Are Two Teachers Better Than One in the Classroom?

1. Are Two Teachers Better Than One in the Classroom? James R. Benchich Cabrini College 6.23.11

2. The Beginning of Co-Teaching • Co-teaching gradually began to increase in popularity during the early 1980’s with the practices of inclusive schooling. Co-teaching quite simply defined is an instructional delivery system or approach which the regular education teacher and the special education teacher share responsibilities during any particular lesson. • This strategy ensures that learning support students included in the regular education classroom are receiving their supports and services as outlined in their IEP. Co-teaching became more mainstreamed and really took off as a result of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001. • The No Child Left Behind Act, “included the requirements that all students, including those with disabilities, access the general curriculum; be taught by highly qualified teachers; and be included in professionals’ accountability for achievement outcomes” (Friend, Cook, Hurley-Chamberlin, & Shamberger, 2010, p. 10).

3. The Beginning of Co-Teaching • Co-teaching in theory is a great strategy to utilize however there are issues around logistics, planning, and assessment practices that have been raising issues. During the most recent reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004, “Co-teaching seems to be a vehicle through which legislative expectations can be met while students with disabilities at the same time can receive the specially designed instruction and other supports to which they are entitled” (Friend, Cook, Hurley-Chamberlin, & Shamberger, 2010, p. 10). • Another item that co-teaching helps to support is that it promotes a Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) for learning support students in a regular education classroom and it helps students who fit into the criteria that the Gaskin Settlement in Pennsylvania has now established for special education students. • The Gaskin settlement litigation now states how the State of Pennsylvania’s public school districts provide special education services and how the quality of special education services is now supposed to be offered. The settlement was designed to increase the number of special education students who are to be included in the regular education classroom and the general education curriculum

4. Understanding Co-Teaching • The typical practice of Co-teaching has been described as an instructional delivery approach where a regular education teacher and a special education teacher share responsibility for planning, delivery and evaluation of instructional techniques for regular education students and students with disabilities in an inclusion setting. Regular education teachers and special education teachers work in a coactive and coordinated fashion, which involves the joint teaching of academics and behaviors. • After the reauthorization of Individuals with Disabilities of Education Act (IDEA) 2004 and the Gaskin Settlement in Pennsylvania, co-teaching was sent to the forefront of educational instructional strategies to ensure that students with disabilities who are included in the regular education classroom are receiving their specially designed instruction and accommodations according to their Individualized Education Plans (IEP’s).

5. Understanding Co-Teaching • Co-teaching today in classrooms across the country are on the rise because it is a way for schools to make sure students with disabilities are receiving supports they need to be successful and as a way for schools to meet federal mandates within stringent budgets. • The one glaring statistic that does come out however is that students in co-taught classrooms are successful within their studies and school classes, but they are still not doing well on state tests. The research is lacking however about student outcomes on state tests that come from co-teaching classrooms.

6. The Critical Component of Co-Teaching Partnerships • Co-teaching as an effective strategy in the classroom is one that has been on the rise and has been receiving a lot of attention lately. In order for an effective co-teaching partnership, the teachers must be compatible with each other and respect each others style of teaching. With all of this tied together, the most critical component of a co-teaching partnership is effective communication skills. • If the teachers are not communicating with each other during a lesson, more harm than good is taking place because the students start to get lost. When effective communication skills are there, all the rest of the components will start to fall in place. With all of this in mind, “adjusting to one’s style to honor the partner’s needs, co-teachers need to use specific effective communication skills with their co-teacher” (Conderman, Johnston-Rodriguez, & Hartman, 2009, p. 10).

7. The Critical Component of Co-Teaching Partnerships • “Special educators often are assigned to work with multiple teachers during the same class period, and thus, the teachers are not able to collaborate effectively anymore” (Murawski & Dieker, 2004, p. 53). Until special education teachers are asked to co-teach with one or possibly two teachers per day, pure co-teaching will not take place. As of now, the time restraints for special education teachers are too restrictive to allow for the special education teacher to be involved with the co-planning time that is needed for a successful co-teaching partnership. Until regular education teachers and special education teachers get co-planning time, co-teaching in a particular school will stay stagnant and will not proceed.

8. How to Prepare Teaching and Planning for Co-Teaching • When teachers are paired up with each other most likely designed by a school administrator, effective preparation is going to be key for any outcomes of co-teaching to be successful. • However, this is the number one thing that schools are grappling with is that there is hardly anytime during the school day to do any co-planning. Most often, the regular education teacher and the special education teacher are do not have prep periods that match up together that would allow the co-planning to take place. Also, many special education teachers are paired up with three to four other teachers through out the day to do “co-teaching” to ease the costs of hiring more special education teachers. • When doing the actual lesson planning, “the general education teacher, being the content experts, can identify the standard and how it relates to the overall curriculum of the content being taught while the special education teacher should be familiarized with each learning support students Individualized Education Plan (IEP) so that specific IEP goals can be incorporated into the instruction” (Howard & Potts, 2009, p. 4). Also during this time, accommodations and modifications are discussed as well as structured by the special education teacher so they can be integrated into the existing classroom setup. This overall design of co-planning in a perfect school is the true definition of co-teaching in practice.

9. Student Response to Co-Taught Classrooms • In a survey designed by Conderman’s research (2011) of co-teaching (2011), he asked students what they liked about co-teaching and how being in a co-taught classroom made them feel. Students revealed they felt they received more assistance, learned more in that particular co-taught class, enjoyed coming to co-taught classes more than non co-taught classes, and they felt they experienced more dynamic teaching methods. Also, students felt they could ask more questions, participated more, received better grades, had more fun, and always knew teacher expectations in a co-taught classroom.

10. Student Response to Co-Taught Classrooms • The favorite aspect this group of students liked about co-teaching was that “I can ask one teacher a question if the other one is busy” (Conderman, 2011, p. 30). Overall benefits that the students picked up on without being prompted by a professional or knew the logistical framework of co-teaching was that the availability of an adult was greater, questions were answered quicker, relationships with the teachers were formed, more time with the teachers, and the content or subject is understood quicker which the bottom line is that the students can see themselves being successful.

11. Conclusion • Because of The No Child Left Behind Act mandates and the inclusion model that is being emphasized by the Pennsylvania Department of Education and the United States Department of Education, co-teaching has been identified as the front runner for the strategy that allows for students with disabilities to receive an education with age appropriate peers in a LRE. Co-teaching also allows for the highly qualified teaching standard to be in each classroom and the special education teacher is not the primary content certified teacher. • Co-planning so far has been impossible for schools to grapple or plan time for. Co-teaching does allow for learning support students to receive specially designed instruction and accommodations within the classroom in order for special education students to be successful. When co-teaching is strategically planned out and there is a support structure from top down within the school district, the learning experience will be enhanced for not only the students with disabilities but also for the regular education students as well.

12. References Conderman, G., (2011). Middle school co-teaching: Effective practices and student reflections. Middle School Journal. 42 (4), 24-31. Conderman, G., Johnson-Rodriguez, S., & Hartman, P. (2009). Communicating and collaborating in the co-taught classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 5 (5), 2-16. Friend, M., Cooke, L., Hurley-Chamberlin, D., & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An illustration of the complexity of collaboration in special education. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 20 (1). Howard, L., & Potts, E. A., (2009). Using co-planning time: Strategies for a successful co- teaching marriage. Teaching exceptional children plus, 5 (4), 2-12. Keefe, E. B., & Moore, V. (2004). The challenge of co-teaching in inclusive classrooms at the high school level: What teachers told us? American Secondary Education, 32 (3), 77-88.

13. References Kids Together Inc.: Information and Resources for children and adults with disabilities. Gaskin Settlement document from website. Source: http://www.kidstogether.org/Gaskin/gaskinsettlement.htm Murawski, W. W., & Dieker, L. A., (2004). Tips and strategies for co-teaching at the secondary level. Council for Exceptional Children. 36 (5), 52-58. Pugach, M.C., & Winn, J. A., (2011). Research on co-teaching and teaming. Journal of Special Education Leadership. 24 (1), 36-46. Nichols, J., Dowdy, A., & Nichols, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An educational promise for children with disabilities or quick fix to meet the mandates of no child left behind? Education 130 (4), 647-651. Ross-Hill, R. (2009). Teacher attitude towards inclusion practices and special needs students. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs. 9 (3), 188-198.