Frequently+Asked+Questions

How do co-teaching and Response to Instruction relate?1 Minnie
**"Co-teaching and collaboration offer a strong means of achieving the goals of RTI, allowing teachers and other professionals to interact in structured ways that allow flexibility aof instructional options and providing intensive instruction for students at the time they need it." (Murawski and Huges, 2009)**

What is best practice regarding the percentage of Exceptional Children in a co-taught classroom?2 Kristi/Paula
Research indicates that no more than 25 to 30% of a general education class could be students with special needs. This allows a heterogenous group to be formed with the low performing students being those identified with special needs, not in addition to them. (//Successful Inclusion: Practical Strategies for a Shared Responsibility//. Kochhar, Carol A., West, Lynda L., Taymans, Juliana M.; 2000, Prentice Hall; page 118)

How do co-teachers address classroom management (procedural) issues?3 Carrie
For students to actively be involved in academic work, effective classroom management must exist. Expected classroom procedures provide for smooth and continuous learning due to fewer disruptions and a high time on task. This type of classroom management ensures that class time is spent effectively. (//Teaching Students with Learning Problems//. Mercer, Cecil D., Mercer, Ann R. 1993, Prentice Hall; page 13) Therefore, it is essential that co-teachers work together to set up and maintain a mutually agreed upon set of classroom procedures. Many special education teachers feel that it is their place to conform to the procedures set in place by the classroom teacher since the special educator is not in that classroom all day. If this is the case, the the special educator needs to have a clear understanding of those expectations from the classroom teacher so that consistencey is maintained. Regardless of who initiates the procedures, it is imperative that both teachers agree upon them and enforce them equally.

How is differentiated instruction addressed in a co-taught classroom?4 Kristi/Jamie
Since different learning needs require differentiated instruction, teachers in a co-taught classroom must know their learners' learning styles and preferences. This knowledge is paired with a concern for each student so that instruction can be tailored to best meet their needs. Differentiation can occur in three areas: Content (what is learned), Process (how the content is taught), and Product (the outcome--how the learner demonstrates their knowledge). (//Differentiating Instruction for Students With Learning Disablilities//. Bender, William N.; 2002 Corwin Press Inc.; page 2) Therefore, all teachers involved in a co-teaching setting work together to make the appropriate adjustments to content, process and/or product for all students in that classroom. While it is generally understood that the classroom teacher has the most knowledge of the content and the special education teacher has more knowledge of making accommodations, please note that these teachers should work together and learn from each others' areas of expertise in order to accomplish the goal of differentiated instruction. In order for this to happen effectively, co-teachers need to plan together to determine how to address the various strengths and needs in the classroom, and to decide who is going to be responsible for what element of the lesson. Ideally, this planning would occur with both teachers in the same room planning face to face. However, schedules rarely allow for this kind of planning, therefore co-teachers need to be willing to be creative, flexible, and to think outside of the box. Some alternative planning options that co-teachers could use are: a Wiki, a digital drop box, an email thread, or even a Google chat session.

What considerations should co-teachers give to behavior (student behavior) management?5 Minnie/Carrie
If co-teachers want students to respect them as equal members in the classroom, they need to share the responsiblitily of behavior management. The teachers need to get away from the belief that these are "my" students and those are "your" students. While this concept is important throughout the co-teaching partnership, it is especially important in terms of behavior management. (Friend, Marilyn 2006) "Teachers' beliefs and principles provide the foundation upon which an instructional classroom management program is built. When co-teachers share and practice principles of respect and belief in students' capacity to learn, they maximize instructional outcomes....Co-teaching partners can capitalize on their collaborative relationship in designing and implementing proactive instructional practices for managing both academic and social behaviors. Friend and Cook (2007) suggest that, in addition to determining foundational beliefs and philososphies, co-teachers identify an ddiscuss classroom routines and what constitutes addeptable student behavior....In developing a classroom management plan, co-teachers should consider broad behavioral catagories or expectations that will enable students to be successful adults." ([] (September/October 2008

What are the roles and responsibilities of the special education teacher?6 Laura
The special education teacher brings expertise in identifying students' unique learning needs and adapting the curriculum and instruction (Cook, et al., 2010; McDuffie et al., 2008). The role of the special education teacher is to adapt the instruction in order to provide access for students with disabilities to curriculum that has been mapped out by the general education teacher.The special education teacher should see that evidence-based practices are infused into the general education curriculum and ensure that these practices are effective and are matched to the needs of students with disabilities (McDuffie et al., 2009).

What are the roles and responsibilities of the general education teacher?7 Travis/Laura
The general education teacher has joint responsibility with the special educator in the education of all students in the classroom. It is the general educator's responsibility to provide specialized content knowledge and skill within the curricula area for all students. The general education teacher should also combine his or her content knowledge with the specialized knowledge of the special education teacher. It is the joint responsibility of both parties to collaboratively assess the students, prepare differentiated lessons, and evaluate students. (Ripley, 1997)

Whose classroom is it in a co-teaching situation?8 Travis
In a co-taught classroom, the co-teachers assume mutual ownership and joint accountability for the students and the classroom. Although general education teachers may also have independently taught classes, during co-taught sections, both educators must have joint ownership and control of the room. (Cook & Friend, 2004)

How do you write co-teaching into an Individualized Education Plan (IEP)?9 Gay/Robin
The IEP Team must determine the student’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance and develop measurable annual goals for the student. If the determination is made by the IEP Team that the student must receive special education services in general education with the support of the special education teacher, the IEP Team must indicate the frequency, location, and duration of the special education services on the service delivery section of the IEP. For example, the student will receive special education, five days per week for 30 minutes each session in general education. The phrase “co-teaching” is not required to be indicated on the IEP.

How is the provision of service documented in the IEP?10 Gay/Robin
The special educator should be able to document the specialized instruction provided to students with disabilities in the co-teaching setting. The specially designed instruction provided to each student should be based on the amount of special education services required in each student’s IEP; the annual goals being implemented during that session; and including any accommodations, supplemental aids and services, and modifications as written in the IEP. To the extent practicable and depending on the individual needs of the students, effective and researched-based instructional practices should be documented within the co-teaching models. Examples of instructional practices may include instructional differentiation, graphic organizers, curriculum modifications, alternative evaluations, peer tutoring, mnemonics, strategy instruction, reading comprehension practices, direct instruction, social skills training, and chunking.

How is co-teaching determined to be an appropriate service delivery model for a student?11 Robin/Gay/Tracy/Mary
All students must first be referred for evaluation, evaluated, and determined eligible for and in need of special education services. The IEP Team must identify the student’s strengths and needs, develop the student’s present level of academic achievement and functional performance, and determine measurable annual goals prior to a discussion of student placement on the IEP. If the IEP Team determines that the student can receive special education services in the general education classroom with the direct support of the special education teacher, then co-teaching may be considered. If the IEP Team cannot reasonably calculate that the student will have access to the general curriculum with modifications and supplemental aids and services as needed **and** make progress towards the annual IEP goals, then the student should not be provided co-teaching services. The IEP Team process, not administrative convenience, should determine the appropriate placement for each student with a disability. **Is the general education setting the least restrictive environment for all students? Mary/Gay** The IEP Team must discuss the least restrictive environment in which services can be delivered for the individual student. IDEA requires that the student with disabilities be educated with non-disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate with the necessary supplemental aids and services. Considerations by the IEP Team should include the nature and severity of the disability and any potential harmful effects on the child or on the quality of services that the student needs. In some situations, even with the use of supplementary aids, the special education services cannot be achieved satisfactorily in a setting with nondisabled students. However, the IEP Team must not remove the student from education in age appropriate regular classrooms solely because of the modifications needed in the general education curriculum. The least restrictive environment must be determined on a case by case basis utilizing the student’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance and annual goals; the unique needs and special factors; the requirement for specially designed instruction; and the supplementary aids and services required for the student.

Would it ever be appropriate for a paraprofessional to serve as a co-teacher?12 Mary/Laura
The paraprofessional's role in the classroom is to support the teacher, not to assume the role of a co-teacher. The primary role of a paraprofessional is to provide additional support to students with disabilities and should not be responsible for initial instruction (McDuffie, et. al., 2009). According to Etscheidt (2005), "paraprofessionals may not serve as the sole designer, deliverer. or evaluator of a student's program" (p.68).

Based on the co-teaching definition by Pugach and Winn it would not be appropriate for a paraprofessional to serve as a co-teacher. We define co-teaching as shared responsibility for teaching within the same classroom by a general and special education teacher and team teaching as an interdisciplinary group of teachers sharing responsibility for a group ofstudents. This definition indicates that anyone serving in a co-teacher role must understand student learning and effective instructional strategies. In general, paraprofessionals do not have the skills or expertise required for successful co-teaching experiences. Pugach, M.C., & Winn, J.A. (2011). Research on co-teaching and teaming. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1), 36-46.

What does the research say about the impact upon student achievement in a co-teaching model?13 Marge/David
The table below summarizes the most current research investigating student outcomes in co-teaching programs.

Replace w/ grade range || All Replace w/student info—see cells below for examples || ???????? || Identification of essential elements to co-teaching Replace w/student outcomes || LD, EBD || Co-teaching vs. previous years’ solo teaching || Co-taught students had an increase in //Stanford Achievement// Math subtest from previous year; no difference in other Stanford subtests nor in GPAs. || References in table above
 * Study || Grades || Students || Comparison model(s) || Outcomes ||
 * Bacharach, Heck, & Dahlberg (2008) || All
 * Bacharach, Heck, & Dahlberg (2010) || K-6 || Students with disabilities (SWD) and non-disabled, included students w/free/reduced lunch || Student teachers co-teaching vs. solo teaching over a four year period || Increases in reading and math scores (as measured by the //Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment// and //Woodcock Johnson III-RE)//, strongest effect occurred for students with free/reduced lunch ||
 * Flicek, Olsen, Chivers, Kaufman, & Anderson (1996) || 4th& 5th grade || Nondisabled,
 * Idol (2006) || Four elementary schools and four high schools || SWD and nondisabled || Statewide assessment data of average student scores over a 4 year period. However, no comparisons were made across settings (co-teaching, resource, self-contained), nor among SWDs. || All but one school made steady gains in average student test scores, despite the presence of SWDs in general education classrooms. In the single outlier school, students’ average scores remained unchanged over 4 years. ||
 * Johnston (1994) || 4th & 6th grade || Nondisabled & LD || Co-teaching vs. solo teaching || All students in co-taught classrooms scored higher on outcome measures: Statewide literacy test, //Iowa// //Test of Basic Skills, Self- esteem Index//, and disciplinary referrals. ||
 * Mote (2010) || 6th through 8th || Students with Autism, EBD, LD, MID, Orthopedic Impairments, and OHI || Co-teaching vs. resource setting || Students from both settings made gains in reading (measured by //Georgia Criterion-referenced Competency Test-GCCT)// and Lexile scores. No difference between settings was reported for 6th and 7th graders. However, 8th graders in co-taught classrooms had higher Lexile scores (but not GCCT scores) than their resource program peers. ||
 * Murawski (2006) || 9th grade English || ??????? || Co-teaching vs. resource setting vs. self-contained || Reading and writing assessments: same across settings Can you replace “Reading and writing assessments” w/the actual test names? ||
 * Rea, McLaughlin, & Walther-Thomas (2002) || 8th grade || Learning Disabilities || Co-teaching vs. resource setting || Co-taught students had higher report card grades and attendance rates than their peers in resource settings. They also performed better on the language and mathematics subtests on the // Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) // . However, no differences were found on the other ITBS subtests, nor on statewide assessments. Suspension rates were similar for both groups. ||
 * Schwab Learning (2003) || 16 schools || All students received blended services from all providers || Co-teaching vs. previous years’ solo teaching || Decreases in special education and disciplinary referrals; increases in whole school average scores on statewide assessments, and students qualified for AIG. ||
 * Walsh & Snyder (1993) || 9th Grade || ?????????? || Co-teaching vs. solo teaching || Higher passing rates of students in co-taught classes. ||
 * Welch (2000) || 4th & 5th grade || SDWs and nondisabled || Pre- and post-test administration of CBM measures || Increases in CBM measures of spelling and reading for all students occurred. However, other CBM measures were not statistically significant. The authors attributed this to the small sample size. ||
 * McDuffie, Landrum, & Gelman (2008) || K-12 || Students with emotional and behavioral disabiltities ||  || Co-teaching appears to offer a number of potential benefits and more research needs to be done. ||

Bacharach, N., Heck, T., & Dahlberg, K. (2008). What makes co-teaching work? Identifying the essential elements. //College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal, 4//(3), 43-48.

Bacharach, N., Heck, T., & Dahlberg, K. (2010). Changing the face of student teaching through coteaching. //Action in Teacher Education, 32//(1), 3-14

ON ORDER FROM LIBRARY: Flicek, M., Olsen, C., Chivers, R., Kaufman, C.J., & Anderson, J.A. (1996). The combined classroom model for serving elementary students with and without behavioral disorders. //Behavioral Disorders, 21//, 241-248.

Idol, L. (2006). Toward inclusion of special education students in general education: A program evaluation of eight schools. //Remedial and Special Education, 27//(2), 77–94.

ON ORDER FROM LIBRARY: Johnston, W.F. (1994). How to educate all students…together. //Schools in the Middle, 3//, 3-12.

Mote, S.Y. (2010). //Does setting affect achievement of students with disabilities: Comparing co-teaching to resource.// Dissertation, Liberty University.

Murawski, W. (2006). Student outcomes in co-taught secondary English classes: How can we improve? //Reading & Writing Quarterly, 22//, 227–247.

Rea, P., McLaughlin, V. L., & Walther-Thomas, C. S. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. //Exceptional Children, 68//(2), 203–222.

Schwab Learning. (2003). Collaboratively speaking; A study on effective ways to teach children with learning differences in the general education classroom. //The Special EDge//, 1-4.

Walsh, J.M., & Snyder, D. (1993). //Cooperative teaching: An effective model for all students.// Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Council for Exceptional Children. San Antonio, TX.

Welch, M. (2000). Descriptive analysis of team teaching in two elementary classrooms: A formative experimental approach. //Remedial and Special Education//, //21//(6), 366-376.

Common planning time is critical for the success of a co-teaching partnership. Weekly planning time (45 minutes, once per week) allows sufficient time to address instructional planning and discuss student progress. In addition, it is helpful to have extended planning time available once a month for long range planning or responding to unexpected problems that may arise given the dynamic nature of classrooms. Some principals have done this by releasing one faculty meeting per month or one grade level meeting per month for collaborative planning. In one school system, co-teachers were given extended planning time ½ day every month, with a pool of full-day substitute teachers providing coverage. This continuity benefitted both students and teachers.
 * What are suggestions for common planning time with regard to co-teaching?14 Marge/David**

How are teachers evaluated in co-teaching?15 Tracy/Paula
Marilyn Friend Power of 2
 * Instructions**

You can evaluate your own co-teaching by completing this observation form. Mark the rubric to determine the developmental level of your co-teaching program. Are there components that you would like to change or improve? If you are not involved in a co-teaching arrangement, observe some teachers who co-teach and evaluate or interview them about their co-teaching?