FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page ix Preface Why Co-Teach? What Experience, History, Law, and Research Say! Erin Jarry ix
FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page x x A GUIDE TO CO-TEACHING Do you remember when you first knew that you were meant to be a teacher? Ann Nevin remembers being a first grader in a one-room schoolhouse on the Troy Road in Schenectady, New York, when the teacher asked her to explain to an older classmate how to do a math problem. Richard Villa reflected daily on the teaching methods used by the nuns during his second-grade year, thinking that if his teachers taught in different ways, more of his classmates would be successful. Jacqueline Thousand similarly recalls playing teacher with her younger brother, who had to endure, from the time Jacqueline was in kindergarten, hours of her replicating what her teacher had done that day in school. We share in common the fact that we all fell in love with teaching at an early age, but we also share the fact that our sole model of teaching was the lone arranger model until well into our careers as educators. Why did we decide to write this book? Fortunately, we have learned a great deal about co-teaching through our co-teaching experiences with one another and with many other educators over the years. The most important thing that we have learned is that we greatly prefer co-teaching to teaching alone. Why? There are at least three reasons: IQ, CQ, and EQ. Our IQs (intelligence quotients) improve exponentially with a co-teaching partner s knowledge to add to the experience, but our CQs (creativity quotients) increase because of the need to collaborate. Our EQs (emotional quotients) also increase because of the added learning styles and communication skills of co-teaching partners. We also have noticed an increased appreciation and valuing of people who have different knowledge bases, opinions, practices, and beliefs. We wrote this book so that you, too, might enjoy more fun, more creativity, more productivity, and more effective outcomes for your students. Each chapter in the book is the result of our co-teaching with each other and collaborating to write this book. Aside from our own personal experiences, there are many other reasons to prefer co-teaching and argue for the use of co-teaching arrangements in all schools. The remainder of this Preface traces the historical origins of co-teaching, the legal rationale for co-teaching, and the benefits of co-teaching to students, schools, and teachers. As you begin to co-teach, there will be those who will ask you to explain or defend your co-teaching practice. This Preface is intended to give you information to support your practice, beliefs, and feelings about the benefits of co-teaching. It is also an interesting account for those of you who enjoy knowing the historical context and rationale for what you do. Finally, be sure to keep track of your own experiences as you embark on your co-teaching ventures and make your own list of reasons for co-teaching, as you experience the positive outcomes of co-teaching in your life and school. WHAT ARE THE ORIGINS OF CO-TEACHING? Do you wonder where the idea of co-teaching originated? The history and evolution of co-teaching in U.S. schools can be traced back to the 1960s when it was popularized as an example of progressive education. In the 1970s, coteaching was advanced by legislated school reforms and teachers increasing need to modify instruction for a more diverse student population. Moreover,
FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page xi PREFACE xi the effectiveness of school-based collaborative activities, with co-teaching as one example, began to be documented in the research and practice literature. Teachers and administrators began to trust that co-teaching led to results that were valued by students, their teachers, parents, the larger community, and boards of education. For example, Walther-Thomas (1997) evaluated coteaching models in 23 schools across eight school districts. Positive outcomes included improved academic and social skills of low-achieving students, improved attitudes and self-concepts reported by students with disabilities, and more positive peer relationships. Students perceived that these improvements were the result of more teacher time and attention. The co-teachers themselves (general and special educator teaching teams) reported professional growth, personal support, and enhanced sense of community within the general education classrooms. The most frequently mentioned drawback was the lack of staff development to learn how to be more effective co-teachers. These co-teachers could have used this book! HOW DOES FEDERAL LAW SUPPORT CO-TEACHING? Federal legislative changes, such as those required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; Pub. L. No. 105 17) and the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 (Pub. L. No. 107 110), have focused attention on students with increasingly diverse learning characteristics achieving high academic performance in general education. To illustrate the recent increase in student diversity, data from the U.S. Department of Education (2001) indicates that the proportion of students with disabilities with primary placements in general education increased from 33% in 1992 to 46.7% in 2001. These proportions can be expected to increase given national trends of the past three decades and IDEA s requirement to include students with disabilities as full participants in rigorous academic and general education curriculum and assessment. Changing legal requirements and student demographics combine to point to the need for increased collaborative planning and teaching among school personnel attempting to comply with legal mandates. Co-teaching is one cost-efficient, legally available, supplementary aid and service that can be brought to general education to serve the needs of students with (and without) disabilities through IDEA. The stated goal of the 2001 NCLB Act is to close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind (retrieved November 16, 2003, from http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/ beginning.html#sec1). Like IDEA, the NCLB Act s requirements for high standards and student performance are intended to foster conditions that lead to better instruction and learning, equality of opportunity to learn, and excellence in performance for all children. The specific conditions fostered by this comprehensive act are (1) the preparation, training, and recruitment of high-quality teachers; (2) language instruction for students with limited English proficiency and children of migrant workers; (3) schools equipped for the 21st century; (4) informed parental choice; (5) innovative and research-based instructional
FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page xii xii A GUIDE TO CO-TEACHING programs, particularly in literacy; and (6) accountability for educational outcomes. A promising NCLB requirement is for all teachers to meet the standards that would certify them as highly qualified by the end of the 2005 2006 school year. According to NCLB, all teachers must demonstrate subject matter competence in every subject area they teach. Historically, special educators and teachers of English language learners (ELLs) often were responsible for teaching the core subjects (i.e., language arts, social studies, science, mathematics) to special education eligible and English language-learning students in separate classrooms. With NCLB, these educators will need to supplement their special education certification with a college degree, certification, or extensive university or continuing education credit units in the core subject areas, as well as passage of a pedagogical exam, to be allowed to continue to teach those areas. Co-teaching could be one way to address this certification dilemma and simultaneously achieve a desired IDEA outcome of increasing special education students time in general education. Creating partnerships between the highly qualified general educators, who have demonstrated subject area expertise, with special educators and ELL teachers, who have complementary expertise in specialized learning strategies and content, would result in implementing the researchbased curricular and instructional approaches required by NCLB. It should be noted here that experts have identified co-teaching as an important method for improving conversational and instructional skills of ELLs (Bahamonde & Friend, 1999; Mahoney, 1997). The inclusion of students with language and learning differences and their teachers in general education through co-teaching arrangements, combined with the research-based curricula and instructional practices required of NCLB, should actually help teachers in standards-based classrooms. All students need their teachers to learn and use the most effective teaching strategies, educational materials, and lesson formats currently known. Teachers can accomplish this by exchanging such information and expertise through their co-teaching partnerships. In summary, at the heart of IDEA and the NCLB Act is the goal of increasing the achievement for all students students with and without disabilities, students who are English language learners, students who are considered disadvantaged. Legal trends, then, reinforce the notion that teachers and other school personnel (e.g., special educators, related services personnel such as speech and language therapists, teachers of ELLs, gifted and talented education educators) can no longer be most effective as isolated professionals. WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF CO-TEACHING? What are the documented benefits of co-teaching for teachers, students, and schools? Schwab Learning (2003) studied the impact of collaborative partnerships and co-teaching. At 16 California schools, staff members and parents made a commitment that (1) every child would learn and be successful and (2) every teacher would be responsible for every learner. Teachers, administrators, and support staff creatively arranged for every
FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page xiii PREFACE xiii student to receive blended services from Title 1 teachers, reading specialists, special educators, paraprofessionals, and so on. Results included decreased referrals to intensive special education services, increased overall student achievement, fewer disruptive problems, less paperwork, increased number of students qualified for gifted and talented education, and decreased referrals for behavioral problems. In addition, teachers reported being happier and not feeling so isolated. What does the research say about students with a variety of instructional needs in co-teaching classrooms? We can be assured that co-teaching is effective for students with a variety of instructional needs, including English language learners (Mahoney, 1997); those with hearing impairment (Compton et al., 1998; Luckner, 1999); those with learning disabilities (Rice & Zigmond, 1999; Trent, 1998; Welch, 2000); high-risk students in a social studies class (Dieker, 1998) and students in a language remediation class (Miller, Valasky, & Molloy, 1998). To illustrate, Welch (2000) showed that students with disabilities and their classmates all made academic gains in reading and spelling on curriculum-based assessments in the co-taught classrooms. Mahoney (1997) found that in addition to meeting educational needs, for special education students, being part of the large class meant making new friends (p. 59). There is, then, an emerging database for preschool through high school levels (Villa, Thousand, Nevin, & Malgeri, 1996) that leads to the following conclusions: 1. At all grade levels, students with disabilities can be educated effectively in general education environments where teachers, support personnel, and families collaborate. 2. Improvements are evidenced in both academic and social skill relationship arenas. What can account for results such as those described here? First, co-teaching allows students to experience and imitate the cooperative and collaborative skills that teachers show when they co-teach. All students benefit when their teachers share ideas, work cooperatively, and contribute to one another s learning. There is a growing research base to support this claim. As previously suggested, with multiple instructors, there is increased flexibility in grouping and scheduling, thus making it possible for students to experience less wait time for teacher attention and increased time on task, an important factor documented to increase achievement. Second, co-teaching provides a greater opportunity to capitalize on the unique, diverse, and specialized knowledge, skills, and instructional approaches of the co-teachers (Bauwens, Hourcade, & Friend, 1989; Hourcade & Bauwens, 2002). The higher teacher-student ratio allows for more immediate and accurate diagnoses of student needs and more active student participation in a variety of learning situations. Students as well as their teachers say they have more fun and feel better about the work they do while in co-taught classrooms. Principals and superintendents appreciate the increased community spirit of the schools where co-teaching prevails.
FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page xiv xiv A GUIDE TO CO-TEACHING Third, teachers who co-teach often find that they can structure their classes to use more effectively the research-proven strategies required of the NCLB Act. For example, Miller and colleagues (1998) described how a co-teacher team (a special educator, a general educator, and two paraprofessionals) were able to blend whole and small-group instruction, peer teaching, and small cooperative learning groups to provide language remediation activities within the general education curriculum. A fourth reason for positive student and teacher outcomes is that co-teaching and other collaborative activities are vehicles for inventing solutions that traditional bureaucratic school structures have failed to conceptualize. Because team structures bring together people with diverse backgrounds and interests, their shared knowledge and skills often generate novel methods to individualize learning (Nevin, Thousand, Paolucci-Whitcomb, & Villa, 1990; Skrtic, 1987). In fact, collaborative co-teaching arrangements are present in model schools where all students (including students with severe disabilities) are educated in general education classrooms in their neighborhood schools (Villa & Thousand, 2004). In interviews with 95 peer-collaborators and 96 others who were not collaborating, Pugach and Johnson (1995) found that those in the peer-collaboration group had reduced referral rates to special services, increased confidence in handling classroom problems, increased positive attitudes toward the classroom, and more tolerance toward children with cognitive deficits. These are powerful outcomes that encourage administrators, advocates, and even state departments of education (Arguelles, Hughes, & Schumm, 2000) to adopt cooperative models such as co-teaching for the effective education of students with disabilities. A fifth reason, related to positive teacher satisfaction outcomes, is that teachers view co-teaching as a way to become more empowered. There is evidence to suggest that teachers feel empowered when they can make decisions collaboratively (Duke, Showers, & Imber, 1980). They report increases in their skills (Thousand et al., 1987). They experience increased higher-level thinking and generate more novel solutions (Thousand et al., 1995). Other valued outcomes include increased attendance and participation at team meetings, persistence in working on difficult tasks, and attainment of the overall team goals (Johnson & Johnson, 1997). Teacher satisfaction in co-teaching arrangements also has been linked to basic needs satisfaction. Glasser (1999) proposed that people choose to do what they do because it satisfies one or more of the five basic human needs: survival, power over or control of one s life, freedom or choice, a sense of belonging, and fun. Specifically, each teacher s potential for survival and power in educating a diverse student body creates opportunities for regular exchange of needed resources, expertise, and technical assistance and professional growth through reciprocal experiences. In co-teaching, teachers experience a sense of belonging and freedom from isolation by having others with whom to share the responsibility for accomplishing the challenging tasks of teaching in classrooms of diverse students. It is fun to problem solve creatively and to engage in stimulating adult dialogue and social interactions. Based on interviews of co-teachers that we have conducted over the past two decades, co-teaching can help educators meet these five basic needs. For
FM-Villa.qxd 3/8/04 9:19 PM Page xv PREFACE xv example, teachers report that co-teaching helps meet the need for survival and power because it promotes perspective taking, increases student teacher direct contact time, and increases the number of students who get the help they need. Co-teaching helps meet the need for freedom and choice because it can facilitate a shared responsibility for all children, provide opportunities to work with a variety of students, and reduce the amount of direct support needed from administrators. Co-teaching helps meet the need for belonging because it can alleviate isolation, motivate a commitment to others, increase social support, and allow for integration of specialists expertise into the classroom. Co-teaching helps meet the need for fun by enabling creativity, providing someone to laugh and talk with, creating a positive learning environment, and improving staff morale. In summary, co-teaching may offer the following benefits: 1. Students develop better attitudes about themselves, academic improvement, and social skills. 2. Teacher-student ratio is increased, leading to better teaching and learning conditions. 3. Teachers are able to use research-proven teaching strategies effectively. 4. A greater sense of community is fostered in the classroom. 5. Co-teachers report professional growth, personal support, and enhanced motivation. 6. Increased job satisfaction can be experienced because needs for survival, power, freedom or choice, a sense of belonging, and fun are met. Co-teaching provides a vehicle for school communities to move from feelings of isolation and alienation to feelings of community and collaboration. Another way of saying this is that the lone arranger model of teaching is replaced with a co-teaching model. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Corwin Press gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the following individuals: Diane Baumstark National Board Certified Teacher Detroit Public Schools Detroit, MI Laura Cumbee Student Support Teacher South Central Middle School Emerson, GA Jill England Inclusive Educational Consultant (Private) Ypsilanti, MI Kathleen M. Falcetta National Board Certified Teacher Granville Elementary School Granville, NY