Скачать презентацию Working together for success Assoc Prof Barrie O Connor Скачать презентацию Working together for success Assoc Prof Barrie O Connor

d9d54a8334122345ce78083e31396a8e.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 64

Working together for success Assoc Prof Barrie O’Connor 4030 CLS – 4201 EBL Lecture Working together for success Assoc Prof Barrie O’Connor 4030 CLS – 4201 EBL Lecture 3, Sem. 1, 2009

Overview What is collaboration? n How used? n Benefits? n Empirical support… n Assignment Overview What is collaboration? n How used? n Benefits? n Empirical support… n Assignment 1 A + others! n

Collaboration? n Working together to maximise outcomes ¨ “Two heads better than one” … Collaboration? n Working together to maximise outcomes ¨ “Two heads better than one” … 1+1 = 3

Key players? Key players?

Key players? Responsible for up to 59% of the variance in student learning outcomes Key players? Responsible for up to 59% of the variance in student learning outcomes (Alton-Lee, 2003, p. x)

Key players? Key players?

Other team members? n n Class teachers class teachers Specialist staff ¨ ¨ Special Other team members? n n Class teachers class teachers Specialist staff ¨ ¨ Special educators Advisory visiting teachers AVTs Learning assistance teachers… Teacher aides / school officers n ¨ ¨ Library staff Therapy staff n ¨ ¨ Auslan Language Models (ALM); Indigenous learning assistants Speech language, OT, Physio Office staff School administration Outside professionals (Health, Communities, Youth) Milpera (newly arrived refugees) at Chelmer

Key Message #1 A word of encouragement is powerful. Key Message #1 A word of encouragement is powerful.

Two viewpoints A. B. n We get along very well. We are both flexible Two viewpoints A. B. n We get along very well. We are both flexible and have developed similar expectations for students and similar classroom management styles. We feed off each others' comments and teaching styles. We switch which groups we work with so that we both get to perform a variety of roles with all our students. We work together, develop together, and bounce things off each other. Working as a team makes you feel good. n n (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196) n I don't think I'd like to work in this type of program again. She felt like a visitor in my classroom, and we never connected personally. We struggled because of differences in roles, teaching and communication styles, and philosophy. The students also were confused. They felt that I was the teacher and she was my aide. I felt like she was always watching me and judging me. We didn't know how to do it and received little support from our principal. (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196)

Two viewpoints In pairs, 1. select one viewpoint each to read; 2. List the Two viewpoints In pairs, 1. select one viewpoint each to read; 2. List the key characteristics of the relationship; 3. compare and contrast your findings A. B. n We get along very well. We are n I don't think I'd like to work in this both flexible and have developed type of program again. She felt similar expectations for students like a visitor in my classroom, and similar classroom we never connected personally. management styles. We feed off We struggled because of each others' comments and differences in roles, teaching and teaching styles. We switch which communication styles, and groups we work with so that we philosophy. The students also both get to perform a variety of were confused. They felt that I roles with all our students. We was the teacher and she was my work together, develop together, aide. I felt like she was always and bounce things off each other. watching me and judging me. We Working as a team makes you feel didn't know how to do it and good. received little support from our principal. n (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196)

Two viewpoints A. Characteristics? n We get along very well. We are both flexible Two viewpoints A. Characteristics? n We get along very well. We are both flexible and have developed similar expectations for students and similar classroom management styles. We feed off each others' comments and teaching styles. We switch which groups we work with so that we both get to perform a variety of roles with all our students. We work together, develop together, and bounce things off each other. Working as a team makes you feel good. n (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196)

Two viewpoints A. n n Characteristics? We get along very well. We are both Two viewpoints A. n n Characteristics? We get along very well. We are both flexible and have developed similar expectations for students and similar classroom management styles. We feed off each others' comments and teaching styles. We switch which groups we work with so that we both get to perform a variety of roles with all our students. We work together, develop together, and bounce things off each other. Working as a team makes you feel good. (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196) n n n n Compatible Shared expectations, goals Share teaching values and strategies Complementary efforts Flexible and variable roles and tasks with students Working and growing together Satisfaction

Two viewpoints Characteristics? B. n n I don't think I'd like to work in Two viewpoints Characteristics? B. n n I don't think I'd like to work in this type of program again. She felt like a visitor in my classroom, and we never connected personally. We struggled because of differences in roles, teaching and communication styles, and philosophy. The students also were confused. They felt that I was the teacher and she was my aide. I felt like she was always watching me and judging me. We didn't know how to do it and received little support from our principal. (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196)

Two viewpoints Characteristics? B. n n n n Dissatisfaction, retreat Social distance, disconnection, lack Two viewpoints Characteristics? B. n n n n Dissatisfaction, retreat Social distance, disconnection, lack of trust? Major differences in ways of working and philosophy Students confused about role relationships and status differentials Defensiveness Principal disinterested, unsupportive n I don't think I'd like to work in this type of program again. She felt like a visitor in my classroom, and we never connected personally. We struggled because of differences in roles, teaching and communication styles, and philosophy. The students also were confused. They felt that I was the teacher and she was my aide. I felt like she was always watching me and judging me. We didn't know how to do it and received little support from our principal. (Salend et al. , 2002, p. 196)

Collaboration At least two members…. Collaboration At least two members….

Collaboration Parity in membership Collaboration Parity in membership

Collaboration Voluntary engagement Collaboration Voluntary engagement

Collaboration Shall we explore this together…? What do you think…? Sharing decisions Collaboration Shall we explore this together…? What do you think…? Sharing decisions

Collaboration n “a style for direct interaction between at least two coequal parties voluntarily Collaboration n “a style for direct interaction between at least two coequal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision making as they work toward a common goal” (Friend & Cook, 1992, p. 5). voluntary engagement in the activity n parity among members n Sharing decisions n

Teacher responsibilities n n “teachers need to demonstrate through their actions that collaboration is Teacher responsibilities n n “teachers need to demonstrate through their actions that collaboration is not about working with best friends or, necessarily, with like-minded people. Collaboration is about trust and respect. It's about working together to create better outcomes for all students. If teachers learn to like each other in the process, that is a bonus, but it is not a prerequisite. … in some schools, the professionals who collaborate are those who are most comfortable with each other; others are not part of the culture. “Educators collaborate because doing so benefits students. They sometimes work together, even if they would not socialize and sometimes even if they have rather opposing views of teaching and learning. “Collaboration is not a personal preference; it is a strategy to do what is best for students. (Marilyn Friend on collaboration – interview with Brownell & Walther. Thomas, 2002, p. 226)

Key Message #2 We work to benefit student outcomes. Key Message #2 We work to benefit student outcomes.

What we bring… n Interpersonal skills? Self awareness (verbal and non-verbal behaviour) ¨ Self What we bring… n Interpersonal skills? Self awareness (verbal and non-verbal behaviour) ¨ Self disclosure Openness Trust ¨ n ¨ ¨ ¨ n n Trusting and trustworthy Sending effective messages; clarity Harnessing thoughts and feelings - genuineness Active listening Challenging ideas – respectful confrontation Focus on ways forward rather than the past … Willingness to engage Willingness to explore, problem-solve…

Self awareness Self awareness

How well do I relate to others? Self awareness How well do I relate to others? Self awareness

How well do I relate to others? Self awareness How do others view me? How well do I relate to others? Self awareness How do others view me?

How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Self How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Self awareness How do others view me?

How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Self How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Self awareness Do I listen carefully before responding? How do others view me?

How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Self How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Self awareness Am I quick to judge? Do I listen carefully before responding? How do others view me?

How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Am How well do I relate to others? What non-verbal cues do I give? Am I willing to keep learning about how I relate to others? Am I quick to judge? Self awareness Do I listen carefully before responding? How do others view me?

Self-disclosure Self-disclosure

Self-disclosure Risking our “skin” to let others in to our thoughts and feelings Self-disclosure Risking our “skin” to let others in to our thoughts and feelings

Self-disclosure I’m feeling anxious about this approach? Risking our “skin” to let others in Self-disclosure I’m feeling anxious about this approach? Risking our “skin” to let others in to our thoughts and feelings I think we can make this work…

Self-disclosure Self-disclosure

Self-disclosure Too defensive, we close up to others’ thoughts and ideas Self-disclosure Too defensive, we close up to others’ thoughts and ideas

It won’t work; I don’t want any part of it. Go away… Self-disclosure Too It won’t work; I don’t want any part of it. Go away… Self-disclosure Too defensive, we close up to others’ thoughts and ideas I don’t know as much as she does; I’ll look stupid… Too risky for me!

Self-disclosure Self-disclosure

Self-disclosure Inappropriate disclosure leaves us vulnerable The parents are useless – don’t even bother. Self-disclosure Inappropriate disclosure leaves us vulnerable The parents are useless – don’t even bother. Mother’s crazy…

Self-disclosure Too much disclosure leaves us vulnerable; perhaps fatally Self-disclosure Too much disclosure leaves us vulnerable; perhaps fatally

Self-disclosure Inappropriate disclosure leaves us vulnerable No special cases in my room – I Self-disclosure Inappropriate disclosure leaves us vulnerable No special cases in my room – I treat them all the same! The parents are useless – don’t even bother. Mother’s crazy…

Stages of group development (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977) 1. Forming 2. Storming 3. Norming Stages of group development (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977) 1. Forming 2. Storming 3. Norming 4. Performing 5. Mourning Getting started Uncertainty, discontent … Gaining focus, clarifying roles … Getting on with the task Regrets leaving team at end

Emerging models of support 1950 s n Class teachers – sole responsibility n Speech Emerging models of support 1950 s n Class teachers – sole responsibility n Speech correctionists n Guidance officers 1960 s n Remedial teachers – pull-out/withdrawal 1970 s n Teacher librarians n Parent volunteers n Resource teachers – in-class support/consultants n Teacher aides n Advisory visiting teachers 1990 s+ n Learning support / enhancement teachers …

Emerging models of support 2000 s n Inclusive curriculum, educational adjustments n AVTs, behaviour Emerging models of support 2000 s n Inclusive curriculum, educational adjustments n AVTs, behaviour support coaching… n Co-teaching n Community of learners Inside school ¨ Engaging wider community - e. g. Rennie (2006), working in Indigenous communities – curriculum knowledge complemented by community knowledge) ¨

An example of support David Wassink – Youth Summit Rep ABC Radio National - An example of support David Wassink – Youth Summit Rep ABC Radio National - Life Matters http: //www. abc. net. au/rn/lifematters/stories/2008/2216561. htm 15 April 2005 - 4 mins There were five subject areas: his was family and community. Now studying to be a primary school teacher, he was homeless for several years in his teens .

Principal – key leadership role n n n “One outstanding principal I know worked Principal – key leadership role n n n “One outstanding principal I know worked in a school in which teachers tended to stay in their classrooms, where small cliques existed but little collaboration occurred. He decided a change was in order, and he took specific steps to recreate the school culture. He created lunch-hour study groups where teachers read about and debated various issues related to collaboration. He created working committees assigned to make important decisions concerning the school, and he taught committee members strategies for working effectively during meetings and for group problem solving. He asked an external consultant to meet with staff to identify concerns and resolve them, including interpersonal issues. After 2 years, teachers and other professionals in the school worked closely together, and they saw collaboration as an essential element of all aspects of their jobs. This all happened because someone in the school set the standard and led staff to it; the someone who can do this is the principal. ” (Marilyn Friend on collaboration – interview with Brownell & Walther. Thomas, 2002, p. 225)

Key Message #2 Engage in change processes to change student outcomes. Key Message #2 Engage in change processes to change student outcomes.

Evaluating collaborative teams What roles do teachers perform? Are these roles meaningful? n How Evaluating collaborative teams What roles do teachers perform? Are these roles meaningful? n How often and for how long are teachers interacting with each other? n Who is initiating and ending these interactions? What is the nature of these interactions (e. g. , cooperative, reciprocal, supportive, complementary, individualistic)? n Which students are the recipients of these interactions? n What are the outcomes of these interactions for teachers and their students? n What factors appear to promote and limit these interactions? n Do the teachers have an equal-status relationship? n To what extent do teachers coordinate their roles and blend their skills? (Salend et al. , 2005, p. 198) n

Co-teaching models 1. Instructor + roving individual assist 2. Station teaching ¨ ¨ content Co-teaching models 1. Instructor + roving individual assist 2. Station teaching ¨ ¨ content and space managed in classroom zones students rotates to staff positions 3. Parallel teaching ¨ joint planning / delivery to two heterogeneous groups 4. Alternative teaching ¨ large group (main instruction) + small group (intensive instruction; small student : teacher ratio) 5. Team teaching ¨ ¨ planning / instructional parity between teachers alternate primary instructor role within individual lessons. (Based on Cook & Friend, as cited in Kloo & Zigmond, 2008, p. 15)

Co-teaching foci Kloo and Zigmond (2008) Three broad lesson configurations from co-teaching: n both Co-teaching foci Kloo and Zigmond (2008) Three broad lesson configurations from co-teaching: n both teachers instructing a single group of students, n each teacher actively instructing his or her own group of students, n neither teacher involved in whole group instruction. n In all cases, either special education teacher or general education teacher serves in role of first teacher or second teacher. The advantage of alternative framework: focuses on the number of instructional groups in a co-taught class; not on interactions between teachers ¨ recognizes team teaching as just one of several configurations in which only one lesson is occurring, and not as the ideal model of co-teaching. ¨

Enhancing learner engagement 1 Instructor + roving individual assist 2. Station teaching ¨ ¨ Enhancing learner engagement 1 Instructor + roving individual assist 2. Station teaching ¨ ¨ content and space managed in classroom zones students rotate to staff positions 3. Parallel teaching ¨ joint planning / delivery to two heterogeneous groups 4. Alternative teaching ¨ large group (main instruction) + small group (intensive instruction; small student : teacher ratio) 5. Team teaching ¨ ¨ planning / instructional parity between teachers alternate primary instructor role within individual lessons.

TEACH Co-teaching – increasing student opportunities to engage with learning Target skills / strategies TEACH Co-teaching – increasing student opportunities to engage with learning Target skills / strategies for student to learn. n Express enthusiasm and optimism. n Adapt instructional environment. n Create opportunities for small-group or individual, direct, intensive instruction. n Help student apply skills learned to content classes. Kloo and Zigmond (2008, p. 15) n

Special Ed Teacher SUPPORT n n n n Study content Understand big ideas Prioritize Special Ed Teacher SUPPORT n n n n Study content Understand big ideas Prioritize objectives Plan with general education teacher Observe Ss in class attending to instruction Rephrase, repeat, redirect Teach your coteacher to do it all on his/her own. Kloo and Zigmond (2008, p. 16)

Co-teaching in content areas n n n Collaboration … e. g. general and special Co-teaching in content areas n n n Collaboration … e. g. general and special educator teaching in single classroom. shared instructional responsibilities and planning time Zigmond and Magiera (2001) - major goals of coteaching increasing access to a wider range of instructional options for students with disabilities ¨ enhancing the participation of students with disabilities within general education classes ¨ enhancing the performance of students with disabilities … but ¨ limited efficacy data ¨ (Mastropieri et al. , 2005)

Co-teaching in content areas Equivocal research findings on effectiveness “After reviewing 23 studies, Weiss Co-teaching in content areas Equivocal research findings on effectiveness “After reviewing 23 studies, Weiss and Brigham (2000) listed several overall problems with co-teaching research, including the following: 1. omitting important information on measures, 2. interviewing teachers only in cases in which co-teaching is successful, (bias? ) 3. finding in many cases that teacher personality was the most important variable in co-teaching success, 4. inconsistent definition of co-teaching, and 5. stating outcomes subjectively. Weiss and Brigham stated that, overall, there were few reports of what teachers actually did in the classroom. This … is relevant and important because careful analyses of what co-teachers are doing and how this relates to student success can help facilitate efforts to better understand improve co-teaching practices. ” (Mastropieri et al. , 2005, p. 261)

What co-teachers do – secondary n n Hardy (2001) observed special and general educators What co-teachers do – secondary n n Hardy (2001) observed special and general educators in secondary biology classrooms Presence of special education teachers in co-taught classrooms – contributes to changes in general educators' instructional behaviors, specialized instruction (albeit limited) for students with disabilities, ¨ a successful partnership, and ¨ success for some students with disabilities. ¨ ¨ (Mastropieri et al. , 2005, p. 261)

Observing co-teaching Phase 1: n What Makes a Good Lesson? Phase 2: n Does Observing co-teaching Phase 1: n What Makes a Good Lesson? Phase 2: n Does the Evaluation of a Co-Taught Class Require a Unique Perspective? Phase 3: n What Are the Essential Components Needed in an Observation Tool for Co-Taught Lessons? (Wilson, 2005, pp. 272 -273)

What Makes a Good “Lesson” n n n n Lessons are student-centered Recognition of What Makes a Good “Lesson” n n n n Lessons are student-centered Recognition of diverse learning styles of students Questions tap high-order thinking Engagement of students and evidence that students are on task Use of materials that are useful and available Attention to motivation Awareness of transitions Aims that are open-ended Summation at the middle and end of the lesson Activities that apply the information Connections made to students' experiences Positive student-teacher relationships and interactions Appropriate use of technology Adherence to state standards Reinforcement of previously learned and new material Positive teacher-teacher relationships

Does the Evaluation of a Co-Taught Class Require a Unique Perspective? n n e. Does the Evaluation of a Co-Taught Class Require a Unique Perspective? n n e. g. Observed Yr 10 Biology & Yr 9 English Subtle and blatant differences between singlytaught and co-taught classes: ¨ Roles of the teachers ¨ Instructional strategies ¨ Assessment processes (Wilson, 2005, pp. 272 -273)

Observing Co-Taught Lessons? 1. Meaningful roles for each teacher ¨ Can they be defined Observing Co-Taught Lessons? 1. Meaningful roles for each teacher ¨ Can they be defined at any point in lesson? ¨ Meaningful roles, enhancing learning process? ¨ Do teachers vary their roles during lesson? ¨ Each teacher well suited to their roles? ¨ Both teachers comfortable with content and process? ¨ Special ed. teacher working with all students? (Wilson, 2005, pp. 272 -273)

Observing Co-Taught Lessons? 2. Promoting success for ALL students ¨ Are teachers engaged ¨ Observing Co-Taught Lessons? 2. Promoting success for ALL students ¨ Are teachers engaged ¨ Focus on process and in co-planning? content, reinforcing important skills? ¨ Directions clear? ¨ What strategies/modifications employed to assist different learners? ¨ What adaptations to materials? ¨ How are students engaged actively in learning? ¨ How are students grouped? Fit the task? Purposeful? ¨ What reinforcement strategies used? (Wilson, 2005, pp. 272 -273)

Observing Co-Taught Lessons? 3. Evidence of success ¨ Are students answering/asking questions? ¨ Are Observing Co-Taught Lessons? 3. Evidence of success ¨ Are students answering/asking questions? ¨ Are students engaged in meaningful work throughout the lesson? ¨ How are teachers assessing the learning needs of each student? ¨ What evidence is there that all students have been appropriately challenged? (Wilson, 2005, pp. 272 -273)

Evaluating co-op teaching teams n n n n Teacher roles - what? meaningful? Teacher Evaluating co-op teaching teams n n n n Teacher roles - what? meaningful? Teacher interactions - how often and for how long? Who initiates / ends interactions? What is their nature (e. g. , cooperative, reciprocal, supportive, complementary, individualistic)? Which students receive interactions? What outcomes of interactions for teachers and their students? What factors promote / limit interactions? Do teachers enjoy equal-status relationship? How well do teachers coordinate roles and blend skills? (Salend et al. , 2002)

Clue for Assignment 1 b Read: Mc. Hatton, P. A. , & Daniel, P. Clue for Assignment 1 b Read: Mc. Hatton, P. A. , & Daniel, P. L. (2008). Co-teaching at the pre-service level: Special education majors collaborate with English education majors. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31(2), 118 -131.

References Ashman & Elkins (2008) – Chapters 12 Bahr, M. W. , & Kovaleski, References Ashman & Elkins (2008) – Chapters 12 Bahr, M. W. , & Kovaleski, J. F. (2006). The need for problem-solving teams. Introduction to the special issue. Remedial and Special Education, 27(1), 25. Beamish, W. , Bryer, F. , & Davies, M. (2006). Teacher reflections on coteaching a unit of work. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 2(2), 3 -19. Broer, S. M. , Doyle, M. B. , & Giangreco, M. F. (2005). Perspectives of students with intellectual disabilities about their experiences with paraprofessional support. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 415 -430. Brownell, M. T. , & Walther-Thomas, C. (2002). An interview with Dr Marilyn Friend. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(4), 223 -228. Brownell, M. Y. , Adams, A. , Sindelar, P. , Waldron, N. , & Vanhover, S. (2006). Learning from collaboration: The role of teacher qualities. Exceptional Children, 72(2), 169 -182. Friend, M. , & Cook, L. (1992). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. New York: Longmans.

References Gable, R. A. , Mostert, M. R, & Tonelson, S. W. (2004). Assessing References Gable, R. A. , Mostert, M. R, & Tonelson, S. W. (2004). Assessing professional collaboration in schools: Knowing what works. Preventing School Failure, 48(3), 4 -8. Gately, S. E. , & Gately, F. J. (2001). Understanding coteaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 40 -47. Giangreco, M. F. , Edelman, S. W. , Broer, S. M. , & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children, 68, 45 -63. Kloo, A. , & Zigmond, N. (2008). Coteaching revisited: Redrawing the blueprint. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 12 -20. Mc. Hatton, P. A. , & Daniel, P. L. (2008). Co-teaching at the pre=service ; evel: Special education majors collaborate with English education majors. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31(2), 118 -131. Mastropieri, M. A. , Scruggs, T. E. , Graetz, J. , Norland, J. , Gardizi, W. , & Mc. Duffie, K. (2005). Case studies in co-teaching in the content areas: Successes, failures and challenges. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(5), 260 -270. Rennie, J. (2006). Meeting kids at the school gate: The literacy and numeracy practices of a remote Indigenous community. The Australian Educational Researcher, 33(3), 123 -142. Salend, S. J. , Gordon, J. , & Lopez-Vona, K. (2002). Evaluating cooperative teaching teams. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37, 195 -200. Tuckman, B. W. , & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of small group development revisited, Group and Organisation Studies, 2, 419 -427. Wilson, G. L. (2005). This doesn't look familiar! A supervisor's guide for observing co-teachers. Intervention in School & Clinic, 40(5), 271 -275.