Download
1 / 18
180 likes | 303 Views
Co-Teaching, Co-Learning Findings from year 1. 2010-2012 Knowles Science Teaching Foundation Grant Jessica Thompson & Sara Hagenah. A Co-Learning Model. Supporting novice learning (Thompson, Windschitl, & Braaten, 2010)
E N D
Co-Teaching, Co-LearningFindings from year 1 2010-2012 Knowles Science Teaching Foundation Grant Jessica Thompson & Sara Hagenah
A Co-Learning Model • Supporting novice learning (Thompson, Windschitl, & Braaten, 2010) • Student teaching can be a time for on-going learning of core practices from methods • Focus on developing a student thinking lens • Supportive contextual discourses • Co-learning can’t fully operate under a traditional apprenticeship model to produce individual artisans (Feinman-Nemser, 2001)
Data Sources • 8 CT-TC pairs • Observed each pair co-teach 5 times • Observed and participated in 4 planning and 4 debriefing sessions with pairs • Pre & post interviews with individuals • CT conversations from summer institute, 2 meetings at critical times, & CTs social media conversations
Points of Discussion • Having structured phases to student teaching • Aligning Practices among UW, CTs, and TCs • Co-teaching at its best--what this sounds like in classroom discourse & planning • Turning over responsibility during student teaching • Midcourse refocusing • Targeted coaching (TC/CT/Coach & social media)
Aligning Practices • Not at all aligned 2. Aiming for different targets 3. Aligning: Building on kids’ ideas 4. Aligning: Working through explanations & scaffolding students’ thinking
Alignment of practice & TC practice Case A Case B Case C
Understanding Alignment • Co-teaching = co-planning, co-instruction, co-debriefing • CT theory behind “turning over responsibility” during student teaching • Midcourse refocusing • CT refocusing • Calibrating through targeted coaching • Calibrating through social media
“Co-teaching” at its best • Co-teaching= co-planning, co-instruction, co-debriefing
Co-planning at its best • Co-planning a full explanation & connecting activities • Set time • With colleagues • Used a tool- as a starting place for conversations & a standing public document representing sharing thinking • Challenging one another’s content knowledge beyond the textbook • Willingness to revise ideas from the text, curriculum • If not: • Loss of rigor • CT lost & can not track student ideas
Co-teaching at its best S: Would ash be considered a physical change? Like an egg? S: So we did an example of melted cheese. TC: So what did we just have in the back of the class? S: We thought also that it was physical changes even though it comes after melting and boiling. S: I don’t agree with that because even though there was a color change CO2 was emitted so the identity of the log would have had to have changed CT: Does anyone have something to add to this? … TC: Raise your hand if you have seen a fire burning…so is it possible that a physical change is happening? • Students’ stories • Participation • Working on students’ ideas
Co-teaching at its best con’t CT: so this is chemistry. Let’s think about this at an atomic level…What makes up an egg? S: Elements S: Potassium TC: Be specific S: Proteins, and when we cook proteins the proteins change TC: What does it look like? What happens when it cooks? [TC draws on board and shows a tightly bound protein and an unwound protein.] S: So it is breaking and forming bonds S: It expanded because of heat. When it heated they [bonds] move apart rather than together. • Students’ stories • Participation • Working on students’ ideas
Co-debriefing at its best • Focused on student thinking • Daily reflection questions about student thinking, including specific individual students • Planning for the next day informed by key episodes of rich classroom dialogue or what students were NOT talking about • NOTE: only a few CT-TC pairs had routines in place for these conversations
Turning over Responsibility Individual artisans Co-Planning Co-Planners • Never fully turning over unit planning, staying involved in lesson planning until the end • Creating richest learning experience for students • On board with others from same department OR didn’t have pressure Individual Artisans • Tended to use teacher learning rather than student learning as a meter stick--meeting CTs limited repertoire or more limited understanding of core practices? • Tension between freedom (TC) and readiness (CT) • Tension between “keeping pace” with department members NOT on board with core practices
Midcourse Refocusing • In January/February many TCs tooka nose dive • CT re-focusing • High expectations & accountability • New requests were made easier if nightly communication and submitting lesson plans was already established as a routine (i.e. adding back-pocket question) • Had tough but supportive conversations, challenged instead of “being nice” • Had stayed in touch with planning so easier to get re-involved, for others CTs all they could do is watch TC regression away from student ideas
Refocusing: Targeted Coaching Pedagogical Content Coaching around 4 core practices • What we did: • listen for richest classroom conversations & analyzed for rigor & responsiveness • Involved CTs • What TCs had to say about our coaching • Some TC-CT kept coaching feedback “alive” after we left • What CTs had to say about coaching • Designated time for reflection • Supportive of CTs’ learning • BUT for some CT/TCs coaching was about “tweaks” and “tricks”
