Co-Teaching: Research on Effective Practice

1. Co-Teaching: Research on Effective Practice Julie King Berlin School District May 2009

2. Essential Question: What are the contributing factors to the achievement gap between students with disabilities and non-disabled peers, and how can this gap be narrowed. The FM Process

3. Strengths Dedicated, caring, hard-working staff that stretch our limited resources Administration open to improvement changes Teaming model at BJHS Differentiated reading programs Co-teaching at BHS Weaknesses Pull-out interventions that cause learning environments with large identified students to teacher ratios Lack of adequate intervention resources that tie directly to regular education curriculum Lack of adequate and consistent training/staffing/resources for teaching multiple subjects to large groups with mixed abilities District Instructional Practices Discussion

4. Hypothesis Effective district-wide implementation of the co-teaching model in classrooms with a high number of identified students will narrow the achievement gap.

5. Gather DataFailure rates before & after co-teaching at BHS

6. Research Review on Co-teaching • Highly encouraged methodology to provide adequate support for the social, academic and behavioral improvement of special education students • There are different models for co-teaching: Lead & Support, Station teaching, Parallel teaching, Alternative teaching, Team teaching, • Should be a process in place for choosing co-teachers - interpersonal skills and willingness are important! • Should be a process in place for pairing co-teachers – Consensus must exist at the following levels of consideration: Philosophical, Theoretical, Procedural, Instructional, and Evaluational • Common planning time is essential • Should be a process in place for determining the effectiveness of the model and the pairings

7. Recommendations • District-wide implementation by 2010-2011 • priority - classes with highest number of identified students • Content areas of math, reading & writing • Assure adequate staffing & scheduling • Professional development for all staff • What is co-teaching? • Different models • Interpersonal skills necessary • Create and following a process for selecting and sustaining co-teachers and pairings • On-going, in-depth Professional Development provided to those involved in co-teaching • Create and follow a process for determining the effectiveness of the model and teacher pairings

8. Thoughts on District Data Profiles Don Picard Berlin School District May 2009

9. Data Subcommittee Hypothesis Examination of student achievement data across the district using a common data tool should advance student achievement and thereby narrow the achievement gap between special education students and their non-special education peers.

10. Current Data Use

11. Current Data Teams

12. Recommendations All teachers are to receive training using Performance Tracker Formation of data teams at each level to analyze student achievement data in reading and mathematics

13. Data Teams and the Future The formation of data teams in the Berlin Public Schools is just the beginning. Intervention programs for reading and mathematics at all levels will require training, materials, and personnel. If training, materials, and personnel are secured, scheduling for individual student interventions will need to be addressed.

14. NPLBNo Para-Educator Left Behind Christine Lindsey Berlin School District May 2009

15. CIA Subcommittee Hypothesis More formal orientations before para-educators begin their jobs, more interactive evaluations, and more professional development based on para-educator needs would narrow the gap between the achievement of students with disabilities and their non-disabled peers.

16. Process • Collection of Materials – • Para Contracts/Job Descriptions • Para Evaluation Forms • On-Line Research of Other District forms • Surveys – • Administrators: Building, Special Ed. and Title One • Para-Educators

17. Administrator Survey Findings • All paras in Grades K-6 meet NCLB requirements • 100% reported having written job descriptions (Para Contract) • Evaluations vary administrator to administrator • 20% reported having formal orientations consistently prior to a para beginning work • 100% reported not having formal para workshops consistently on professional development days

18. Para Qualifications & Job Description Findings

19. Para Evaluation

20. Para Findings Orientation & Professional Development

21. Observations & the Future • Administrators appeared happy with how things were • Paras appreciated being asked for their input • Paras provided lots of useful info for planning future orientations, evaluation procedures, and professional development needs • Include para representatives/input on committees that address the FM Achievement Team recommendations

22. Focused Monitoring Sets the Agenda for Systems Improvement Berlin School District Julie King Christine Lindsey Don Picard

23. Area of Investigation Differentiating Instruction Teacher and Para-educator Surveys Research about DI Findings 10% of teachers and 18% of paras report little to no knowledge of DI 26% of teachers and 36% of paras report receiving no previous training in DI Recommendations All teachers must have participated in DI training by the end of 2009-2010 school year A qualified presenter goes to each teacher’s room and models Presenter returns and observes teacher doing the DI in class Teachers meet by level/subjects to discuss DI, work on planning units, and share resources Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment Committee

24. Area of investigation Co-teaching Analyze BHS Course Failure Rates Before & After Co-teaching Research on co-teaching Findings HS failure rates have decreased since moving to co-teaching in lower-level Math and English courses Disaggregated groups have shown improvements on NECAP scores Recommendations District-wide implementation by 2010-2011 priority - classes with highest number of identified students Content areas of math, reading & writing Assure adequate staffing & scheduling Professional development for all staff What is co-teaching? Different models Interpersonal skills necessary Process followed in selecting and sustaining co-teachers and pairings On-going, in-depth Professional Development provided to those involved in co-teaching Process followed and data collected to evaluate the effectiveness of the model and pairings Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment Committee

25. Area of investigation Para-educators Administrator Survey Para-educator Survey Findings 100% of K-6 para-eds meet NCLB requirements (73% district-wide) 100% reported having written job descriptions (Para-ed Contract) 100% reported not having formal para-ed workshops consistently on professional development days 91% say they know their role in the classroom 68% feel teachers know their role in the classroom 9% have never been evaluated 45% Did not receive any job orientation 29% of those having an orientation were satisfied with it Recommendations All para-educators meet NCLB by Fall of 2014 Review job descriptions and have written descriptions for all para-educator positions Uniform # of evaluations Review/Develop standard evaluation format Standardized orientation format by building Orientation for all para-educators Para-educator specific PD workshops Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment Committee

26. Findings NECAPs are the only source of data consistent across district Data teams do not exist at all grade levels Recommendations All teachers receive training using Performance Tracker Formation of data teams at each level to analyze student achievement data in reading and math Data Committee

27. Areas of Investigation Parent Involvement & Satisfaction Communication effectiveness Parent, staff surveys Findings Parent Survey (20% of parents surveyed) Parents value opportunities to communicate with teachers about their child Preferred Methods of contact: Telephone Face to face Teacher/Para-educator Survey 50% of staff “communicate with parents about their child’s progress” 62% feel “recognized for good work” Recommendations Teachers have access to MMS (parent contact info) Staff log all telephone contacts Expand existing phone system Explore creation of Parent/Teacher conferences Develop a planned strategy for communicating with parents, staff, students and community at large regarding the direction of the district in addressing strategic goals Explore strategies to recognize accomplishments of school personnel Parent Involvement Committee

28. The Future • Prioritize current recommendations! • Data Teams will be effective only with intervention materials, training, and personnel • Our district has limited resources – it’s the dedication of staff that makes it thrive! We must have programs/systems/methods in place that show administrators, teachers, and support staff they are valued! • Explore more flexible means of communicating with parents as technology changes (blogs, emails, text messaging) • Rotate A-Team members for more staff investment and to avoid burn-out