Co-Teaching & Individualizing the Curriculum

Co-Teaching- Share your thoughts about the co-teaching model. What impact does the upgrade of curriculum for the 21st century have on co-teaching? As a curriculum supervisor or leader, what challenges would you have supervising and evaluating a co-teaching team, and how might supervisors address these challenges?

In our school, we currently have five sets of co-teaching pairs that consist of two sets of general educator/special educator and three sets of teacher mentor/teacher intern. Some pairs are working and some are not. Co-teaching, if done the way it should be, could be one of the most ideal situations for each teacher and the students. Not only would the teachers have extra help in the room, but there is a gain of an automatic collaboration and feedback partner. You have two people with different backgrounds and experiences that can plan lessons, deliver lessons, analyze data, and provide interventions. Co-teaching just yells to me "DIFFERENTIATION" because the setup would allow students to gain knowledge and skills from different perspectives and work with either teacher on different activities based on their skill level and readiness. Of course, the effectiveness of co-teaching depends solely on the teachers and their relationship. As Gately & Gately (2001) mention, teachers may be at different developmental stages that may not allow the co-teaching relationship to be viable. However, co-teaching has the potential to increase students achievement and allow teachers to perfect and provide and receive immediate feedback on their craft. 

With the upgrade of curriculum for the 21st century, co-teaching should be able to fall directly in-line with the expectations. It would be rare that co-teachers will have the same teaching style, same personality, and same opinions. Within a co-taught classroom, students have to learn, demonstrate, and emulate (from the relationship of the co-teachers) a variety of 21st century skills such as effective communication, collaboration, flexibility, and adaptability in order to learn from two different people and demonstrate mastery to both teachers. 

As a curriculum supervisor, a number of challenges could arise, but there are ways to address those challenges:

1. Co-teachers feeling responsible only for a certain group of students, especially if there is a general and a special educator - Responsibilities must established prior co-teaching so that both teachers understand who they are responsible for and when does this responsibility change.

1. Who is responsible for grading and how will students be graded - Guidelines need to be established beforehand and if there are special circumstances, a joint decision needs to be made on an individual assignment basis.

1. Co-planning time - As an administrator, I would need to ensure that the co-teachers have the same planning period so that the teachers have time to plan together.

1. Sharing a space - In order for a co-teacher to feel that they are not just in the room as an assistant, they need to have as much ownership to the room as the other teacher. I can ensure that both teachers have a desk and their own sets of supplies, key to the room, etc. 

1. Classroom management - Both teachers need to understand that they are both responsible for classroom management and should assist with issues if need be. They should discuss their classroom management styles and their expectations of each other.

Before school begins, I would have the co-teachers write out a plan of action that addresses the above mentioned concerns so that we would all be on one accord and have a great co-teaching experience.

Gately, S. E. & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding Coteaching Components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4).

Individualizing the Curriculum- Select one model or individualized program from Chapter 15 of the Glatthorn text that you think would work best.  Explain your choice and reasons supporting it.  What, if anything, would need to change in your school or district to adapt it, and how as a curricular leader would you make those changes?

The model that I think would work best in the current educational system is the Mastery Learning Model. The Mastery Learning Model falls directly in line with Data-Driven Instruction. Students are pre-assessed so that when formative and summative post-assessments are  given, the teacher is able to track growth. The teacher provides instruction based on the data from the pre-assessment and can group students accordingly based on their current knowledge or skill level. After each formative post-assessment, the teacher can adjust groups and plan for reteaching. Students that have mastered certain objectives or standards can focus on their weaker ones and receive the appropriate instruction. Students are assessed again only on those standards and objectives that needed to be retaught. Once students have mastered all intended objectives and standards, enrichment or extension activities can be provided to allow for students to pursue their interests beyond the written curriculum. 

This type of model allows for students to get what they need. Why keep a children stagnant because four students in the classroom have not mastered one aspect of the content? This also allows students to focus only on what they need help with. If a student can run off the organelles in a cell, why keep testing them over and over on what they have already mastered? Some students need extra assistance on certain concepts and may need additional support or time to grasp it. This model allows for that and it allows for the teacher to know where each of his or her students are at any given time. 

Only a couple of teachers in our school are currently using this model and this model has shown that those students have been able to pass the HSAs the first time or score the very high on district benchmarks. The district is currently on a data-driven instruction push. In order for this model to occur school-wide, teachers must understand the purpose for implementing this model either through the testimony from teachers who are currently doing it and/or research-based literature. The teachers that are currently doing it would have to assist in providing professional development to the other teachers and literally explain and demonstrate their entire thought and action process, because it takes a tremendous amount of planning to make this work. Departments would also need to collaborate and plan how the process would look for their classrooms and plan what those mastery and enrichment lessons would look like. Common assessments would also have to be created for tracking between sections of a course to determine where all students fall. There may be times when students not mastering a certain content in one classroom is able to be moved to another teacher that is having success with getting her students to master the content. Because this process takes time and may prolong a curriculum, departments with administrators need to plan out timelines to still ensure that they can hit all required standards in the time frame allotted. This is why the pre-assessment is particularly important because if students have already mastered content in a prior class or are getting the same content in another class students are taking concurrently, then that is one less standard or objective to focus on. This eludes to the fact that there also needs to be horizontal and vertical collaboration occurring as well. 

As a leader, being transparent with the staff on what needs to occur and how it should occur is essential. Support has to be provided every step of the way, especially because this process is new for a lot of teachers and requires strong prediction skills. Actually sitting down with teachers and assisting them during every step of this process would allow them to have the self-confidence and the motivation to strive for success.