Quotes from Co-Teaching That Works: Structures and Strategies for Maximizing Student Learning (2nd Ed.) By Anne M. Beninghof
Chapter 1: An Overview of Co-Teaching
“Differentiated instruction is based on the premise that teachers should adapt instruction to meet students’ varying readiness levels, learning preferences, and interests. Although most educators agree with this premise, they also agree that practical application is a challenge. Co-teaching makes differentiated instruction so much easier. Two heads and four hands make planning and implementing differentiation possible on a daily basis. Co-teachers bring different perspectives to lesson design, creating plans that include higher and lower levels of complexity and more hand-on applications. During instruction, partners flexibly group students as needed to ensure that all are learning at their highest levels. In addition, shared classroom management allows teachers to feel more comfortable with multiple learning activities taking place simultaneously in the room” (14).
Chapter 2: Leadership for Co-Teaching
Questions for Conversations about Co-Planning
“Do you have a shared online lesson planning form” (49)?
“Is your lesson planning form working as well as you’d like? If not, why?” (49)
“Are there ways you could divide planning and implementation tasks to increase efficiency while still maintaining quality” (49)?
“Which small instructional group configurations are you using? Why?” (49)
Questions for Consideration after a Lesson Observation
“What type of changes did you make to the lesson so that students with disabilities or students learning English could participate” (50)?
“Why did you choose the specific small-group configurations you used today? Would you do it differently” (50)?
“How might you have increased the amount of small-group instruction?” (50)?
“Were both teachers effectively included in the lesson” (50)?
“What was your sense of student engagement” (50)?
“What formative assessment methods did you use today? How well did they work” (50)?
“How did the physical arrangement of the room impact the learning” (50)?
“Can you think of ways to adapt print material, lectures, or discussions that would make them more accessible to all students” (50)?
“What would ‘better’ look like” (50)?
Questions for administrators and facilitators when co-teachers are facing difficulties
“Are partners aware of each other’s strengths? Expertise? Style preferences?” (51)
“Did partners spend sufficient time setting up team norms” (51)?
“Have partners allowed themselves to be vulnerable with each other to build trust” (51)?
“Have partners visited successful co-taught classes in the district” (51)?
Have partners participated in a structured reflection process? What do they see as their joint strengths and weaknesses” (51)?
How have you communicated your expectations for collaboration? Is there another way to clarify these expectations” (51)?
“Is their co-teaching linked to their professional goals? To their evaluation plan” (51)?
“What accountability is there for teamwork” (51)?
“What resources are available in the district to help teachers improve a skill deficit” (51)?
Chapter 3: Relationship Building
“Tuckman (1965) claimed that the honesty of the second stage, storming, was essential to the health of any team that wanted to perform well over the long haul. This process of open, authentic discussion about differences doesn’t have to be as volatile as the name suggests, but it does have to occur. Because no two teachers are exactly alike, differences will be inconsequential, while others may have a grave impact on student learning. Co-teachers will want to be courageous and professional enough to have these necessary conversations” (56).
“Style: On the one hand, a benefit of co-teaching is that it brings together teachers with differing styles, strengths, and experiences - making instruction more applicable to a heterogeneous group of students. On the other hand, if teachers have drastically different styles, it may be difficult to work together effectively. The tortoise and the hare didn’t end up as best buddies! Potential co-teaching partners should feel each other out for preferences about advanced planning, flexibility, time management, use of humor, classroom organization, noise tolerance, and level of assertiveness. The best co-teaching partners usually have styles that complement each other” (59).
Successful Start Discussion Questions (on page 60)
“Too many co-teaching relationships fail simply because teachers have never talked about how best to share roles and responsibilities. Although some guidance can be mined from federal and state law, responsibility for many of the day-to-day tasks is left to each unique partnership to determine. Sharon Pratt found that successful co-teachers develop a ‘compatible relationship by learning from and relying on each other’s differences and strengths’” (62).
Exhibit 3.5 on pages 69-71 is good for PLC discussions and throughout the year. It is titled Reflective Questions for Co-Teaching Teams.
Chapter 4: Specially Designed Instruction
Steps for Co-Planning SDI
“Pinpoint the difficult moments students may experience.
What has been a challenge in the past? What do we expect to be challenging, based on data and our knowledge of student capacities? How do we build toward independence” (84)?
“Adapt the general approach.
How might we incorporate pre-teaching, visual and kinesthetic input, small group instruction, explicit directions, chunking, and other alternative methods? Is there a specific approach that will yield better skill generalization” (85)?
“Build in specific methods to boost participation.
Why might a student not participate? What strategies or tools will lead to successful participation and engagement? What small group configurations will work best” (85)?
Chapter 8: The Adding Model
“In effective co-teaching, both teachers embrace the benefits of swapping the roles of Teacher A and Teacher B. Rather than the specialist only serving as Teacher B, there may be times when she is leading the lecture and the general educator takes on Teacher B tasks. By switching roles, both teachers have the opportunity to view students from a new perspective. This enhanced perspective provides them with additional insight when making instructional decisions” (124).
“The simplicity of this models makes it attractive as a first step into co-teaching for busy specialists. However, using only this model can lead to a significant problem. If the specialist is always expected to be the one who ‘adds’ rather than leads, her skills will be vastly underutilized. Once a role is established, it can set up patterns of behavior and attitude between the teachers. It may be very difficult for the specialist to break out of this role and share fully in the instructional process. Students will not receive the specialized instruction they need. Therefore, this should be seen as one of several ingredients that blend together in the Duet or Map ad Navigate models” (126).
Chapter 9: The Transforming Model
“In a formal approach, Teacher A usually takes responsibility for planning the core instruction, while Teacher B plans for ways to adapt and transform. Both teachers will be equally involved in implementing the transformed lesson. On days when the partners have to be more flexible and informal, then both teachers would be responsible for being on the constant lookout for appropriate opportunities to augment the lesson with adaptive, multimodality techniques and tools.
Ideally, someone observing over time might also notice these roles flip-lopping. Teacher A benefits enormously from having the opportunity to work one-on-one with students who are struggling” (137).
“Modifications are usually overseen by the specialist. These significant changes to the curriculum might include designing lessons on alternative standards, developing modified assessments, or assigning below-grade-level homework. When modifications are provided in a co-taught class, students may voice questions or complaints. It is common to hear, ‘Why doesn’t he have to do as much work as we do?’ It will serve partners well to discuss this potential complaint in advance and agree upon a response. Co-teachers might decide to explain to students that fair treatment does not mean equal treatment and that every student’s individual needs will be considered” (137).
“Anyone who has cruised a high school hallway, glancing into classrooms as they pass, has seen the frequency of ‘sit and get’ learning. Though not as common in elementary schools, the proportion of seat time grows at an alarming rate as students grow. Ask a group of teachers why this persists in education, and you will hear reasons ranging from ‘If students are moving, they will get out of control’ to ‘We don’t have time to do hands-on stuff.’ And yet, these same teachers will agree that after twenty or so minutes of sitting, students’ attention drifts. In the Transforming Model this doesn’t happen. Through carefully orchestrated infusion of novelty, differentiation, adaptations, movement, and specialized instruction, teachers are able to maintain student attention and engagement” (139).
Chapter 12: The Readiness Grouping Model
Sonya Kunkel, a former co-teacher and national expert on co-teaching, found in her own practice that the use of readiness groups actually reduced co-planning time. Instead of both teachers having to co-plan all the minute details of the lesson, they could divide responsibilities based on the groups. For example, the special education teacher might plan the instruction for a group that will include students with IEPs, ensuring that their goals will be addressed. She will not need to sit with her partner to do this, perhaps even choosing to think it through while doing her morning run or driving home from school. If co-teachers are short on common planning time, this model will be a favorite.
Once plans are in place, both teachers will be fully involved with instruction and assessment. Typically, the general education teacher works with proficient and advanced groups, while the specialist works with the students who are not yet proficient. Communication between partners will be essential, s that both are aware of how all students are progressing. Intermittentently flipping roles will also increase awareness.
After teachers have gathered sufficient date, they may decide to arrange for some students to receive reteaching before moving on to the next unit. Reateaching is usually done by the specialist, utilizing their expertise in task analysis, multimodality instruction, and memory, but may also be done by the content expert. Partners build time into the next lesson or two for this small group of students to receive the extra time they need for success” (159-160).
“Dedicated teachers often feel frustrated by the time constraints of a traditional classroom. One of the beauties of co-teaching is that time becomes a bit more flexible. Having two adults in the classroom increases the ability to take time with targeted students for focused assistance. This is especially true of the Readiness Grouping Model. One of the two adults can concentrate his or her attention on tailoring instruction to students who are advanced or not yet proficient. Providing instruction at the zone of proximal development is most likely to yield significant gains. And for students with IEPs, readiness groups are an excellent structure for proving the legally required specially designed instruction.
Cation must be taken when using Readiness Grouping Model so that specific students do not begin to feel isolated or embarrassed by always being pulled by the same teacher. In the early grades, children may think it a privilege to spend extra time with a specialist, but as children age, their perceptions will change and may cause reluctance. Secondary students may even refuse to work with the specialist. These types of reactions are understandable and can be preempted by careful adult orchestration and a classroom culture that honors diversity.
Because these groups are more homogeneous in skill level, students are not being exposed to the breadth and depth of discussion, modeling, and insight that comes from a heterogeneous experience. Teachers who are mindful of these disadvantages will be sure to blend this model with the Mixed-Readiness Grouping Model, rather than use it as their only structure for co-teaching” (160-161).
Chapter 20: Co-Teaching with an English Language Development Specialist
“The specialist will be more likely to make in-the-moment changes or additions to the lesson, relying on the Adding Model. In any mini-lecture that a classroom teacher presents, there will be many instances when students with limited English proficiency will need information restated or clarified. Similarly, there will be many times when a visual or tactile support will make the information more easily accessible. The classroom teacher will want to be relaxed and flexible about these frequent additions, seeing them as enrichments rather than interruptions” (234-235).
“In a co-taught class, cooperative group work and peer interaction will be essential for success. To ensure effective group work, co-teaching partners will want to spend some time at the beginning of the year helping students get to know each other. In addition, it will be worthwhile to teach specific skills for group work - skills such as turn taking, clarifying, leading, and recording. When group work is assigned, co-teaching partners will want to provide specific directions that ensure everyone’s participation. Cooperative learning structures, such as Numbered Heads Together or Think-Pair-Timed Share (Kagan and Kagan 2008) have been proven effective for heterogeneous groups of students.
In addition to cooperative learning, co-teachers will want to incorporate a significant amount of multi-sensory teaching strategies. While these strategies are helpful to many students, they are especially crucial to students who are ELL. For example, a traditional auditory lecture, because it is dependent on language knowledge, will pass right over the heads of many students, leaving them frustrated and lost. Conversely, a lecture that is supported by descriptive photos, visual time lines, maps, props, manipulatives, gestures, and demonstrations will make much more sense. The ELD specialist’s expertise will make it easy for the partners to generate a variety of simple ideas for multisensory instruction” (237).
Appendix: Instructional Strategies for Co-Taught Classrooms
My favorite strategies listed in this section:
Board Relay - pages 245 - 247
Group Graffiti - pages 267 - 268