Successful Integrated Co-Teaching
Improving Access to the
Curriculum for
Students With Disabilities Through
Integrated Co-Teaching
Presented by
Rhonda Sorger-Special Education Achievement Specialist
Phoebe Robinson Sorger-Special Education Achievement Specialist
CFN 211-Jean McKeon-Network Leader
CFN 210-JoAnne Brucella-Network Leader
October 2012
Session Agenda
• Welcome and Overview/ Opening Activity
• Introduction to Integrated Co-teaching
• Integrated Co-teaching Approaches/Video
viewing and activities
• Collaborative Lesson Planning
• Wrap-up
• Reflection
Two on a Crayon
Activity #1:
Instructions:
1. This is a completely NONVERBAL activity!!!! 
2. Select one crayon and one piece of paper, per team
3. When the music begins, START creating a picture together
4. When the music stops, STOP and put the crayon down
5. Connections
Background:
Educators are more receptive to change
when they have background knowledge
and a common purpose to improve
teaching and learning.
Steele, Bell, & George, 2005
Outcomes of Our Work:
• Clarify what Co-Teaching is / is not
• Identify the benefits of using the six
models/approaches of co-teaching
• Utilize strategies for effective
collaborative planning
Defining Co-Teaching
Co-teaching occurs when two or
more professionals jointly
deliver substantive instruction to
a diverse, or blended, group of
students in a single physical
space.
Cook & Friend, 1995, p. 1
Co-Teaching
What is it?-What it is not?
Six Co-teaching Approaches
•
•
•
•
•
•
One Teach, One Observe
Station Teaching
Parallel Teaching
Alternative Teaching
Team Teaching
One Teach, One Assist
One Teach, One Observe
• One educator teachers the lesson, the other
educator observes student (s), teaching strategy,
lesson delivery, or an aspect of classroom
management
• The teacher who is observing should be using a
clipboard or some other device to take notes
• The observer will be looking for specific things, that
are predetermined prior to the lesson
Station Teaching
• Teachers divide the responsibility of planning and
instruction
• Students rotate on a predetermined schedule
through stations
• Teachers repeat instruction to each group that
comes through; delivery may vary according to
student needs
• Approach can be used even if teachers have very
different pedagogical approaches
• Each teacher instructs every student
• One station may be for students working
independently
Friend & Cook, 2003
Parallel Teaching
• Teachers share responsibility for planning
and instruction
• Class is split into heterogeneous groups,
and each teacher instructs half on the same
material
• Content covered is the same, but methods of
delivery may differ
• Both teachers need to be proficient in the
content being taught
• Teachers switch groups at another time
Friend & Cook, 2003
Alternative Teaching
• Teachers divide responsibilities for planning
and instruction.
• The majority of students remain in a large
group setting, but some students work in a
small group specifically for preteaching,
enrichment, reteaching, or other
individualized instruction.
• Approach allows for highly individualized
instruction to be offered.
• Teachers should be careful that the same
students are not always pulled aside.
Friend & Cook, 2003
Team Teaching
• Teachers share responsibilities for planning
and instruction
• Teachers work as a team to introduce new
content, work on developing skills, clarify
information, and facilitate learning and
classroom management
• This requires the most mutual trust and
respect between teachers and requires that
they be able to mesh their teaching styles
One Teaching, One Assist
• One teacher plans and instructs, and one
teacher provides adaptations and other
support as needed
• Requires very little joint planning
• Should be used sparingly
– Can result in one teacher, most often the general
educator teacher, taking the lead role the majority
of the time
– Can also be distracting to students, especially
those who may become dependent on the
assisting teacher
Friend & Cook, 2003
Video Viewing Activity #2
• Refer to handout packet #H4 -
Use the ICT Model Processing Sheets as you watch the
video. Take notes on the strengths and weaknesses of
each of the different approaches. Write down how you
might implement this in your classroom.
Team Teaching possibilities in the classroom:
• Refer to handout #H13 –
Co-Teaching in the Classroom
Benefits of Collaboration
• Shared responsibility for educating all
students
• Shared understanding and use of
common assessment data
• Supporting ownership for programming
and interventions
• Creating common understanding
Friend & Cook, 2003
Effective Co-Planning
Effective Pre-planning
• Important to spend time talking and
getting better acquainted with each
other’s skills, interests, and educational
philosophies
• Having a semistructured preliminary
discussion can facilitate this process.
• Discuss current classroom routines
and rules
Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
Effective Classroom-Level Planning
• Effective planners design learning
environments for their students and for
themselves that demand active involvement.
• Effective co-planners create learning and
teaching environments in which each person’s
contributions are valued.
• Effective planners develop effective routines
to facilitate their planning.
• Planning skills improve over time.
Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
Provide Weekly Scheduling Co-Planning Time
• Co-teaching teams should have a
minimum of one scheduling/planning
period (45 minutes) per week
• Experienced teams may need less time
Dieker, 2001; Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
Weekly Co-Planning
• Is based on regularly scheduled meetings,
rather than “fitting it in”
• Review of content in advance of meeting
• Maintaining focus
Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
Weekly Co-Planning (cont.)
• Guide the session with the following
fundamental issues:
– What are the content goals?
– Who are the learners?
– How can we teach most effectively?
Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
Weekly Co-Planning (cont.)
• Shape instructional plans
• Establish timelines and priorities
• Assign preparation tasks
Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996
Lesson Planning Tools and Templates:
• Refer to handouts
Lesson Planning Tools & Templates
Things that can be done to maximize success:
Review the different approaches to co-teaching
and think about how each might look in a
classroom
Discuss each other’s learning style preferences to
see how these can be incorporated into the
lesson to assist students with varying styles
Murawski & Dieker, 2004
Instructional Tips:
• Develop unobtrusive signals to communicate with each other
• Create signals for students that are consistent and can be
used by either teacher
• Vary instructional practices
• Clearly display an agenda for the class, which includes the
standard(s) to be covered and any additional goals
• Avoid disagreeing with or undermining each other in front of
the students
• Strive to demonstrate parity in instruction whenever possible
by switching roles often
• Avoid stigmatization of any one group of students
Murawski & Dieker, 2004
Wrap-up
• Summary-Prepare to Collaboratively
Impact the Academic Outcomes for
ALL students.
• Complete the Reflection Sheet
TOGETHER
is a beautiful word
•
•
•
•
Coming together is the beginning
Keeping together is progress
Thinking together is unity
Working together is success!
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Austin, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs about co-teaching. Remedial and Special
Education, 22, 245–255.
Cook, L. H., & Friend, M. (1995). Co-teaching guidelines for creating effective
practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28(2), 1–12.
Cook, L. H., & Friend, M. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school
professionals (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Dieker, L. (2001). What are the characteristics of “effective” middle and high school
co-taught teams? Preventing School Failure, 46, 14–25.
Dieker, L. (2002). Co-planner (semester). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design.
Fennick, E. (2001). Co-teaching: An inclusive curriculum for transition. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 33(6), 60–66.
Friend, M., & Cook, L. H. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school
professionals (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Gately, S. E. (2005). Two are better than one. Principal Leadership, 5(9), 36–41.
Gately, S. E., & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding co-teaching components.
Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 40–47.
Geen, A. G. (1985). Team teaching in the secondary schools of England and Wales.
Educational Review, 37, 29–38.
Hourcade, J. J., & Bauwens, J. (2001). Cooperative teaching: The renewal of
teachers. Clearinghouse, 74, 242–247.
References (cont.)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Graetz, J. E., Nordland, J., Gardizi, W., &
McDuffie, K. (2005). Case studies in co-teaching in the content areas:
Successes, failures, and challenges. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40, 260–
270.
Murawski, W. W. (2005). Addressing diverse needs through co-teaching: Take
baby steps! Kappa Delta Pi Record, 41(2), 77–82.
Murawski, W. W., & Dieker, L. A. (2004). Tips and strategies for co-teaching at
the secondary level. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(5), 52–58.
Salend, S., Gordon, I., & Lopez-Vona, K. (2002). Evaluating cooperative teams.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(4), 195–200.
Steele, N., Bell, D., & George, N. (2005, April). Risky business: The art and
science of true collaboration. Paper presented at the Council for Exceptional
Children’s Annual Conference, Baltimore, MD.
Trump, J. L. (1966). Secondary education tomorrow: Four imperatives for
improvement. NASSP Bulletin, 50(309), 87–95.
Walsh, J. M., & Jones, B. (2004). New models of cooperative teaching. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 36(5), 14–20.
Walther-Thomas, C., Bryant, M., & Land, S. (1996). Planning for effective coteaching: The key to successful inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 17,
255–265.