Quotes from Co-Teaching for English Learners
Below I will list quotes from Co-Teaching for English Learners: A Guide to Collaborative Planning, Instruction, Assessment, and Reflection by Maria G. Dove and Andrea Honigsfeld. These quotes stood out as I read the book. Other people will probably have some different impressions when reading the book and choose other quotes.
Chapter 1: Teacher Collaboration is Not an Option … It is a Must
“Although in the past English language development programs were recognized as a stand-alone subject matter, the more current understanding is that language acquisition is not a separate subject but a systematically supported practice situated in the authentic context of the classroom. Integrated language and content learning provides ELs the opportunity to acquire English through content-area lessons. The concept of integrated instruction is a powerful way for ELs to develop both their language and academic skills. For example, writing across the curriculum experts Bazerman et al. (2205) have long noted that writing supports subject learning and thinking. Further, they remind us that ‘while the sophistication of the subject matter engagement changes over the course grades, the use of writing to increase understanding, involvement, subject learning, and disciplinary thought remains consistent’ (p. 35) (8).
“In co-teaching, there is no distinction between the EL teacher and the general education teacher; both work with the entire class on mastery of content and language-acquisition objectives. Some grade level teams have arranged for the EL teacher to teach a whole-class language-oriented lesson once a week to build the language skills of all students, regardless of their EL status” (9).
There are many misconceptions about the practice of co-teaching. First and foremost, co-teaching does not work as a process in itself. The simple placement of two teachers in the same classroom does not constitute an instant teaching partnership. Many researchers of inclusive education as well as practitioners in schools with collaborative school cultures emphasize the need to engage in a complete instructional cycle of collaboration, which consists of four interrelated phases: collaborative planning, instruction, assessment, and reflection … All four phases together will maximize teacher effectiveness and impact on ELs’ language acquisition, literacy learning, and content attainment” (9).
Chapter 3: Model 1 - One Group: One leads, One “Teaches on Purpose”
“It is important to note that with this model, the classroom or content-area teacher should not always be the one who undertakes the lead teacher role. This practice will position the English language development/English language learner (ELD/ELL) teacher or other co-teaching specialist (e.g., special education, literacy, bilingual teacher, etc.) as an assistant or “helper,” and the students may not view the supporting teacher equitably. Therefore, apart from other measures that are further explained in this chapter, we recommend that the lead role be shared between the two teachers to form a balance of power” (58).
“Even though it is sometimes not an easy task for support teachers to interject during the lead teacher’s instruction, we strongly urge that they do so. Better yet, co-teachers should plan certain junctures of the lesson where the supportive teacher might share information with the class such as clarify vocabulary, repeat task information, comment on a spelling trick, note a point of grammar, describe an anomaly or a derivation in the English language, share an interesting anecdote, and so on. As the teaching partnership develops, this particular type of planning may no longer be necessary.
Consider the amount of instructional time that is spent using this model. Although on occasion we have observed it successfully used for an entire class period, we generally recommend that is take up no more than ten to fifteen minutes of the scheduled class time. The primary purpose of this model’s configuration should be to set the learning stage for students. If overused or not successfully incorporated with other teaching configurations, this instructional model might reinforce a “sit and get” mode of learning. To ensure students have time to read, interpret information, think critically, write, and work collaboratively, use this model both intentionally and sparingly” (59-60). (My comment: Note that even with strategies recommended for making this model effective effective like graphic organizers/guided notes, the authors recommend that teachers “take up no more than ten to fifteen minutes of the scheduled class time.”)
“Teaching on purpose should never be used as the default go-to model because of lack of planning time. All too often, this practice has been the case. Without proper planning, this model equates to letting the supporting teacher render instructional Band-Aids to already academically challenged ELs; in turn, their learning will be more fragmented and their instruction less impactful” (60).
Low-Prep Strategies for Model 1
Scaffolded Speech. Teachers who teach on purpose can spontaneously break down complex sentences and vocabulary being introduced by the lead teacher. This help can be accomplished when the support teacher repeats the same information but paraphrases - reduces the complexity of the spoken words - or explains the meaning of new vocabulary in context. In this way , students are exposed to rigorous academic language, yet their understanding is well supported.
Increased Wait Time. At appropriate intervals, the support teacher might signal to the lead teacher the need for students to stop and process certain information. For this reason, either the lead or the support teacher might pose a question for students to consider and ask students to engage in a Turn-and-Talk - inviting students to share their ideas with a partner before a response is presented to the whole class. A variation of the strategy Stop-and-Jot asks students to write down their ideas, share them with a partner, and then answers are shared with the larger group of students” (65).
Pro-Prep Strategies for Model 1
Partially Completed Graphic Organizers. ELs at lower levels of language proficiency are better able to organize information from content-area lessons using partially completed charts and graphic organizers. Teachers teaching on purpose use various organizers that are completed in some measure to provide ELs with a lesson’s main ideas and challenge students to recall the details, or identify the details and ask students to determine the main ideas. In this way, students are engaged with the use of academic language and enhance their comprehension of the subject at hand” (65). (The book has an example of a graphic organizer/guided notes.)
“Realia. The use of real objects or replicas of real objects can help some students connect with lesson content. Realia is most often used in the lower-grade classes of elementary schools, but it can be just as effective in the upper grades when teaching English learners with beginner or intermediate levels of language proficiency” (65).
“In this chapter, we have explored a commonly used co-teaching model - along with its variations and possible extensions - in which one teacher leads instruction for the entire class while the other is offering immediate interventions or teaching on purpose based on a predetermined learning target. While we sometimes dub this model as being the most dangerous choice, it has a clear place among all the models co-teachers may select. The danger lies in one teacher taking on the role of an assistant; to avoid this pitfall, co-teachers must ensure a clear focus and purpose for the teacher who is in the supportive role and use this model interchangeably” (74).
Chapter 4 - Model 2 - One Group: Two Teach the Same Content
“Imagine just one teacher modeling a dialogue, a difference in opinion, or an academic argument! The opportunity to have two teachers working elbow-to-elbow can be an enormous advantage for English learners (ELs)” (75).
“To introduce a lesson, consider how one teacher might begin by sharing information about a topic while her co-teacher clarifies information by emphasizing key vocabulary through the use of various visual representations, charts, manipulatives, and other realia. One teacher might identify and demonstrate the use of a skill or strategy guided by a PowerPoint presentation while the other teacher supports students’ understanding by giving them an example of how to apply the skill or strategy. One teacher may use high levels of academic language while the other scaffolds the language verbally so all students can better understand. This model of instruction works well when introducing a lesson or recapping a lesson at the end of a class period. It is also a powerful way to establish equity between co-teachers since both of them are perceived to be in a leading role” (76).
“At times, teachers who are not proficient in the class content are reluctant to co-teach using this model for instruction. This reluctance particularly seems to manifest when a novice English language development/English language learner (ELD/ELL) teacher is asked to work alongside a veteran core content instructor at the secondary level. We agree that this task may seem daunting, yet we strongly believe that this model needs to be a part of the repertoire of any co-teaching team” (76).
“First, both teachers need to know their roles in the co-taught lesson from the onset. Although this may be true with every way a class is configured for co-taught instruction, it is particularly significant when both teachers are leading the lesson. For instance, there must be some ground rules for who will introduce students to the lesson’s learning objectives, guide them to complete an opening activity, give students directions for the materials they will need, be responsible for working the interactive whiteboard, be in charge of releasing and retrieving students from a partner discussion, and so on” (76).
“With this model, it is more important than ever before that both teachers leave their egos at the classroom door. In order to lead instruction together, there is no room for one person upstaging the other. Most important, students should be able to notice the mutual respect between the two teachers concerning the area of expertise, how both teachers negotiate any changes about lesson content, procedures, resources, assessments, and so on, and that both teachers are able to resolve any difficulty in a commonly beneficial way, remaining flexible, polite, and professional. We do not suggest here that each teacher relinquish his or her individuality; on the contrary, different teaching styles, abilities, humor, energy levels, personal preferences, and so on can all be valuable assets in this co-teaching arrangement” (77).
“And then there is magic: It occurs in a co-teaching partnership over time when each teacher acquires the other’s content and pedagogical skills. Co-teaching may well be one of the most effective ongoing, job-embedded professional learning opportunities in which both teachers expand their expertise beyond what they had prior to their partnership” (80).
“After modeling the activity, engage students in guided practice using a different text. Have students work in pairs or small groups with both teachers circulating within the room assisting students with the task and directing students step-by-step to consider different text aspects, meanings, and features. When both teachers explicitly share their individual thinking processes, it gives students the opportunity to explore and apply multiple strategies. Working in pairs or small groups also allows them to share their ideas with their peers” (83).
My comment: I think this quote is important for teachers who just work through exercises with students, and the students just need to copy the teacher’s answers on the board. Modeling is good but not sufficient. Students also need time to work through the problems on their own, and working in pairs/small groups can help sometimes. If students just copy the teacher’s answers and do not do any thinking themselves, a teacher-centered classroom has been created for the whole class-period, and that should be avoided. Modeling with no actual student practice creates the appearance of a smooth-running classroom, but a class that struggles to learn the material for themselves is a learning classroom.
Chapter 6 - Model 4 - Two Groups: Two Teach Same Content
“Specifically, each group’s lesson is devised to meet the needs of those particular students, so frequently co-teachers prepare two separate lessons to match the strengths and abilities of each group” (117).
“Deliberate, systematic attention to this model will yield positive results from its use. Teachers who use this approach to instruction routinely have their students well prepared by carefully demonstrating, modeling, and practicing how to move from whole class to group work. In this way, co-teaching procedures become predictable patterns for students - they allow for smoother transitions and take up less instructional time” (118).
“Generally speaking, this model is best employed when it is coupled with other class configurations. Co-teaching teams often avoid using it to open a lesson unless it is an extension of instruction begun the previous day” (118).
“As mentioned in the introduction to this model, one of the greatest advantages of this approach is the reduction of the student-teacher ratio. Some studies have shown the positive effects on student achievement when placed in smaller classes (Chingos & Whitehurst, 2011). From a content and language point of view, English learners have more opportunities to ask questions, clarify information, and take risks to practice their language skills in a smaller and often safer environment. To wit, small-group instruction, when used purposefully, can boost the content and language learning of ELs” (118-119).
“Considering that all students do not need the same interventions and support for their learning, attention might be more easily paid to differentiation of instruction when fewer students are being taught. For this reason, dividing students into two groups will benefit those students who need additional support while allowing those students who are able to work more independently to do so. For example, one teacher might monitor a group in completing a task while the other group is given more direct instruction or additional modeling and demonstration in order to apply a new skill or strategy” (119).
My comment: My rotating groups system falls underneath this model. Basically, one group receives instruction at the front of the class in front of the smart board while another group works on an independent assignment. Halfway through, the groups switch and the students in the back of the class come to the front of the class for instruction. I could then provide explicit instruction on the assignment on which the ELs were working.
Both groups receive explicit instruction and independent work (with a supporting teacher for both groups). This also helps teacher share noise space and providing appropriate differentiated instruction with apportioned teaching air time.
“This lesson segment focuses on writing an opinion piece in a fourth-grade class, which contains both beginning and advanced-level English learners integrated with fluent English speakers. It is part of a greater unit of study on persuasive writing. In this session, students will be guided to write a persuasive letter to the state governor on the topic of homework assignments. For the purpose of this narrative, we will call the fourth-grade teacher Ms. Vincent and the ESOL teacher Ms. Hyland.
The lesson opens with both teachers in front of the whole class (Model 2, see Chapter 4). Ms. Vincent reads to the class a letter from a ten-year-old girl who is trying to persuade her mother to buy her a cell phone. Ms. Hyland projects the written letter on the whiteboard using a document camera. She guides students to follow along while the letter is being read. At intervals, Ms. Vincent pauses and Ms. Hyland explains part of the text, clarifies vocabulary via verbal scaffolding and/or visuals, or asks students questions. Her questions help to build comprehension for those children who need additional language support. Ms. Vincent also asks questions but devises them for all students to dig deeper and think critically about the text. Both teachers encourage students to seek out and share the information used by the writer to persuade the reader.
Next, the teachers divide the class into two equally sized groups to organize their writing. Here is where Model 4 - Two Groups: Two Teach the Same Content - comes into play. For this part of the lesson, they have decided to divide students according to their facility with letter writing. They place the beginning-level ELs, students who are struggling readers, and reluctant writers in one group. They place most of the advanced-level ELs and the rest of the students in the other.
Ms. Vincent takes the group with the majority of advanced-level ELs and distributes the written directions for the writing task. At first, she asks students to read the directions silently; then, she reviews the directions with them together, clarifies the task for students with questions, and presents them with the graphic organizer. She asks them to either work alone or in pairs to complete the organizer to plan their letter writing. In contrast, Ms. Hyland reads the directions aloud as her students follow along with copies of the text. She pauses frequently to paraphrase the directions, review vocabulary, use visuals and realia to support students’ understanding of the task, and model what students will need to do with the graphic organizer, which is scaffolded with partially completed sentences to support students’ writing (see Figure 6.5) [in the book].
All students complete their graphic organizers in their respective groups. Once the organizer is complete, the students in Ms. Vincent’s group are directed to write their persuasive letters to the state governor independently. They return to their own desks, and Ms. Vincent circulates and monitors their progress. At the same time, Ms. Hyland keeps her students together in the group. She walks them through step-by-step on how students can transfer their ideas from the graphic organizer to a written letter.
An analysis of the lesson segment. The teaching team begins by keeping the class together, which helps to establish the lesson objectives and sets high expectations for all learners. The teachers decide that flexible grouping - combining students with similar learning needs - is the best choice for lesson delivery, so they divide the students into two groups accordingly. Although the content (forming and writing an opinion) and the product (composing a persuasive letter) remain constant objectives for all students, the use of this model facilitates the differentiation of the process for learning, allowing students who need additional guidance and support with understanding the content and ultimately producing a written letter to receive such attention. In this way, all students have access to the same English language arts curriculum and rigorous instruction can be maintained” (127-128).
Chapter 7 - Model 5 - Two Groups: One Preteaches, One Teaches Alternative Information
“Preteaching strategies include ways to assist students to tap into their prior knowledge, active their schema related to the new topic, as well as expose students to new information prior to the target lesson. These strategies include discussions about subject matter, text previews, ways to critically think about text or concept, uncovering new vocabulary, and so on. Based on the availability of native language resources and the co-teachers’ language proficiency in their students’ home language, preteaching may also be conducted in languages other than English.
Frontloading information refers to guiding students to discover new information using various teaching strategies. The task is to build students’ background knowledge, which involves the marriage between what students already know and what new information students need even before they acquire rigorous content information and skills that are planned for a particular lesson. To accomplish this task, preteaching needs to be an essential part of the co-taught class, particularly when there are ELs who are developing their basic language skills in English” (136).
“Teaching small groups of students allows for instruction using literature and informational texts at a reading level that makes content more accessible. In addition, pieces of complex text can also be introduced - breaking them down into manageable bits of information and analyzing them for their language and content” (140).
“I would reteach by playing the videos over and over and stopping as needed for ELLs to write the needed words on the fill-in-the-blank worksheet that went with the video. The ELLs would work together to listen and record their answers, which gave them practice with the content language” (157).
My comment: Now we have EdPuzzle and chromebooks so students can go at their individual paces. EdPuzzle videos on chromebooks is a good station to incorporate and make the groups smaller that teachers work with. Teachers can then decide to have a pre-teaching before the EdPuzzle for some students or the EdPuzzle can serve as background for the higher level students before coming to a teacher station.
Chapter 8 - Model 6 - Two Groups: One Reteaches, One Teaches Alternative Information
“The research is consistent in finding that it takes students significantly longer than a year or two to become proficient in academic language. As a result, students who are in mainstream classes before they have developed the requisite language skills to fully participate are not in fact being afforded equal access to the curriculum … language and content should not be perceived as sequential: first language, then content; instead, language and content are integrated in the co-taught classroom … all content areas must be translated into meaningful instructional experiences for ELs” (160).
My comment: This quote shows that schools cannot just put newcomers in classes without differentiation and expect the ELs to “pick-up” English.
Chapter 9 - Model 7 - Multiple Groups: Two Monitor/Teach
One of the most important aspects of co-teaching for English learners (ELs) is that is provides students at various levels of English language proficiency targeted instruction to develop their language and literacy skills along with content knowledge. This model - creating multiple student groups for instruction - is truly the most versatile; it can accommodate individual needs in an almost unlimited number of ways. It is often the model of choice for novice and experienced teachers alike. It allows for the planning and implementation of differentiated instruction through the development of various learning tasks and activities. This model sets as a priority the cooperation or collaboration of students learning together in teams under the supervision of one or more teachers, or small groups of students working under the direct instruction and guidance of one of the teaching partners … Cooperative learning refers to the tasks set for teams of students who work in tandem to complete assignments, such as brainstorming, problem solving, responding to questions, finding textual evidence, analyzing a political cartoon, completing a step-by-step process (a science experiment or a simple recipe), and so on” (185-186).
“For this reason, the preparation for instruction using this model may appear to be labor intensive - requiring a great deal of time to create activities for students at various levels to learn the same content or to practice language and literacy skills. However, the versatility of this model allows for the use of both low-preparation strategies as well as those strategies that take time to prepare and execute. In addition, both teachers are engaged in the preparation of lesson materials, which significantly lessens the workload” (188).
Using learning centers in combination with this co-teaching model provides opportunities to meet the needs of all ELs at various levels of English proficiency. Learning centers also help young learners enhance their self-efficacy and develop a sense of autonomy.
In secondary classes, learning stations can be invaluable for English learners. Not only do they often promote the four language skills -speaking, writing, reading, and listening - they also can make content more accessible and comprehensible for students who lack English language proficiency. We have frequently observed this model being used in science classes; the hands-on nature of science investigations and experiments provides the context for co-teachers to use various grouping strategies for students to engage in the learning process. Learning stations can also be successfully developed in any content class. Malefyt (2016) suggests learning stations also support teachers to conduct formative assessment to assist in future planning and drive instruction. He recommends the following strategies for station teaching in the secondary classroom:
Station-Progression Maps. Co-teachers maintain an outline of how student groups progress from station to station using a progression map. Spaces for teacher review and signatures upon completion of tasks on these maps allow for greater student responsibility and accountability.
Varied Involvement. Although routines are important in the co-taught class, consider engaging students in diverse activities with learning stations incorporating varied modes of learning (kinesthetic, tactual), use of technology, creative writing (songs, poetry), photography, and so on.
Free-Choice Time. Allow students to have some unscheduled time to complete project work or extend a project that was initiated by a learning station activity. In this way, students get to manage their own time and opportunities to build on their areas of interest.
Resource Management. Some instructional resources such as laptops or tablets may be limited in number and therefore impossible to use with whole-class instruction. Station teaching provides the vehicle to incorporate such learning tools into the co-taught class.
Anecdotal Notes. While circulating within the class, consider carrying a clipboard and jotting down information on individual student progress. Station-teaching time is ideal for gathering information on the academic and linguistic development of ELs.
Critical Conversations. Station teaching provides opportunities for teachers to have one-on-one conversations with students, which help to clarify information, extend ideas, support reading and writing activities, and strengthen the student-teacher relationship” (190).
“Drawing on our insights from working with teachers to develop collaborative teaching practices over the past 10 years, this model - Multiple Groups: Two Monitor/Teach - is one that remains popular with and often preferred by co-teaching teams. Beyond its versatility, this model provides a considerable number of advantages for teaching English learners.
First and foremost, the flexibility of this model provides ELs with comprehensible input - a way of teaching that makes content understandable for students with various levels of English proficiency. Lightbown and Spada (2013) identify how comprehensible input continues to be the unyielding support all students need to acquire a new language. By grouping students in multiple ways for instruction, small-group learning can provide opportunities for tiered reading lessons, scaffolded discussions, application of strategies (manipulatives, visuals, realia, props), and so on - for entering or beginning ELs and the direct teacher support to make lessons accessible.
Grouping strategies, addressed earlier in this chapter in connection with station teaching and with some detail in Chapter 6, also come into play with this model of instruction when considering its advantages. Whether students are placed together heterogeneously or homogeneously, careful selection of participants and activities for small-group learning can yield high levels of interaction and engagement for all students. It is imperative that co-teachers interact directly with student groups as well as facilitate their active learning with one another so that language and literacy skills are continually developed. Given that student engagement is most critical to successful learning (Dove, Honigsfeld, & Cohan, 2014), this model can provide multiple opportunities to motivate students to attend to tasks, spark their curiosity, and support them in developing their language skills.
Another significant aspect of student teamwork is that it promotes SWIRL - an emerging practice in collaboratively taught classes in which co-teachers focus on providing opportunities for students to speak, write, interact, read, and listen every day. We often compare language acquisition with learning how to ride a bicycle or progressing as a swimmer. If you never get on a bike or go into the water, you will have little, if any, chance of developing these skills. Similarly, language learning is a skill-building endeavor. Giving students ample time to practice their language skills - using student-to-student interactions as the vehicle within this co-taught model - is a positive step toward ensuring ELs have a rich language-learning environment” (192).
“In classes that have a large number of students, even the presence of two co-teachers in the room may not be sufficient to quell all off-task behavior. Consider how you can incorporate individual accountability measures so that there will be an assessment for the group’s effort as well as each member’s contribution. Self-assessment tools or peer-rating scales can support students to remain on task (see Figure 9.1 … [in book]) In addition, rules and procedures for teamwork that are established by co-teaching partners from the onset of group activities provide students with overall expectations for working with others” (194).
“It is important to note that preparing instruction for multiple groups of students that is scaffolded, differentiated, provides tiered reading content, supports different learning styles, and so on is not a simple task. This model at times will be quite labor intensive to organize, coordinate, prepare, and deliver. Table 9.2 [in book] summarizes the advantages and challenges of Model 7. In spite of the time needed for its preparation, the benefits of this model for developing both language and content skills are found in the high levels of student motivation, engagement in learning, and academic achievement of English learners” (195).
“Most likely, the strategies presented in previous chapters for other co-teaching models might very well be adapted for this multifaceted model. For example, the concept webs, partially completed graphic organizers, and use of realia, and manipulatives featured in Chapter 3 could most easily be incorporated into group work in learning centers or stations for this model” (195-196).
My comment: Puzzles (for learning lesson content) could be utilized in learning stations. For example, a world history class could have students complete a puzzle of Europe as a group. Students can then build on that knowledge at a station with a teacher present.
Low-Prep Strategies for Model 7
Rolling rounds. With this strategy, students seated in groups are presented with a category such as invertebrates. Students must then take turns going around the table naming items that belong in that category. An adaptation for English learners is to provide them with a list of choices or a word list accompanied by photographs or illustrations to select from during the round.
Writing rounds. A variation of rolling rounds, this activity gives students the opportunity to think and write their answers for a set category before they are shared with the group. This strategy allows for additional wait time and provides students the opportunity to check resources or seek the advice of a peer or one of the co-teachers before the group work takes place” (196).
My comment: I could have the questions on a page, and students answer on their own, writing their responses at one station. At the next station, I can ask question and get students to respond orally. I can also check their written work and ask further questions.
Numbered heads together. This strategy affords ELs greater participation in class discussions and supports them to answer questions in front of the whole class. To begin, four students sit as a team, and each team member is designated a number from one to four. Teachers present the class with a question or a prompt, and students must collaborate together in their teams to come up with a response. when the specified time is up, teachers call a number and all students with that number must raise their hands. From these students, one of them is called on to answer, and the discussion continues through several rounds in the same manner. This activity allows for wait time, discussion of responses, and provides all students with plausible answers before they are called on to respond, thereby ensuring the participation of English learners” (196).
My comment: Another game I created that is similar but gets the lower-level ELs more involved in competitions that often are dominated by higher level students is what I’m calling Team Leaders. The lowest level students are the team leaders since they write the answer on the board or say it for their groups. I ask the question to the class and then group members communicate the answer to the lowest level ELs. They will write the response for the lowest level EL for written responses or say it to them for oral responses.
Jigsaw. This group approach gives students the time they need to read, discuss ideas, listen to one another, and write. Teachers direct individual students to move from one group to another and then back again with the set purpose of completing certain tasks that build knowledge and understanding of a set topic within a framework for cooperative learning. To implement this strategy, arrange students in groups of equal size and designate those groups as their “home” groups. Next, take one student from each home group to create ‘expert’ groups. Students read and discuss a certain part of a set topic by reading a portion of an article or book chapter. In turn, other expert groups read, discuss different parts of the text, and jot down essential information. When time is called, students return to their original home groups and use their notes to share with their home group members what they learned in their expert groups” (196-197).
My note: Better for a class of ELs with higher levels and not newcomers.
Pro-Prep Strategies for Model 7
Guided Reading. This practice supports student reading during small-group instruction … Generally speaking, students are grouped according to their instructional level in reading. In each group, students read the same text as the teacher guides them through the use of minilessons, pointed questions, building background about the topic, uncovering new vocabulary, and so on. This reading strategy provides students with needed skills they can later apply when they read independently (Dove & Honigsfeld, 2013).
In the co-taught class, each co-teacher might take one group of students for guided reading while other groups work on different aspects of building their literacy skills; the groups could rotate from independent work to one of the co-teachers so that each group would have some time for direct literacy instruction. Another approach to this activity is for one teacher to remain stationary and support students’ reading development while the other teacher circulates around the room to guide students’ independent work” (197).
My comment: One thing that can be done is students reading independently with audio before-hand on chromebooks with applications like Classkick.
Coffee Klatch. This activity combines elements from both the Tea Party and Jigsaw strategies. It gives students the time to gather, analyze, evaluate, and summarize information from a number of sources. In order to begin, teachers prepare readings - articles that cover different aspects or points of view about the same topic, idea, or event - and materials for each student group. These readings can be tiered to accommodate students’ different reading levels. Chart paper, markers, and index cards are also distributed to each team.
In their groups, students read the articles they were assigned either silently or taking turns reading aloud. in the co-taught class, one teacher might work with one group of students while the other teacher circulates to support other teams. Each student is charged with completing index cards that contain information from the readings; students should place only one or two pieces of information per card, and all students on a team should have different information they have noted. For this reason, team members need to consult with one another as they complete their cards. Next, students are asked to walk around the room, read as many cards from other teams as they can, and take notes. When time is called, students regroup into their original teams and share their information.
As a culminating activity, students prepare a graphic representation of the total information they have gathered on the topic using the chart paper and markers. Finally, each team presents their findings to the rest of the class. As we have seen with many strategies for use with multigroup instruction, this activity provides for a SWIRLing classroom in which students must speak, write, interact, read, and listen to fully participate” (198).
Chapter 11 - Reflection: Closing the Collaborative Instructional Cycle … and Starting a New One
When reflecting on the co-teaching practice, coaching, or observing co-teachers, consider the following short list of look-fors that may serve as a baseline:
Parity: Do both teachers participate equitably in the lesson (not equally)?
Integration of language skills: Do both teachers provide instruction and support for content and language development?
Opportunities to talk: Does the smaller student-teacher ratio lead to higher levels of student-to-student interaction and more student talk for academic purposes?
Engagement: Do both teachers provide students with meaningful, challenging learning activities that make engagement visible?
Formative assessment use: Do the co-teachers collect and respond to formative assessment data to offer interventions as needed and, as a result, maximize the benefits of co-teaching?
Self-Assessment/Partnership Assessment: Self-assessment and reflection practices as well as tools to apply may be differentiated based on the implementation stage of the co-teachers. Setting realistic goals and monitoring and reflecting on implementation in the early stages of a co-teaching partnership (years 1-2) may be best supported through carefully tailored questions or prompts that establish the foundations for success. Later stage implementation is often characterized by most initial challenges being resolved, so co-teachers often look to moving from good to great …” (253).
“Based on our fieldwork and research on co-teaching for ELs, we have developed DELIVER - an acronym that encompasses the seven most important aspects of a co-taught class for English learners, as follows:
Differentiation. How and to what extent are the content, process, and product of the lesson adjusted for the learning needs of ELs at different levels of English proficiency? How has curriculum for ELs been developed for integrated instruction in the co-taught class?
Engagement of Students. In what ways do co-taught classes provide ELs with multiple opportunities to speak, write, interact, read, and listen (SWIRL) during one class period?
Language and Content Objectives. By what method are both language and content objectives identified, reviewed with students, and given equal weight during co-taught instruction?
Instructional Strategies. To what degree are tried-and-true strategies to develop the English proficiency of ELs being incorporated into the co-taught class? What are some of those strategies being used?
Varied Co-Teaching Models. Are co-teaching models being selected to optimally teach ELs in the co-taught class? Do the models incorporated into the lesson provide integration or segregation of ELs?
Equity and Parity Established. Do all students perceive both educators in the room as “real” teachers instead of one as the helper or teacher’s aide? How is equity promoted for all students, giving them access to the information, material, and resources they need for positive outcomes?
Rigor. To what degree do all lessons for ELs contain rigorous content (text), process (the way students learn), and/or product (the task to be completed and evaluated)” (253-255).