-
http://tcx.sagepub.com/TEACHING Exceptional Children
http://tcx.sagepub.com/content/30/2/4.citationThe online version
of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/004005999703000201
1997 30: 4TEACHING Exceptional ChildrenSharon Vaughn, Jeanne
Shay Schumm and Maria Elena Arguelles
The ABCDEs of Co-Teaching
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Council for Exceptional Children
can be found at:TEACHING Exceptional ChildrenAdditional services
and information for
http://tcx.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://tcx.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
What is This?
- Nov 1, 1997Version of Record >>
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on
August 18, 2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Tiffany Royal is a fifth-grade teacher atFlamingo Elementary
School in Miami. Forthe past 3years she has co-taught languagearts
and social studies for part of the schoolday with Joyce Duryea, a
special educationteacher. For both teachers, the idea of work-ing
coUaboratively with another teacher wasnot part of their original
plan for teaching.Joyce said:
When I was preparing to be a spe-cial education teacher it never
oc-curred to me that I would need toknow how to co-teach in a
generaleducation classroom. I alwaysthought Iwould have my group
ofstudents with special needs andthat is the way it would be.
4 THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
Tiffany felt the training she received tobecome an elementary
teacher did little toprepare her for her present position.
Shecommented:
I was taught about curriculum andclassroom management, but not
co-teaching. I suppose these changestook everyone by surprise.
Tiffany and Joyce are part of a growingnumber of teachers whose
"solo" teachingroles have changed in the past few years.For both
Joyce and Tiffany, the changes arefor the better. Tiffany said:
We learn so much from each other.Really, Joyce has taught me how
toimplement strategies that are goodfor other students in the
class, notjust the students with special needs.It is wonderful to
have a partner tobounce ideas off who really under-stands the
kids.
Joyce put it this way:I think I'm a better teacher now,and
Idefinitely have a much betterunderstanding of what goes on inthe
general education classroomand what kinds of expectations Ineed to
have for my students.
Both teachers agree that their co-teach-ing has had real
benefits for the students.They are convinced that the benefits are
notjust for students with special needs but forall students. As
Joyce, the special educationteacher, said:
I am able to provide some supportfor all of the students in the
class.Mind you, Inever lose sight ofwhyI'm in here, to assist the
studentswith identified special needs, butthere are benefits for
other students,as well.
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Both Joyce and Tiffany feel lucky towork with each other. but
are also awarethat co-teaching is not always so mutuallysatisfying.
They know of other teachers whoare working in co-teaching
situations wherethe partnerships are not nearly as success-ful.
Co-teaching is a bit like a marriage. Bothpartners have to feel
that they are giving100% and have to want things to work out.This
is particularly true when their philoso-phies about teaching and
discipline aredifferent (see box page 9. "Common Co-Teaching
Issues").
Modifying Models foreo-Teaching Roles
Tiffany and Joyce are not unusual in thatthey had little
preparation for co-teaching.As experienced teachers, both had
goodideas about how they would establish theirclassrooms and
instruct their students. Theywere just not clear about how they
woulddo it together.What roles do teachers often implement
when co-teaching? Having observed in morethan 70 co-teaching
classrooms, we haveidentified several typical practices that
teach-ers implement. We feel that when thesepractices are refined,
they provide moreeffective and efficient uses of teachers' timeand
skills. 1\vo practices that need modifi-cation are grazing and
tag-team-teaching.
Grazing
In grazing, one teacher stands in front of.the room providing an
explanation orinstruction. and the other teacher movesfrom student
to student checking to see ifthey are paying attention or following
along.Often. in co-teaching situations. teachers areinvolved in
grazing; and yet they report tous that they are not sure it is a
good use oftheir time. Unfortunately. they are uncertainabout what
else they could be doing duringthis time that would be more
effective.We suggest that teachers replace graz-
ing with teaching on purpose-giving60- second. 2-minute. or
5-minute lessonsto individual students. pairs of students, or
even a small group of students. Teaching onpurpose often
involves a follow-up to aprevious lesson or a check and extension
ofwhat is presently being taught. Teacherswho implement "teaching
on purpose" keepa written log of information for each
specialeducation student who needs follow-up.Sometimes this
follow-up work is related tokey ideas, concepts. or vocabulary from
thelesson or unit. Teachers may realize that se-lected students are
still unsure of critical in-formation; during "teaching on
purpose"lessons, they approach the student. checkfor understanding.
and then follow up witha mini-lesson.
You may wonder how students can payattention to the presentation
at hand if theco-teacher is moving from student tostudent and
"teaching on purpose." Stu-dents quickly adjust to the role of the
sec-ond teacher and, in fact, often want theteacher to check in
with them.
Tag-Team-Teachlng
In this familiar scenario. one teacher standsin the front of the
room providing a lessonor presentation. and the other teacher
eitherstands in the back of the room or sits at adesk involved in
another activity. When thefirst teacher has completed the lesson,
heor she moves to the back of the room or sitsat a desk, and the
second teacher takes over.Teachers often use tag-team-teaching
be-cause they are unsure of how else they candeliver instruction to
the class as a whole.Further, they have been provided few
alter-native models for how two teachers mighteffectively teach
together.We have identified several alternative
models-Plans A through D-to grazingand tag-tearn-teaching. We
suggest that youtry all the just select the onethat makes most
sense to your teachingteam (Bauwens, Hourcade, &Friend.
1989).
A: One Group-One LeadTeacher, One Teacher "Teachingon
Purpose"
As we previously suggested, teaching onpUTpOse is an effective
alternative to usualmodels of co-teaching. Also called"Supportive
Learning Activities" (Bauwens& Hourcade. 1995), Plan A
provideseffective roles for both teachers.
In this structure, the general educationteacher does not always
assume the leadrole, nor does the special education teachersolely
serve in the role of teaching onpurpose. Teachers can use the
PlanningPyramid Unit or Daily Lesson Form (seeSchumm. Vaughn, &
Harris, 1997; Schumm.Vaughn. &Leavell, 1994) to record the
keyideas they want every student to know andthen monitor the
progress of students withspecial needs through teaching on
purpose.Teachers can also use the Co-Teaching DailyLesson Plan Form
(Figure 1 shows sampleitems from this form with teachers'
plansadded) provided in Figure 2.
Two Groups: Two TeachersTeach Same Content
In Plan B, the students in the class form twoheterogeneous
groups. and each teacherworks with one of the groups. The purposeof
using two smaller groups is to provideadditional opportunities for
the students ineach group to interact, provide answers, andto have
their responses and knowledgemonitored by the teacher. This
co-teachingarrangement is often used as a follow-up tothe
whole-group structure in Plan A.Because small-group discussions
andteacher instruction always result in some-what different
material being addressed ineach group, teachers may want to pull
thegroups together to do a wrap-up. Thepurpose of a wrap-up is to
summarize thekey points that were addressed in eachgroup, therefore
familiarizing the wholeclass with the same material. A wrap-upalso
assists students in learning to criticallysummarize key
information.Some teachers wonder whether students
must always be heterogeneously groupedor if it ever makes sense
to group studentsbased on their knowledge and expertiseabout the
designated topic. We feel that itdoes; the next co-teachingmodel
addressesthat issue.
c: Two Groups: One TeacherRe-teaches, One Teacher
TeachesAltemative Information
In Plan C, teachers assign students to oneof two groups. based
on their levels ofknowledge and skills for the designated
TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN NovIDEC 1997 5
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
0'
FigureI
CO,TEACH
INGDAILYLESSON
PLAN
S
Date
Whatareyou
Whichco-teaching
Whatarethespecific
Whatmaterials
Howwillyou
Informationaboutstudents
goingtoteach?
techniquewillyouuse?
tasksofbothteachers?
areneeded?
evaluate
learning?
whoneedfoUow-up
work
Roots
at1dsfettts
PlattP:
Ms.P:Workw
itttOM
Celerystaib,
CotMpletiottof
bul:H
avebulparaphrase
tOl5197
Assigtlstud
ettts1
0group.
carrots.co
lored
labreport.
sRpsbefore
dffferettt
groups.
Ms.l:
Mot1Horthe
water.la
bno1I
booI- ,... (j ;I; t= o '"", z
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Figure2
CO,TEACHINGDAILYLESSON
PLANS
COpyME!
GeneralEducator
_SpecialEducator
_
-J ::I: Z C'l '" ::l a z > r- (") :r i= o ;>:> '"z z
........ o Pi ..... \0 \0 "'J "'J
Date
Whatareyou
Whichco#teaching
Whatarethespecific
Whatmaterials
Howwillyou
Informationaboutstudents
going
toteach?
techniquewillyouuse?
tasksofbothteachers?
areneeded?
evaluate
learning?
whoneedfollow#upw
ork
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
Collllllon Co-Teaching IssuesBased on extended observations and
interviews with more than 70 generaleducation/special education
teacher teams, we have identified several issuesthat co-teachers
must address if they are to be successful.Whose students are
these?Address this issue before co-teaching begins: Who is
respon-sible for the students in the classroom? The general
educationteacher is responsible for all of the students in the
class, buthow do these responsibilities change when the special
educa-tion teacher is in the room? Who is responsible for the
studentswith special needs? Under what conditions do these
responsi-bilities change?
Perhaps the issue that warrants the most discussion prior to
co-teaching is grading. Special education teachers are accustomedto
grading based on the effort, motivation, and abilities of
thestudents. General education teachers are accustomed to grad-ing
based on a uniform set of expectations that is only
slightlyadjusted to reflect issues of effort, motivation, and
student abil-ities. Making joint decisions about how grades will be
handledfor in-class assignments. tests. and homework will reduce
thefrictions frequently associated with grading special
educationstudents in general education classrooms. Working
together,teachers can develop guidelines for grading to use with
bothstudents and parents.Whose classroom management rules do we
use?Most general and special education teachers know the typesof
academic and social behaviors they find acceptable and
un-acceptable. Over the years, they have established
consequencesfor inappropriate behaviors. Rarely is there
disagreement be-tween teachers about the more extreme behaviors.
The subtleclassroom management difficulties that are part of the
ongo-ing routines of running a classroom. however, can cause
con-cerns for teachers. Often. the special education teacher is
unsureabout when he or she should step in and assist with
classroommanagement. Teachers should discuss their classroom
man-agement styles and the roles they expect of each other in
main-taining a smoothly running classroom.What space do I get?When
special education teachers spend part of their day in-structing in
general education classrooms, it is extremely use-fulto have a
designated area for them to keep their materials.Adesk and chair
that are used only by special education teach-ers provide them with
a "base" from which to work and con-tribute to their position of
authority.What do we tell the students?An issue repeatedly brought
up by teachers is how much in-formation should be given to
students. Should students be in-
8 THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
formed that they will have two teachers? Should students
knowthat one of the teachers is a special education teacher and
thatshe will be assisting some children more than others? The
stu-dents should be informed that they have two teachers and
that
teachers have the same authority. We think it is a goodidea to
introduce the special education teacher as a "learningabilities"
specialist who will be working with all of the stu-dents from time
to time. It is our experience that students will-ingly accept the
idea of haVing two teachers and like it verymuch. In interviews we
have conducted. many students whohave participated in co-teaching
classrooms tell us that havingtwo teachers is better because
everyone gets more help.What do we tell the parents?Teachers are
often unsure of how much they should tell par-ents about their new
teaching arrangement. One of the concernsthat teachers have is how
parents might react to having a spe-cial education teacher in the
classroom for part of the day. Itis our experience that these
programs are most successful whenparents are brought in early and
are part of the planningprocess. Thus. parents are part of the
process from the begin-ning and are able to influence the
development of the program.Parents of average- to high-achieving
children may express con-cerns that their children's education may
be hampered becausestudents with special needs are placed in the
classroom. Teach-ers report that these students fare as well or
better, academi-cally and socially, when students with special
needs are in thegeneral education classroom; and all students
benefit from thesupport provided by the special education teacher
(Arguelles.Schumm, &Vaughn. 1996).How can we get time to
co-plan?The most pervasive concern of both general and special
edu-cation teachers in co-teaching situations is obtaining
sufficienttime during the school day to plan and discuss
instruction andstudent progress. This is of particular concern for
special edu-cation teachers who are working with more than one
generaleducation teacher. Teachers report that planning often
comeson their own time. Even when a designated period is
estab-lished for co-planning. teachers report that this time gets
takenaway to be used for meetings and other school
managementactivities. Teachers need a minimum of 45 minutes of
unin-terrupted planning time each week if they are likely to have
asuccessful co-teaching experience. One suggestion made byseveral
of the teacher teams with whom we have worked is todesignate a day
or a half-day every 6-8 weeks when teacherscan meet extensively to
plan and discuss the progress of stu-dents. as well as changes in
their instructional practices.
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
topic. Although students with special needsare often in the
group that requires re-teach-ing, this is not always true. The
criterion forgroup assignment is not ability but skill levelon the
designated topic. Though ability andskill level for the designated
topic are oftenrelated, they are not the same. This is
oftenreferred to as flexible grouping, because thegroup to which
students are assignedis temporary and relates solely to
theirknowledge and skills for the designatedtopic. As the topic and
skills that are ad-dressed change, so does group composition.In a
co-teaching situation, it is tempting
to have the special education teacher alwaysprovide instruction
for students in there-teaching group and to have the
generaleducation teacher provide instruction forstudents who are
ready for alternativeinformation. In our experience, the specialand
general education teachers find it mosteffective to alternate
between groups. Thisallows both teachers an opportunity towork with
the full range of students andcurriculum content.
D:Multiple Groups: TwoTeachers Monitor/Teach; ContentMay
Vary
Plan D is much like using learning centersor cooperative
learning groups. Activitiesrelated to the topic or lesson are
arranged indesignated areas throughout the classroom.(One area may
have computers, anothermay have audio equipment, etc.) Groups
ofstudents either alternate working in each ofthe designated areas,
or are assigned to workin a particular area that responds to
theirspecific needs. Teachers can perform one ofseveral roles:
Monitoring student progress. Providing mini-lessons to
individualstudents or small groups of students.
Working with one group of studentsduring the entire period while
the otherteacher monitors the remaining studentsand activities.This
multiple-group format allows all or
most students to work in heterogeneousgroups, with selected
students pulled forspecific instruction. Plan Dcan be particu-larly
effective in language arts when stu-dents with specific reading
disabilitiesrequire specific and intensive
small-groupinstruction.
E: One Group: Two TeachersTeach Same Content
Plan E is perhaps the most difficult toimplement and certainly
extremely chal-lenging for teachers who are first learning
toco-teach. In Plan E, two teachers are. directing a whole class of
students, and bothteachers are working cooperatively andteaching
the same lesson at the same time.For example, in one classroom
where thiswas implemented, a general educationscience teacher was
presenting a lesson onanatomy; and the special education
teacherinterjected with examples and extensions ofthe key ideas.
The special education teacheralso provided strategies to assist the
studentsin better remembering and organizing theinformation that
was presented.
A Co-Teaching Plan of Action
As mentioned earlier, these five approachesto co-teaching are
part of a coordinatedeffort to implement multiple types
ofco-teaching and grouping procedures thatcan and should be
implemented.Let's visit Tiffany and Joyce again to
see how they are planning for effectiveco-teaching.Tiffany and
Joyce co-plan to determine
the critical information they want to coverfor selected units.
Using a pyramid plan,they consider information they think
allstudents should know, most studentsshould know, and some
students shouldknow. They organize this information inwriting (see
Schumm et al., 1997). Tiffanyand Joyce then consider the activities
thatthey will implement to ensure learning onthe part of all
students. While consideringclassroom activities, they think about
thematerials they need and the co-teachingstructures they intend to
use. Because bothteachers are highly familiar with the five
co-teaching alternatives described in this arti-cle, they refer to
them by theirletter names (A, B, C, D, or E) and then de-cide which
teacher will play which role. De-cisions about the co-teaching
structure
Tiffany and Joyce will implement are closelyrelated to learning
goals and activities. Thefollowing is a typical plan for a unit of
study:1. Plan A is commonly implementedduring the first and second
day of a newunit. In this way, one teacher can providecritical
information to the class as a whole,and the second teacher can
providemini-lessons.2. On the third day of the unit, Tiffany
andJoyce have decided to use Plan B, whichallows most students to
interact with thenew material. The teachers can also ascertain
which students understand the newmaterial and at what level of
understand-ing they are operating. Plan Bprovides keyopportunities
for the teachers to expand,clarify, and extend learning.3. On Days
4 and 5, the teachers decide toimplement a whole-class project in
whichstudents are asked to work in heterogeneousgroups (Plan D).
One teacher takes the leadto explain the project, while the
secondteacher assists the students with specialneeds to ensure they
are following thedirections. When students form smallgroups, both
teachers work actively witheach group. At the end of Day 5,
theteachers provide a brief quiz covering thematerial presented
during the week. Theinformation from this quiz is then used
todetermine their co-teaching activities for thefollowing week.4.
Because six students performed poorlyon the quiz, the teachers use
Plan Con Day6. While one teacher re-teaches the studentswho
performed poorly, the other teacherprovides an alternative lesson
to the rest ofthe class.5. During Day 7, they return to the
whole-group structure of Plan A.6. For Days 8 and 9, the teachers
uselearning centers and small groups (Plan D).Thus, designing the
co-teaching
structures they intend to implement eachday is an integral part
of planning andinstruction for Tiffany and Joyce. When
planning for theunit as a
TEACHING ExCEPTIONAL CHILDREN NovIDEC 1997 9
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from
-
whole, both teachers consider how they will teach the critical
in-fonnation and the roles each teacher will play. Like most
teachers.Tiffany and Joyce often have to make changes as they
teach. butthey always feel they have a common roadmap or
understandingof where and how they want students to learn and the
roles theycan play to facilitate that learning.
......1Arguelles. M. SChumm. J. 5. & Vaughn. S. (1996).
Executive swnmaries for
ESElFEFP PilDt Program. Tallahassee. FL: Repol1 submilled 10
FloridaDepanment of Education.
Bauwens. J. & Hourcade. J. J. (1995). Cooperotive teaching:
Rebuilding theschoolhouse for all students. Austin. TX: Pro-Ed.
Bauwens. J Hourcade. J. J & Friend, M. (1989). Cooperative
teaching: Amodel for general and special education integration.
Remedial andSpecial Education. 10(2). 17-22.
Dieker. L. A. & Barnell. C. A. (1996). Effective
co-teaching. TEACHINGExceptional Children. 29(1), 5-7.
Kluwin. T. N.. Gonsher. w., Silver, K.. & Samuels, J.
(1996). The E. T. class:Education together. TEACHING Exceptional
Children. 29(1). H-I S.
SChumm. J. 5., Vaughn. 5. & Harris. J. (1997). Pyramid power
for collabo-rative planning for content area instruction. TEACHING
ExceptionalChildren. 29(6), 62-{;6.
SChumm. J. 5. Vaughn. 5. & Leavell. A. (1994). Planning
pyramid: A frame-work for planning for diverse student needs during
content area instruction.The Rrotiing Teadzer. 47(8). 608-61S.
Sharon Vaughn (CEC Chapter # 121). Professor, Depanment of
SpecialEducation. University of Texas at Austin. Jeanne Shay
SChumm(CEC Chapter # 121). Professor; and Maria Elena Arguelles.
GraduateAssisraIU. University ofMiami. Office ofSchool-Based
Research. Florida.
Address rorresporuJence to Sharon Vaughn. Depamn.ent ofSpecial
Education.University ofTexns at Austin. SchoolofEducation SZB 306.
Austin TX 78712-1290 (e-mail: [email protected]).
Copyriglu 1997 CEC.
TIPS FORCO-TEACHINGGradingDieker and Barnett (1996)
suggesthaving both teachers check, discuss,and then assign grades
for studentwork. This process allows teachers, to become familiar
with each other'sstandards and is especially helpfulwhen student's
work is borderline.
Space
To avoid issues related to territory, bothteachers should move
into a differentclassroom rather than one teachermoving into the
other's space(Bauwens & Hourcade, 1995; Kluwin,Gonsher, Silver,
& Samuels, 1996).
PlanningAsking community volunteers oruniversity students who
are majoring ineducation to direct certain classroomactivities or
accompany studentsto schools assemblies may allow forsome extra
planning time (Bauwens &Hourcade, 1995).
10 THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
74-,;,,9, ,4.
,],
at UNIV OF WASHINGTON LIBRARY on August 18,
2014tcx.sagepub.comDownloaded from