EBPs during instruction.

This column explores the value of eliciting perspectives from students with and without disabilities about their experiences in co-taught settings. Research focused on co-teaching and eliciting feedback from co-taught students is identified. Interviews, surveys, and exit slips are described as ways co-teachers can acquire feedback from students, which can also promote students’ reflective skills. Attention is given to the important link between co-teachers acquiring and using students’ feedback to enact meaningful changes in co-taught instruction.

Co-teaching is fundamental to inclusive education. However, the way co-teaching is implemented, varies considerably, and establishing and allocating instructional responsibilities does not follow a standardized pattern. This study is based on four cases – two located at traditional secondary schools and two at newly created community schools – and includes semi-structured in-depth interviews with four regular teachers and four special education teachers. It aims at providing insight into how co-teaching partners in Germany perceive their own and their partner’s instructional responsibilities. Data are analyzed with a structuring technique of qualitative content analysis. It becomes evident that the partners in each case do not always follow identical instructional intents. Nonetheless, different types of teacher knowledge seem to complement each other effectively in co-teaching relationships. Although, of course provided primarily for pupils with special needs, special education expertise also seems to support pupils without such needs. The results indicate a need to secure and integrate co-teaching relationships structurally into a school’s development process. The article concludes with some options for development in practice.

Global health needs the humanities today as medicine needed the humanities in the 1970s. When new biomedical technologies threatened to undermine the physician in their primary role of healing the patient, the field of medical humanities emerged to rehumanize the doctor and revive physician empathy through humanities methods and content such as close reading of poetry and novels, reflective writing, and critiquing art. In contrast, many of today’s undergraduate global health students are plagued by a surfeit, rather than a lack, of empathy to “save the world.” As the medical humanities transformed medical education, can today’s humanities and arts, especially the new fields of health humanities and critical medical humanities, transform global health education and practice by igniting a “global health humanities”? This essay focuses on emerging pedagogical and curricular challenges in nonclinical, undergraduate global health training primarily in North America.

This article examines collaboration in the context of how gifted education teachers co-plan and co-teach with general education teachers. Perspectives of the benefits and barriers to collaboration are explored from gifted education teachers, gifted education administration, and general education teachers in one school district in the Southeast United States. Benefits include perceived growth in teacher competency to differentiate for students identified as gifted and growth in student learning; barriers include time constraints and perceived conflicting assumptions. The article highlights implications of the challenges and practical nature of implementing collaboration between gifted education teachers and general education teachers within the context of systemic change.

One-teach/one-assist and one-teach/one-observe are the two most widely used co-teaching models. Special educators often take on the support role when these models are used. At times, co-teachers in the support role may be unclear about how to implement active instructional practices that engage students and improve student outcomes. In this article, opportunities to respond and contingent support are described as two research-based practices that can be implemented by co-teachers in the support role.

Co-teaching is when two or more people share instructional responsibility for all of the students assigned to them. There are many benefits to students when speech–language pathologists (SLPs) participate in co-teaching relationships with other educators and specialists by working on functional goals in the natural environment of the classroom. With co-teaching, SLPs are able to provide services to students who are eligible for special education and also support their school community through a model of multitiered system of support for all children. The purpose of this tutorial is to provide SLPs with a rationale for collaborative interventions and co-teaching, information about the four co-teaching approaches, planning and collaboration issues partners need to address, and tips for success.

This study examines the effects of co-teaching between native and non-native English teachers on English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ English proficiency in China, and then explores the students’ perceptions of the collaborative form of teaching. Based on the co-teaching schemes created by the previous researchers, this experiment adopted three co-teaching models: (1) one teaching/one assisting model, (2) team teaching model, and (3) station teaching model. By comparing the effects of co-teaching with those of traditional teaching, the study found that the students who were co-taught by a native and a non-native English teacher made more gains in English proficiency than those who were taught by one teacher alone. The findings from the attitudinal survey indicate that the students generally held a positive attitude towards co-teaching and that they attributed the success of this experiment to three benefits in co-teaching: ideal linguistic environment, complementary teaching behaviors, and favorable cultural atmosphere.

This study investigated what happened during the implementation of a co-teaching model for student-teaching from a relational perspective. When analyzed through the theoretical framework of care ethics, teacher-candidates and their mentor-teachers developed caring relationships, acknowledged and negotiated differential power dynamics, and described cultivating a caring climate through dialogue and modeling.

Co-teaching is the most popular model for supporting students with disabilities in the general education setting. However, the limited research that supports this framework as effective for increasing outcomes for students with disabilities may indicate co-teachers have difficulty providing students with specialized instruction to meet individual learning needs. In this article, co-teachers are provided a model for integrating effective practices strategically within various co-teaching models to increase educational outcomes for students with disabilities.

The purpose of this literature review is to examine music education research concerning the emerging practice of co-teaching between cooperating music teachers and student teachers, and to understand the benefits of co-teaching for both. The review is organized into two sections: (a) how cooperating music teachers and student teachers view their co-teaching experiences and (b) how cooperating music teachers mentor student teachers in a co-teaching model. Co-teaching during student teaching can occur successfully through cooperating teachers’ willingness to facilitate the co-teaching process, student teachers’ reflective practice with cooperating teachers and careful sequencing in teaching opportunities, and co-teachers’ engagement in daily communication activities. Music education researchers should continue to examine various topics related to implementing a co-teaching model in student teaching. This article will provide current P–12 music teachers with successful co-teaching examples and suggestions for applications in music classrooms.

The recent Supreme Court decision in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District focused attention on outcomes for students with disabilities. It is not just about participating; it is about the instruction and outcomes from those services. Co-teaching is a prevalent service delivery model for students with disabilities who access the general curriculum. Much has been written about co-teaching but not necessarily about the instruction that takes place in a co-taught classroom. In this case study, we present a preliminary investigation of a conceptual model for instruction in co-teaching. We report teacher and student behavior change as well as contextual variables that had an impact on implementation.

Collaboration among teachers is necessary for school improvement efforts. In the case below, a high school shifts its instructional model to include students with disabilities in general education classes. The school needs to raise state test scores for students with disabilities and hopes this instructional change will help. To implement a full-inclusion model, general education and special education teachers will be assigned to teach classes together as co-teachers. Co-teaching, however, is a collaborative model that requires relational trust among colleagues. Leaders are encouraged to consider how developing trust for collaboration may be difficult during times of school improvement.

This study reports practices implemented in over 2,000 minutes by 16 middle school special education and general education co-teaching pairs in English language arts classes. We report the extent to which teachers integrated literacy activities that support reading comprehension, the co-teaching models used, and the frequency with which each teacher led instruction. We also report the types of grouping structures teachers used and the extent to which teachers interacted with students with disabilities. Finally, we report the types of text used. Observations revealed that more than half of time spent on literacy activities involved reading aloud or silently with no co-occurring literacy instruction that supports reading comprehension. Students with disabilities spent a majority of their time in whole-class instruction or working independently with little teacher interaction. Special education teachers spent most of their time supporting whole-class instruction led by the content-area teacher. Implications and directions for future research are provided.

With the number of students with emotional or behavioral disorders who are being served in the general education classroom increasing, co-teaching has become a more common practice than ever before. Through the use of a hypothetical journey of a special educator placed in a co-teaching situation without prior experience, we provide practitioners with the context and rationale for implementing co-teaching effectively in combination with the incorporation of research-based instructional practices in an inclusion classroom.

Co-planning is considered an integral part of a successful co-teaching relationship in which both teachers have parity and use their individual expertise to benefit all students. However, the literature has not discussed adequately how co-planning is achieved within the parameters of the already full schedules of two teachers. This column shares how co-teaching partnerships can work to use individual expertise in curriculum development, teaching, and ensuring student learning to create plans that meet all students’ needs. A co-planning framework used by practicing co-teachers is discussed in detail, including how to use synchronous and asynchronous tools to plan course goals, biweekly units, and daily lessons.

Often the first-time health professionals work together is as new graduates, with a paucity of shared learning among the various health disciplines within university curricula. This is largely due to the complexities of delivering interprofessional education (IPE) and the preference of individuals to work within their established silos. With its ability to nurture collaboration among students, there is a developing trend to use team-based learning (TBL) as a teaching method to engage health care students in IPE. Using the conceptual lens of social capital theory, the purpose of this article is to provide readers with an overview and evidence for the use of TBL within the interprofessional health care education setting, highlighting the benefits and challenges.

The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of students with and without disabilities being educated in inclusive schools, documenting their perceptions of the culture of their school, inclusion, and the practices that were implemented to support all students. Focus groups were conducted with 86 students with and without disabilities from six schools that were recognized as exemplars of inclusive schoolwide practices. Three major themes emerged: (a) students’ sense of belonging in their school culture, (b) inclusion and its impact on students, and (c) school and classroom practices, such as positive behavior support systems, co-teaching, and instructional practices related to student self-determination and direction, feedback and re-teaching, multiple means of representation and expression, and technology utilization. Implications of these findings for implementing inclusive practices in other schools are discussed.

The concept of team teaching is not new, but based on her qualitative research findings the author has conceptualized intercultural team teaching in the field of theological education and its implications for global theological education. This article introduces the model that emerged from a bilingual qualitative case study exploring the contextual appropriateness of a graduate theological program in Korean at a North American theological school. How does teaching and learning happen across languages and cultures in the theological classroom? By design, intercultural team teaching can be a pedagogical model for intercultural collaboration in global theological education.

Although the term co-teaching has for many years described a service delivery option for students with disabilities or other special needs, recently, it has been used as a label for an alternative approach to student teaching. In this article, the authors describe the essential characteristics of co-teaching and what is appropriately called apprentice teaching and outline the similarities and differences between these two collaborative practices, including overall program structure, the contributing characteristics of the participating individuals, and the nature of the professional relationships. The authors provide conclusions regarding the risks for teacher candidates and faculty members of using the same term for significantly different models.

Despite the popularity of co-teaching and widespread professional literature describing exemplary co-teaching practices, this instructional approach has yet to realize its potential. One way to increase the effectiveness of co-teaching is for special educators to contribute meaningfully by assuming the role of strategy leader in the co-taught classroom. This article provides examples of how special educators can define their role in co-taught classrooms by contributing purposefully through evidence-based strategy instruction.

A large percentage of students with disabilities are being educated in the general education environment for a majority of the academic day. Many educators have chosen co-teaching as the most appropriate method of educational service delivery to meet the needs of this population of students. To ensure the success of this delivery method, co-teaching teams should engage in active communication, co-planning and preparation, shared instructional delivery and assessment, and conflict resolution. This article presents a variety of tools and resources that co-teaching teams might use to establish a successful classroom environment for all students.

Co-teaching is a widely implemented instructional strategy that poses unique challenges to teachers and may require targeted training. This study considers the role of pre-service and in-service professional development opportunities regarding co-teaching and teacher confidence, interests, and attitudes regarding co-teaching in a sample of general education and special education teachers. After controlling for key teacher demographics, professional development opportunities around co-teaching were positively associated with each teacher outcome. Teachers with more frequent in-service opportunities in co-teaching were more confident in their co-teaching practice and demonstrated higher levels of interest and more positive attitudes about co-teaching than did those teachers with less frequent in-service opportunities. Pre-service training on co-teaching was also positively associated with teacher confidence.

With the continuing increase of inclusive education in our public school classrooms today, there is a great deal of interest in co-teaching teams. Research indicates that administrative support is a critical factor in co-teaching effectiveness. In this study, we explored administrator knowledge and practices related to the supervision and evaluation of co-teachers in inclusive classroom settings. Clear themes that emerged were related to professional preparation and training; expectations and perspectives of co-teaching and inclusive practice; and supporting, supervising, and evaluating co-teachers. The data indicated that there is considerable inconsistency in administrator knowledge and practices and that professional development for administrators is warranted. Implications for practice as well as questions and issues for further research are discussed.

This article describes an innovative collaboration between graduate students and a faculty member to co-design and co-teach a graduate-level workshop-style qualitative methods course. The goal of co-designing and co-teaching the course was to involve advanced graduate students in all aspects of designing a syllabus and leading class discussions in a required course for first-year graduate students. The authors describe the multiple stages involved in designing and teaching the qualitative methods course and discuss the challenges of this type of collaborative teaching. This type of collaboration builds on the existing strengths of workshop-style methods courses to improve student learning by providing opportunities for grounded engagement with epistemological topics and ample opportunities for feedback, discussion, and reflection on the research process. This collaborative teaching model, although difficult and time-intensive, provides measurable improvements to existing qualitative workshop courses by overcoming some of the limitations of workshop courses and providing significant benefits for graduate students in the class, the student co-teachers, and faculty.

As increasing numbers of students with disabilities are taught in general education classrooms, co-teaching has become an established method of special education service provision. No longer viewed by education professionals as a collaborative model-come-lately, this shared approach of working side by side with a colleague in a classroom can be a rewarding and at the same time frustrating experience. This article offers co-teachers practical techniques to enhance their interactions and, in turn, improve educational outcomes for all of their students.

In this article, the authors examine pre-service special education teacher reaction to and experience in a collaboratively taught higher education course. Forty-three full-time postbaccalaureate students participate in a course designed to examine critical issues in special education, taught by two faculty members, one specializing in mild and moderate disabilities and the other in moderate and severe disabilities. Pre-service teachers respond to a survey about their knowledge and comfort with co-teaching. Data are collected and analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Three qualitative themes regarding participants' perceptions of skills affecting co-teaching emerge: interpersonal skills, collaborative skills, and instructional issues. Overall, participant knowledge of co-teaching increase and faculty modeling of co-teaching is reported as the most valuable contributing factor.

Co-teaching has been developed as an instructional approach to support students with disabilities in general education classrooms. The purpose of this study was to identify teachers’ and students’ perspectives of co-teaching and the efficacy of this teaching approach. Forty-five co-teachers and 58 students with disabilities ( N = 103), all of whom were new to co-taught classrooms during the 2004 through 2005 school year, participated in this study. Data were collected from surveys, observations, and records review. Significant differences in student academic and behavioral performances were found in comparisons between the year before co-teaching and the year of co-teaching. Students with disabilities and their teachers also reported positive perspectives about co-teaching. Based on these preliminary results, co-teaching appears to be an effective instructional delivery option for meeting the needs of students with disabilities in general education classrooms.

General education teacher (overheard in the hallway): “Oh yeah, I used to have a special educator working with me in the classroom … but I do not know what happened to her!”

General education and special education teacher candidates lack experience in collaborating with each other as colleagues; however, upon graduating and entering their own classrooms, most are expected to know how to provide services to students with disabilities in the general classroom. This study describes the efforts of two professors, one in special education and the other in English education, to have their students participate in a collaborative and consultative relationship with each other at the pre-service level. Data are comprised of pre- and post-surveys, as well as weekly written reflections by the teacher candidates. Significant differences were found across programs and within the English education program. Reflections reveal differing participant perceptions of the co-teaching experience. Findings indicate exposure to co-teaching at the pre-service level provides an opportunity to address the roles and responsibilities of general and special educators in working together to ensure academic success for all learners.

This paper describes the efforts of one school district to implement and evaluate co-teaching as a means for successfully including most students with disabilities into general education classrooms. The evaluation team collected data for two years at the elementary and middle school levels related to student achievement, application of classroom and test modifications, behavioral referrals, student self-concept, and teacher and parent satisfaction. Evaluation results indicated support for co-teaching as a means for providing students with disabilities access to the general education curriculum and their peers without disabilities.

Co-teaching–general and special education teachers teaching together in a general education classroom–is frequently offered as a means of promoting inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education curriculum but few researchers have examined the context in which special educators co-teach. Six special educators at the middle school and high school level were observed and interviewed in their co-taught classrooms. Using grounded theory methods for data analysis, a description of the roles the special educators took in the co-taught classrooms, the influences upon those roles, and the reasons these teachers participated in co-teaching was developed. These special educators took on roles ranging from providing support to the general educator to team teaching, some of which deviated a great deal from the co-teaching literature. Knowledge of content, attitude of the general educator, and scheduling issues influenced the roles that each teacher took and most teachers felt pressured by administrators, other professionals, and the community to participate in co-teaching without much support. These results raise questions about what the expectations are of co-teaching from both administrative and teacher perspectives and what teachers need in order to implement co-teaching programs.

Students with special needs are increasingly being served in the general education classroom. Co-teaching is one service delivery option designed to meet those needs. The purpose of this article is to synthesize data-based articles pertaining to co-teaching between general and special education personnel. Of 89 articles reviewed, only 6 provided sufficient quantitative information for an effect size to be calculated. Effect sizes for the individual studies ranged from low (0.24) to high (0.95), with an average total effect size of 0.40. Dependent measures were varied and included grades, achievement scores, and social and attitudinal outcomes. Results indicate that further research is needed to substantiate that co-teaching is an effective service delivery option for students with disabilities.

The proliferation of inclusion in public schools has prompted the development of several models of collaborative instruction. In response to that trend, this study provides some relevant information about the current state of practice from the perspective of essential stakeholders: the collaborating teachers. This investigation focused primarily on important factors affecting collaborative teaching, including effective strategies that were both valued and used, important teacher preparations, and valued school-based supports. Information relative to these issues was gathered by using the Perceptions of Co-Teaching Survey, an instrument developed by the author. A number of survey respondents were selected randomly to participate in a semistructured interview. Of the 139 participants who returned the completed survey, 92 represented intact collaborative teaching partners. From this respondent pool, 12 co-teachers were interviewed. Based on the most significant findings of the study, two conclusions were posited. First, general education co-teachers were perceived as doing more than their special education partners in the inclusive classroom. Second, co-teachers who had access to the collaborative practices, preparations, and supports listed in the survey considered them less valuable in practice than in theory.