Toni Strieker, Jim Wright, Susan Stockdale
Kennesaw State University
October 3, 2011

 Our Journey
 Program Design & Implementation
 Assessment of Candidate Dispositions & Concerns
Model & Survey Development
Findings of Study
Implications & Limitations
 Administrative Assessment of Faculty Concerns
 Road Ahead

Social
Studies
Science
Special
Education

 Co-teaching Curriculum, Focus on Concerns
- Interactive Seminar
- Readings & Log
- Observations & Interviews
KWL Charts
 Embedded in a semester long middle school methods block







Understanding Critical Elements of
Effective Co-teaching
Planning and Preparation
Co-Delivery of Instruction
Positive Interaction and Communication
Content Competence and Differentiated
Instruction
Greater Understanding of and Respect for
Special Education Teachers’ Work and
Expertise



Mixed method design to systematically examine the change in concerns regarding co-teaching with pre-service middle school candidates
Pre-post instrument to examine concerns using Preservice Teacher Concerns
Questionnaire, adapted from of Stages of
Concern Questionnaire (Hall, et al.)

Self
Impact
Task
CBAM (Hall & Hord, p. 63)
Modified by Cheung & Ng

Cronbach's Alpha
.893
N of Items
20
35 students

35 students

Paired Samples Test – 20 item Teacher Concern Questionnaire
Mean
27.429
Std.
Paired Differences
Deviation
27.355
Std.
Error
Mean
4.624
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower
18.032
Upper t df
36.825 5.932 34
Sig. (2tailed)
.000
Pair
7
Pair
8
Pair
9
Pair
10
Pair
1
Pre and Post Total
Pre and Post Mean Total Pair
2
Pair
3
Pair
4
Pair
5
Pair
6
Pre and Post Indifference
Pre and Post
Informational/Personal
Pre and Post Management
Pre and Post
Consequences/Collaboration
Pre and Post Refocusing
Pre and Post Self Dimension
Pre and Post Task Dimension
Pre and Post Impact
Dimension
1.32770
.35714
1.82500
1.12143
1.42143
.10294
1.52059
1.12143
.97396
1.29117
1.61141
1.56953
1.60808
1.66690
1.69571
1.42079
1.60808
1.43254
.21825
.27238
.26530
.27182
.28176
.29081
.24366
.27182
.25324
.88417
-.19640
1.28585
.56903
.84883
-.48872
1.02485
.56903
.45747
1.77124 6.083 34
.91068 1.311 34
2.36415 6.879 34
1.67382 4.126 34
1.99403 5.045 34
.69460 .354 33
2.01633 6.241 33
1.67382 4.126 34
1.49044 3.846 31
.000
.199
.000
.000
.000
.726
.000
.000
.001

 Limitation
 Reworking the instrument

 What to do with “zero”
Other issues . . .

 Three years ago . . .began with with refocusing (top level not expected in pre-service teachers
 Today . . . information . . .



Initially faculty (limited ) driven . . . bottom up
Today . . .
 National emphasis on Clinical Experiences
 Renaissance Group Emphasis
 P-12 School Emphasis
 Special Education Recognition
 All MGE faculty




Facilitate scholarship (research) of coteaching
Maintain longitudinal data base
Facilitate learning and writing communities




Cheung, D., & Ng, D. (Su 2000). Teacher stages of concern about the target-oriented curriculum.
Educational Journal, 28, (1), 109-122.
Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2001). Implementing Change:
Patterns, Principles, and Potholes. Boston: Allen and Bacon.
Hall, G., George, A., & Rutherford, W. (1979).
Measuring Stages of Concern about the innovation: A
manual for use of the SoC Questionnaire. Austin, TX:
The University of TX at Austin, Research and
Development Center for Teacher Education.