Module 2: Collaboration and Community
Who needs to be there to contribute?
What needs to be kept in mind?
DOs and DONTs of collaboration
DOs and DONTs of collaboration
Types of Planning Time:
Common Planning Time- time that is scheduled for the same time every day or every week. Common planning time is reflected in the master schedule for the school and you and your partner will have the advantage of meeting together at the same time on the same days and in the same location week after week.
Protected Planning time- time derived from one or more creative options for locating a reasonable block of time that may or may not be on a regular basis but can provide time that is set aside for you and your partner to plan together. Both partners must be creative and flexible and committed to using the time you do have in the best way possible.
Make use of your planning time- because planning time can be so difficult to come by you want to make sure not to waste it. It can be helpful to set ground rules at the beginning so that everyone is on the same page, for example be on time, bring all your materials, turn phones off, etc. It may also be helpful to set an agenda focused on questions that you would like to answer in order to keep on task and make sure you accomplish everything that needs to get done.
Benefits of Collaboration
-Stronger lessons
-Stronger classroom community
Tough parts of Collaboration
Tough parts of Collaboration
-Finding time
-Making sure everyone’s voice/opinion is acknowledged
Tips for successful Collaboration
- Listen carefully to others
- Listen carefully to others
-Take turns & give everyone a chance to speak
-Keep phones/distractions away
-Eliminate unrelated discussions and focus on the point
Types of Co-Teaching:
SERC(2007)
1. One Teach, One Observe. One of the advantages in co-teaching is that more detailed observation of students engaged in the learning process can occur. With this approach, for example, co-teachers can decide in advance what types of specific observational information to gather during instruction and can agree on a system for gathering the data. Afterward, the teachers should analyze the information together.
2. One Teach, One Assist. In a second approach to co-teaching, one person would keep primary responsibility for teaching while the other professional circulated through the room providing unobtrusive assistance to students as needed.
3. Parallel Teaching. On occasion, student learning would be greatly facilitated if they just had more supervision by the teacher or more opportunity to respond. In parallel teaching, the teachers are both covering the same information, but they divide the class into two groups and teach simultaneously.
4. Station Teaching. In this co-teaching approach, teachers divide content and students. Each teacher then teaches the content to one group and subsequently repeats the instruction for the other group. If appropriate, a third station could give students an opportunity to work independently.
5. Alternative Teaching: In most class groups, occasions arise in which several students need specialized attention. In alternative teaching, one teacher takes responsibility for the large group while the other works with a smaller group.
6. Team Teaching: In team teaching, both teachers are delivering the same instruction at the same time. Some teachers refer to this as having one brain in two bodies. Others call it tag team teaching. Most co-teachers consider this approach the most complex but satisfying way to co-teach, but the approach that is most dependent on teachers' styles.
(http://www.ctserc.org/initiatives/teachandlearn/coteach.shtml)
Effective Co-Teaching
-Utilize both or all teachers in the room throughout the lesson whenever possible
Ineffective Co-Teaching
Ineffective Co-Teaching
-Switching between teachers where one or more teachers isn’t doing anything
-Two teachers doing two completely unrelated tasks
Remember our classroom activity- In this module we split up into groups of co-teachers. Two groups had the chance to meet and discuss their lessons prior to teaching and two did not. We noticed major differences in the performances of the two types of groups. The teachers who had a chance had one cohesive lesson t that considered the goals of all the children as well as the student with an IEP, focusing on blending “Polly’s” goals into the lesson. Unless otherwise stated, it was also difficult to establish who was the general education teacher and who was the special education teacher because they shared roles. The groups who did not have a chance to meet had two different ideas for how this lesson will go. The general education teacher had a plan for the entire class to be doing, and the special education teacher had activities for polly to do if she could not participate within the whole class instruction. They were not two teachers co-teaching, but two separate teachers with their own ideas.
Resources:
No comments:
Post a Comment