# data[].attributes.headline
Multiple  groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 1 

# data[].attributes.subject
Multiple  groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 1 

# data[].attributes.headline
Multiple groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Multiple groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 2

# data[].attributes.headline
Two groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 1 

# data[].attributes.subject
Two groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 1 

# data[].attributes.headline
Two groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Two groups of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 2

# data[].attributes.headline
One group of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 1 

# data[].attributes.subject
One group of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 1 

# data[].attributes.headline
One group of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 2 

# data[].attributes.subject
One group of students with 2 teachers -- Poster 2 

# data[].attributes.body
Can you share some structures for reflection for co teaching teams. This is often a step I forget or don't make time for.

# data[].attributes.headline
Coaching protocol for coteaching intervisitation 

# data[].attributes.subject
Coaching protocol for coteaching intervisitation 

# data[].attributes.headline
Day 1-- removed some photographs and decorative slides to make sure the file is not too big to access. All essential content slides are included. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Day 1-- removed some photographs and decorative slides to make sure the file is not too big to access. All essential content slides are included. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
One Direction - What Makes You Beautiful (5 Guys, 1 Piano) - The Piano Guys

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This website uses cookies. A cookie is a small piece of code that gives your computer a unique identity, but it does not contain any information that allows us to identify you personally. For more information on how TESOL International Association uses cookies, please read our privacy policy. Most browsers automatically accept cookies, but if you prefer, you can opt out by changing your browser settings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This website uses cookies. A cookie is a small piece of code that gives your computer a unique identity, but it does not contain any information that allows us to identify you personally. For more information on how TESOL International Association uses cookies, please read our privacy policy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The frustration regarding limited time for collaborative teaching partners to meet and plan instruction are high on most lists of co-teachers. Within the past five years, there have been many articles written about the necessity of quality planning time. As a result, many principals have made certain to build into their master schedules a planning opportunity for grade level teams or department/subject area teams. They also recognize that two individuals who share the responsibility for teaching the lesson must have some planning time to prepare their lessons, determine what materials are needed, and to decide on the roles each will play throughout the lesson.

We will address the two questions related to the topic of planning:

How do we find the time to meet for planning our lessons and instructional delivery?

How can we use the planning time we do have to our best advantage?

To answer the first question, let us begin with a basic understanding about the complexity of the issue of finding quality time for joint planning. This is one decision that:

Rests with the principal or his or her administrative designee;

Involves the master schedule that must accommodate a mind-boggling amount of detail and often very inflexible conditions.

For example, master schedules often will be dictated by the limited availability of a specialized science lab or an elective course that is taught by an itinerant teacher who shares his time across two or more schools. And finally,

May require our own flexibility and ingenuity to find planning time that meets our needs as collaborative teachers.

As challenging as the need for quality planning time is, however, there are some very creative options for you to consider and if appropriate, to share with your principal or assistant principal. In other words, you can influence the decision regarding planning time and we will provide the information you will need to do so. For those of you who are fortunate to have your planning needs met at this time, celebrate! If you are in need of additional planning time, continue on this path with us.

Okay. You are in the group that doesn't presently have sufficient quality planning time with your partner in order to regularly meet to discuss upcoming lessons and the roles each of you will play in the process.

If you are a special education teacher who is coming into the general education classrooto co-teach a lesson this lack of planning time may mean that you find yourself unprepared when you enter the classroom. You must look to your general education teaching partner for directions, often in the middle of instruction. As a result, many co-teachers find that their roles are generally those of the type paraeducators might be assigned, such as individual or small group student support with inequitable sharing of responsibilities.

If you are a general education teacher, you may feel as though the partnership without prior planning results in unclear roles, inequitably shared instruction, and even perhaps, lost instructional time in the classroom. No wonder this concern is so frequently the first one mentioned when co-teaching teams discuss the effectiveness of their partnerships.

Let's look at two important terms so we can begin discussing options for shared planning time. They are common planning time and protected planning time.

Common Planning Time

Common planning time is the 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.

For example, Sue co-teaches a 7th grade math class with Mary for three periods each day. Their principal wisely scheduled Sue, a special education teacher, with the 7th grade math team for their common planning period each day. One every day but Friday, they plan their weekly instructional lessons with the team but on Friday, they meet apart from the group to assign specific instructional roles for each of the planned lessons and to review the progress of their partnership and any problems or opportunities that have emerged during the previous week.

Depending on the size of your school and the staff, you will want to:

1. Encourage your principal to assign special education teachers as members of either grade level or subject area team rather than to a 'special education' team. This opens up great possibilities to schedule each special education teacher with the grade or subject area team they work with for most of the instructional week.

2. When this is not possible, ask the principal to consider creating a common planning time for the special education teacher with one team every other week and with a second team on alternate weeks. This reduces the total amount of common planning time for the special education teacher with the same teacher or teachers but does provide a predictable planning time with those teachers whom she or he works to provide in-class support through co-teaching.

3. If you use the second option, it is important that each team recognizes that one or more designated days of the week must be extremely focused on planning the collaborative teaching lessons and roles as your time together is more limited.

If you are lucky and your stars are aligned, this will be the solution to your need for collaborative planning time. For many teaching teams, however, this doesn't completely solve the problem. In this case, they must turn to options for Protected Planning Time.

Protected Planning Time

Protected planning time is 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.

For example, Jim is a special education teacher in a small school and provides co-teaching services across three different teachers in three different subject areas. It simply is not possible to attach to a single grade level or subject area team for a common planning period. Unless he and his three partners can think of something creative and are willing to be somewhat flexible, time for planning may be restricted to accidental meetings in the hallway. Not - of course, in keeping with standards for quality teaching partnerships.

Here are some creative options for Protected Planning Time.

Use Substitute Teacher planning time. Most schools use the services of a substitute teacher fairly often and yet they may not require the planning period that is assigned to the teacher they are 'subbing' for that day. The office secretary should maintain a sign-up sheet for the occasions when a substitute teacher will be working in the school.

Now when a substitute is scheduled and the teacher who will be absent has a planning during 2nd period, the school office will notify both Sue and Mary and they can either:

Accept the planning time and send the substitute to Mary's class so she can join Sue during her planning period or, „

Decline because it is simply not a convenient day due to the complexity of lesson Mary is teaching that day or any other reason that would preclude leaving the class with a substitute for that period.

Think about the fact that many schools have teacher absences that require a substitute for as many as 50-150 days each year. This option does not offer predictability but is often used by teaching partners for some protected time to plan and work together.

Regularly schedule a substitute teacher to relieve the special education teacher to provide protected planning time. This option is predictable and is one that principals may rely on if there is simply no way for the master schedule to accommodate a common planning period for every co-teaching team. In this case, the substitute is contracted for each week or every other week to provide the opportunity for co-teachers to plan together. The same substitute may also provide the same opportunity for other teaching pairs in the school who have a similar need.

Utilize the same planning period each week if the students served by the special education teacher do not require daily in-class support. For example, if the four students receiving assistance from the special education teacher during the same period do not need her services every day, the teacher would be free to meet with another co-teaching partner during his or her planning period once each week. If the classroom teacher provides instruction in the school library every Wednesday and has the assistance of the librarian and his or her library clerks, the special education teacher would be able to schedule a regular planning time with a different co-teaching partner.

Discuss the possibility of an assistant principal, department chair, curriculum coach, or other certified educator taking over the special education teacher's duties for a specified time each week. In this way, the special education teacher and his or her co-teaching partner could schedule their joint planning session during this class period on the same day each week.

These are just a few of the creative, and out of the box, options for finding protected planning time for co-teaching partners who are unable to have a common planning period assigned each day with one or more of their teaching partners.

Now, it's time for you to think out of the box. Think about your school and one option that may exist for creating protected planning time for two teaching partners. If one of the options above will work, think about how you envision it would be applied in your school.

Using Planning Time Well

The second of the two challenges we will address in this article is: When we do find time to plan, we often do not use the time effectively. By the time we have identified the topics we need to discuss - the bell rings! How can we use the planning time we do have to our best advantage?

While it is really challenging to find ways to increase the amount and quality of time for planning, the other equally challenging task is to use found time well. We can find multiple ways to increase planning time and if we do not protect this time and use it effectively and efficiently, we still will not have meaningful collaboration in our schools and for our co-teaching partners.

So, how can we use our planning time more effectively? Here are several suggestions that are from the fields of business as well as education.

Identify prime meeting time for partners and groups. In other words, don't schedule planning time at the end of the school day if possible. Your ability to focus and be creative as often significantly reduced when you are tired.

Time should be a sustained interval. Don't look for small increments of time for planning. Ten or 15 minutes of planning time is typically a waste of energy. You should find a minimum of 25 minutes of uninterrupted planning time or more if possible. This means that you and your partner should quickly go to your planning location and begin to work.

Provide training and models for collaboration. Seldom do teachers have any formal training in how to facilitate or participate in effective meetings. This could be a very valuable professional development topic. Suggest this to your principal or take advantage of several quick and inexpensive resources for effective meetings. Here are several links for using planning time well.

Establish and periodically review group norms. This is really important. We have found that this small step can transform ineffective planning sessions to highly effective planning opportunities. Here is a good way to set planning norms for you and your teaching partner or a planning team. Ask the question: How can we use our planning or meeting time more effectively? Together let's list the behaviors we think would significantly improve the value of our planning sessions and our own satisfaction with the results. (Use either a flip chart or a plain paper that you can laminate for use every time you meet.)

Here is a short list one group we recently worked with prepared:

1. Be on time

2. Bring the materials needed with you.

3. Use an agenda and stick to it!

4. No side conversations.

5. Be fully present in the meeting.

6. Cell phones off.

7. Make a list of assignments if we have agreed to accomplish some work on our own prior to the next meeting.

8. End every meeting with 5-10 minutes remaining for personal breaks or rest.

It is a good idea to post your meeting norms where you typically meet. At the end of each planning session, check to see if you or your partner violated any of the norms. Discuss how you will return to them for your next meeting. Hold each other accountable.

Protect the time you have created! So often, teachers will feel pressure to spend their protected planning time on other tasks, such as completing a faculty survey, writing a note to a parent, etc. If you allow this to happen you will soon notice that you are experiencing the same problems associated with insufficient planning time and the cycle will start all over again. Protect your planning time!

One strategy that helps collaborative teaching partners make the most of their planning time is to have a set agenda for each meeting. One teaching team told us they address only three questions when they meet to plan. They are:

1. What are we teaching next week?

2. Who will do what? (E.g. what roles will we assign ourselves?)

3. Do we have a student or students that are struggling in class and what will we do about it?

Each time they planned together, this list of questions kept them on target, used their planning time to best advantage, and after a few months, they found that they were really skilled in instructional planning and more satisfied with the impact they had in the classroom. Perhaps every teaching team would do well to identify the three or four questions each planning session should address. This is an automatic agenda and prevents the meeting from drifting along as partners look for a starting point.

"The quality of a collaborative teaching partnership is in direct relationship to the quality of the collaborative planning that preceded it."

-Stetson & Associates, Inc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Finding Time for Collaboration and Using it Well

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The frustration regarding limited time for collaborative teaching partners to meet and plan instruction are high on most lists of co-teachers. Within the past five years, there have been many articles written about the necessity of quality planning time.

# data[].attributes.headline
10 Tips to Use Coplanning Time More Effectively

# data[].attributes.subject
10 Tips to Use Coplanning Time More Effectively

# data[].attributes.body
Benefits of Co-Teaching

# data[].attributes.body
Three-year longitudinal study demonstrating successful coteaching implementation paralleling the outcomes of dual language instruction.

# data[].attributes.body
See this document that redefines the role fo ESL/ELD teachers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Watch one of the Japan videos from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)-more specifically, mathematics video 3 on solving inequalities-and you'll see that after giving his students a word problem to solve, the 8th grade math teacher strolls among the students' desks for almost 15 minutes, leaning over to see what each student is doing, making brief comments to each one, and noting on a chart how different students are solving the problem. Some are counting, some are making tables or charts, and some are writing equations.

The teacher clarifies instructions for one student: "Yes, write your explanation on the paper next to the problem." He clarifies terms for another: "This 180 − 10x you wrote-whose money is this?" He nudges others forward: "So you counted all the way? Is there an easier method to find the answer?" And he supports and acknowledges more complex approaches: "If you try combining this and that, you can make a mathematical expression." "So you wrote a simultaneous equation-OK!"

This process of roving among desks to monitor and assist students' independent or collaborative work is known as kikan-shidō (between-desks instruction). We encountered this practice firsthand while teaching and coordinating professional development at a K-12 school in Saitama, Japan (Ermeling &amp; Graff-Ermeling, 2014).

We first learned of kikan-shidō while participating in lesson study ( jugyō kenkyū) in Japan with a district-level research group for English teachers. The central feature of lesson study is observing and analyzing live classroom research lessons that a group of teachers has collaboratively planned (Ermeling &amp; Graff-Ermeling, 2014; Lewis, 2002).

During one lesson study project hosted at our school, the English department prepared a lesson for a 9th grade oral communication course and asked one of us to teach the lesson for the scheduled observation. The lesson included teacher modeling and several pair exercises that challenged students to practice speaking English with their peers.

During the post-lesson reflection meeting, one observer suggested a more systematic use of kikan-shidō, pointing out that most of the instruction the teacher delivered when moving around the classroom focused on a few pairs of students who struggled with the exercise, whereas intermediate and advanced students received little guidance or support.

The observer suggested spending less time with each pair of students and giving briefer, more concise feedback so the teacher would have time to interact with everyone in the room. He proposed that as the teacher circulated among students, he should note the progress of each one, including any patterns that might warrant whole-class attention. As a result of these observations, the team discussed ways to more intentionally differentiate support for all students during kikan-shidō without neglecting those who struggled with the content.

This experience and subsequent observations of Japanese colleagues opened our eyes to the importance of kikan-shidō as part of regular lesson preparation, as did our analysis of videos from our own classroom lessons. We saw that the unplanned, cursory exchanges we had with students when they were working on an assignment in class mostly reiterated previous instruction and seldom advanced student learning. We came to understand that the teacher's role during student work time in class-what we chose to focus on, how long we spent with each team or individual, what we chose to say or not say-had crucial instructional value. Improving the use of this time required careful planning.

For decades, Japanese educators have used this practice to engage students in deeper learning around challenging problems and tasks (Sakoda, 1991). In his commentary on the solving inequalities lesson we describe at the beginning of this article, the national research coordinator points out specific video segments in which the Japanese teacher used kikan-shidō to engage and support students' independent work:

The teacher purposely speaks loudly when giving advice to a student so that other students can hear ... the teacher could exploit the advantages of a whole-class instruction method ... by doing kikan-shidō. The teacher instructs students while strolling among the students' desks, thinking about the upcoming order of presentations for successful whole-class instruction ... The teacher carries a lesson plan sheet and writes down the students' understandings of-or difficulties with-a solution, while instructing individual students. (UCLA &amp; the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, n.d., 05:10)

The practice of kikan-shidō can prove valuable to U.S. teachers as they work to address new and more rigorous standards in math, science, and English language arts. The intentional use of kikan-shidō can elicit, prod, and facilitate deeper learning in all students.

Using data from six cities across the world and more than 180 videotaped lessons from the Learners Perspective Study, which examined patterns of participation in well-taught 8th grade mathematics classrooms, O'Keefe, Xu, and Clarke (2006) outline four principal functions of kikan-shidō: (1) monitoring student activity, (2) guiding student activity, (3) organizing materials and the physical setup, and (4) engaging students in social talk. The examples we provide below come from our direct observations of more than 20 U.S. teachers working to improve between-desks instruction and facilitate deeper learning.

After studying the Japanese TIMSS video on solving inequalities, a high school algebra teacher we observed prepared a lesson that placed students in small groups to solve a challenging multistep problem using systems of linear equations. The problem read as follows:

Your friend has interviewed for two different sales positions in competing companies. The Stellar Company pays $500 per week plus 10 percent commission on the total dollars from sales per week. The Lunar Company pays $200 per week but offers a 20 percent commission on the total dollars from sales per week. Sales at both companies are seasonal. Your friend wants some help determining which job option is best.

The teacher circulated during group work; recorded the approach that each group selected to solve the problem (table, graph, or system of equations); and asked questions to elicit and understand students' thinking. For students who were using a table to solve the problem, the teacher anticipated that they might struggle to find how the total amount earned would change for each job. She asked questions such as, "How are the variables changing?" and "How fast are the two jobs moving together?" For students who selected a graph, she wanted to see whether they understood the solution conceptually. She asked those students questions like, "What data do you have?" "What are you going to put on each axis?" and "What is the graph going to tell you?" For students using the system of linear equations to solve the problem algebraically, she paid close attention to how they set up the problem. She asked, "What variables did you choose, and what does each represent?"

It's important to clarify that each method the students chose revealed underlying patterns of their thinking. Students who chose a table to solve the problem were typically less comfortable determining appropriate scale and intervals for a graph. They were also less likely to recognize when a problem involved a system of equations. The table represented a concrete and trusted format for organizing data, calculating values, and thinking through the solution.

Students who chose to solve the problem graphically typically recognized the need for two linear equations and saw the graph as a useful way to identify the point of intersection. They felt confident working with a more abstract representation and less computation.

Students who chose to solve the problem algebraically were comfortable visualizing the problem without all the detailed computation or graphical representation. They viewed the system of equations as the quickest, most reliable method and perhaps recognized that graphing could be imprecise when plotting values that involve decimals.

In the course of her observations, the teacher identified several groups to present their solutions at the end of the period. She ensured that each of the three main approaches-table, graph, and system of equations-was represented.

Much like in the Japanese TIMSS video the teacher studied, the goal of this lesson was to help students better understand the continuum of problem-solving approaches, starting with more concrete methods (creating a table) and moving toward more sophisticated and abstract ones (using a system of equations). By strategically selecting students to present each method, the teacher highlighted the validity and benefits of all three methods but also pointed out the value and necessity of the algebraic approach for tackling mathematical problems with increased scale and complexity.

It was the first experiment of the year in a 5th grade science lesson we observed. The teacher's goal was to introduce students to the investigative process and teach them to anchor data in descriptive observations. The students would start by exploring simple interactions between liquids and solids; in subsequent lessons, they would use the data to note differences among various physical and chemical changes, discuss patterns that emerged across the data, and draw conclusions on the basis of this evidence.

Using six white powders and six clear liquids-the powders included Epsom salt, flour, and powdered lemonade, whereas the liquids included water, vinegar, and cooking oil-the teacher designed a whole-class experiment with 36 different mixtures and gave pairs of students at least two mystery combinations to analyze. After receiving the mystery liquid from the teacher, students carefully added two spoonfuls of powder to their bags, which listed the number assigned to the white powder and the letter assigned to the clear liquid they were investigating. The teacher asked the students to record each aspect of the experiment in their science notebooks: materials, procedures, observations, and ideas for future investigation.

Once the experiment was underway, the teacher rotated among the desks to support student pairs in developing their observational skills. He listened to student observations, noting when the students offered only vague descriptions, and prompted them to elaborate by asking such questions as, "What do you mean by the mixture 'making noise'?" and "What happened when you first added the powder?"

The teacher had to continually remind students to keep their observations rooted in sensory evidence-what they could see, hear, smell, and touch-while refraining from telling them what he could readily see and describe. Also, by asking such questions as, "Why do we have notebooks?" and "How will you remember your observations?" he continually impressed on students the importance of recording their observations.

In the early stages of the lesson, most students' observations were brief and simplistic: "They mix." "It's hard." "It's white." Only a few student pairs recorded information in their notebooks. The teacher noted that one group was having trouble describing the physical and chemical changes; the students weren't sure what to write. As the teacher encouraged them to be more detailed in their observations, the students began to note more specific characteristics, such as, "the mixture changed color," "it bubbled at first and then stopped," and "it was clear at first and then got foggy." Students across the class responded well to these individualized prompts and showed improvement in both describing and recording observations, an important first step in developing investigative skills.

Following the experiment, the teacher asked each pair of students to share their data. He then summarized all student responses in a large matrix on the board. One student shared two descriptive words from his science notebook-that the reaction "moved fast"-which the teacher highlighted as particularly interesting because it raised a point about the pace of a chemical reaction, an important scientific observation.

In a 1st grade science lesson we observed, students were investigating the basic properties of magnets. The teacher designed an exploratory lesson, placing students in groups and giving each team a carefully organized tray that included different combinations of magnets: horseshoe, rectangle bar, paddle, and ball. The trays also contained a variety of objects that magnets could and couldn't move: steel wool, cotton balls, paper clips, plastic coins, erasers, and a compass. By intentionally including items that could and couldn't be picked up by a magnet, the teacher created a sense of mystery as well as a puzzling situation in which students would need to look for patterns.

Each student chose different items to investigate, enabling them to both individually and collectively explore, compare, and discover magnetic properties. One student discovered how the bar magnets' red and blue ends would pull together, whereas the two blue ends would push away (polarity). Another student created a chain of paper clips hanging from a magnet and observed that if she added more than three, one paper clip would drop off (magnetic strength). The teacher's careful preparation of the diverse trays helped facilitate active inquiry, effectively setting the stage for a rich culminating discussion during which students learned about the unique discoveries from each group.

Students were excited as they described what they learned: "The magnets rolled like magic!" "The two blue ends didn't stick to each other." Because of her intentional organization of materials, the teacher was able to build on these discoveries from her 1st grade scientists, and she finished the lesson by bridging students' observations to the key scientific concepts of attraction, repulsion, and magnetic fields.

We observed a similar focus on organizing materials and attending to classroom logistics in a high school English lesson. The teacher prepared a small-group exercise aimed at helping students shift their revision focus from mechanics and punctuation to quality of content and clarity of arguments. She carefully selected sample papers in advance that had various degrees of weakness in clarity of arguments (for example, lack of a clear main idea or thesis, use of quotes without sufficient explanation, and so on) and removed all student names before making copies for the lesson.

After leading the class through a modeling exercise during which they analyzed different levels of revision, the teacher placed students in groups and provided each team with three papers from a different class period to ensure anonymity and facilitate objective analysis. She also assigned students roles (reader, recorder, commentator) and explained that commentators should pause the group whenever they noticed specific errors with clarity or content.

Instead of briefly reviewing the paper for superficial errors or being preoccupied with whose paper they were commenting on-problems the teacher had noted in previous peer-editing sessions-the students showed increased focus on the substance of the writing and greater willingness to provide specific suggestions for improvement.

A 5th grade teacher we observed asked students to work in small groups to complete an exploratory exercise about the earth's water cycle. As she circulated and listened to group discussions, she saw one student carefully explaining to his team members the processes of evaporation, condensation, and precipitation.

During a brief lull in the conversation, she took a moment to affirm the student's skillful explanation. Using language familiar to their inner-city community, she said, "That's your new hustle. Instead of working the street corners, you study hard, get an A in class-and that's your proof that you can tutor other students. That's your new hustle!" The teacher later explained that she often looks for opportunities to offer students alternative choices to counter the more negative influences of their environment.

We also noted the intentional use of this practice in a high school chemistry class. The teacher rotated around the classroom as students cleaned up their stations from a lab experiment and engaged in brief conversation with individual students to build rapport. He asked one student about the opponent for an upcoming volleyball match. He asked another about a sister who was in the hospital for surgery. He assisted the students with clean-up duties as they conversed and gradually switched from social talk to questions about what they learned from the lesson activity.

Teachers can prepare for kikan-shidō by thinking through a series of questions and constructing a clear mental image of the lesson activity: What are my goals as I circulate? How will I distribute my time with various groups and differentiate support? What key understandings or misconceptions will I be looking for? What probing questions will I use to check for understanding or advance student thinking? What will I be careful not to say or do that might decrease the rigor of the task? What materials will I need to distribute? When should I engage in brief social conversation with students to provide encouragement and build relationships?

Using a format to plan and reflect on a few key lessons is one way to develop the discipline of regularly thinking through these questions. For example, in the 9th grade oral communication course we described, in which Japanese students practiced English dialogue, our planning template listed common student reactions to the assignment that we should look for, such as reading the conversation without trying to commit it to memory, trying to memorize the dialogue without reading it out loud, and reading or speaking lines mechanically without attempting to convey meaning. The template also listed helpful teacher responses and support during kikan-shidō, such as providing feedback on pronunciation and intonation, encouraging students to work on memorization, and providing additional instruction to students who were reciting lines without a communicative purpose.

Carrying a copy of the lesson plan on a tablet or mobile device during kikan-shidō is also useful; teachers can review the plan on the spot and take notes as they observe. This kind of planning and reflection will help them develop increasingly nuanced understandings of the choices presented in each kikan-shidō episode and the effect these choices have on student learning.

Much like in Japan, teachers and administrators will need sustained, collaborative learning opportunities to persist with the slow, steady process of "learning to teach between desks." One study suggests it takes, on average, 20 separate instances of practice for teachers to master a new skill, and the number could be significantly higher for more complex skills (Joyce &amp; Showers, 2002).

Findings from a case study we conducted on teacher change showed that it took at least three semesters for teachers to adopt and effectively implement a new instructional approach in their high school science classrooms, which involved significant adjustments to teachers' "between-desks" instructional routines (Ermeling, 2010). One teacher shared the benefits of this approach, which helped her not only guide student activity but also challenge students with an appropriate level of struggle:

I just got my scores back: 18/20 passes = 90 percent. Seven students received a 5, six received a 4, which is so much higher than any class ever before. I'm so happy for my students, I just sat down, closed the door ... and cried and cried and gave thanks. I have to believe I changed the way I taught, that making them struggle really bridged the gap. This was my most enjoyable year of teaching in my 28 years. (p. 386)

Adopting "instruction that sticks" means sticking with the relentless pursuit of incremental improvement. It means learning to understand and predict how specific aspects of an instructional practice, such as kikan-shidō, will influence learning and how student responses, in turn, might influence teacher actions. It means persevering long enough to understand the nuances of effective implementation-and translating these into practical teacher knowledge and tangible student results.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
U.S. educators can use a tried-and-true practice from Japan-kikan-shidō, or teaching between desks-to engage all students in deeper learning.

# data[].attributes.headline
Interview in Edweek based on 2022 WIDA presentation

# data[].attributes.subject
Interview in Edweek based on 2022 WIDA presentation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When it comes to providing English learners with an equitable education, some researchers point to the need for more-strategic collaboration between general classroom and content teachers and multilingual specialists.

About 10 percent of all public school students were classified as English learners in 2019. While only 2 percent of all public school teachers teach English as a Second Language as their main assignment, 64 percent of all public school teachers have at least one English learner in their class, according to the latest federal data available, which is from the 2017-18 school year.

At the Sept. 28 to 30 conference of the WIDA consortium-which offers language assessments for English learners in 36 states, several U.S. territories, and federal agencies such as the Bureau of Indian Education-tips and tricks were shared on how to best meet the needs of this growing student population, including the call for collaboration among educators.

Andrea Honigsfeld, a professor of teacher education for teachers of English to speakers of other languages, or TESOL, at Molloy University in New York, and Valentina Gonzalez, an educational consultant and author for Seidlitz Education, a consulting group for those working with multilingual learners, presented actionable practices that teachers can use when working with English learners and multilingual specialists in their districts.

The hope is that if all educators in a district view multilingual learners as their students, rather than just the responsibility of specialists or an add-on to their already packed workload, it prevents marginalization of these students and benefits teachers as well.

"When we collaborate with one another, we're reducing the workload we have," Gonzalez said.

The co-presenters shared the following five key strategies to bring about effective collaboration.

Collaborative planning

Collaboration starts at planning meetings. Schools should create opportunities for at least a weekly common planning time where grade-level teams at the elementary level, or content-area specialists at the secondary level, can work together with the English language development team or specialists. They would examine the curriculum and plan out how they will scaffold and differentiate instruction for multilingual learners and others who need the extra support, Honigsfeld said.

In an ideal world, she added, administrators would set up two of these weekly planning periods so that one could be a larger group or team meeting to focus on questions such as what are the curricular goals and grade-level standards. The second meeting would dive deeper into students' individual and group needs.

Questions in these collaborative planning meetings should also consider: what type of academic language and literacy opportunities are embedded in the lesson; how can teachers ensure all students can be successful and participate fully; and how to use scaffolding to ensure students understand the content while being appropriately challenged.

Intentional partnership building

At some point during the school week there may be teachers who are doing exemplary work when it comes to supporting multilingual learners alongside their peers and others who are still learning what strategies work best. This is where educators can intentionally build bridges by, for example, inviting colleagues to visit during certain class periods to either observe or offer feedback, Honigsfeld said.

"Many seasoned teachers might have started out their careers with the notion of 'my classroom, my kids, I close the door and behind the door it's my way of reaching these students,' " Honigsfeld said. "And with the best of intentions, we're creating silos or pockets of excellence."

In cases of resistance to such partnerships or to partnerships with a specialist within the classroom, finding ways to build trust among colleagues is key, Gonzalez said.

"Sometimes just talking less and listening more offers the other partner space to contribute, aiming for parity in the lesson, aiming for parity in the classroom, or in planning, and sharing the spotlight with one another," she added.

Content and language integration

The ability to incorporate academic language lessons into a multitude of subjects is key for supporting multilingual learners and their peers.

For instance, in math class, teachers can think about typical sentence structures that the students use in a math lesson, such as the comparative forms of "less than" or "greater than." Within the math lesson, teachers can explore these language forms and other nuances of academic language (such as using "than" rather than "then") as part of the content area, Honigsfeld said.

Integrating content and language also means coming up with creative opportunities for class participation like a talking activity where students articulate the thinking that goes beyond solving a math problem.

And teachers must remember that "every student, even your highly gifted monolingual, English-speaking student will be an academic language learner," Honigsfeld added. "It's not an add on, it is not something that now we're taking away time from all the other students. Instead, we're supporting all students in their academic language development."

Technology integration

Honigsfeld and Gonzalez advocate for teachers to use technology as a tool both for collaborating with fellow colleagues (such as sharing resources on Padlet), and for better engaging all students, and particularly English learners.

Multilingual learners, for instance, can benefit from watching prerecorded lectures they can pause and rewind and then dig deeper into with the teacher in class. This is something that can benefit their monolingual peers as well, Honigsfeld said.

Tools like Flipgrid can also allow students to record themselves, so they respond orally rather than in writing and practice that aspect of language acquisition.

Coaching and consultation

Recognizing that there are school districts that struggle to recruit and retain enough specialists to support their English learners and the heavy workloads teachers already have, coaching and consultation among educators in a school is helpful, Honigsfeld said.

This can look like teachers across class periods sharing materials and strategies to support multilingual learners since they each only get about 15 or 30 minutes to work directly with these students, she added.

It goes back to the importance of all educators thinking of themselves as the teachers of multilingual learners even when that student population isn't as sizable in their school as other groups. And district and school administrators play their own role by giving teachers the time and resources needed to make all five of these strategies work, Honigsfeld said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Ways Teachers Can Collaborate to Support English Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To achieve equitable outcomes for English learners, all educators must work together, say researchers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Impact of Separationist Models of Instructional Support on the Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Latino English Language Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Federal and state mandated linguistic and academic supports for English Language Learners (ELLs) compete for instructional time, resulting in ELLs being pulled away from the general population of students multiple times per day. Grounded in the socio-cognitive and socio-cultural theories, the resear…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article on indicators of effective co-teaching is Part 11 of the Collaborating for ELLs Series .

Lately, I've noticed an increasing number of people using wearable technology such as the iWatch. People who own iWatches talk about how it measures key health indicators: heart rate, steps walked, and hours slept. These indicators help us determine if we've been too stationary or haven't slept enough. We can then take actions to change our behaviors so that we can become healthy again.

This analogy also works for co-teaching. Unfortunately, there's no wearable device to monitor how well you're co-teaching, but there are clear indicators of effective co-teaching between the content teacher and the English language teacher(ELT). We can use these indicators to measure the degree to which the co-teaching is asset-based, meaning that the expertise of both teachers are being capitalized.

Indicators of Effective Co-Teaching

I organized these indicators into three groups: student-facing, content-facing, and classroom-facing. Student-facing means how teachers work with students. Content-facing indicators are ones that address how teachers led instruction. Finally, classroom-facing means how both teachers use the physical space they share.

Student-facing

Both teachers are expected to work with all students.

Students seek help from both teachers based on content or language needs.

Students respect both teachers equally and follow the instructions of both educators.

When Ms. C, a science teacher is absent, we've agreed that she doesn't need to call a substitute. Because we've already planned our lessons together, she sees me as truly another teacher and has me lead instruction instead. Because of her attitude, students are used to this arrangement and also see me simply as one of their teachers, not strictly a remedial one.

Content-facing

Both educators led instruction. The content educator teaches nuances of the content; the ELT teaches strategies to access the content.

Both educators assess students and provide feedback. The content teacher assesses content knowledge; the ELT assesses use of academic language.

Both educators differentiate content, process, and product based on students' needs and interests.

In Mr. Arno's science class, students often come and ask me for help writing their lab reports because I've led several sessions on writing like a scientist. Though I am officially responsible for the ELs, I make myself available to support everyone through the writing process.

Resource-facing

Both educators share the same space and resources.

Both schedules are aligned to allow time for co-planning and co-teaching.

Both teachers can arrange the class into small groups, stations, or whole class.

In one example, Mr. Duncan wanted students to present one-by-one. This was a time-consuming structure, so I recommended that we have students simultaneously present in small groups. Mr. Duncan gave me full control of how I wanted to arrange the students around the classroom. He didn't feel like I was invading his space because we were co-teaching using the same classroom.

Takeaways

The running theme in these indicators of co-teaching is collaboration. When students see that the content teacher and the ELT are working in tandem, they begin to see that both teachers are valuable and both play a distinctive role in students' development based on the teacher's area of expertise.

We could also substitute the word "equality" for "inclusion" when thinking about co-teaching. The content teachers need to be included as a positive contributor to class and allowed to assume an expanding role in leading instruction.
Next Post
Now that we have a list of indicators of effective co-teaching, we can extend these indicators into evaluation of our collaboration in terms of co-teaching and co-planning. In next's week post, I'll share ways to evaluate one's collaboration formally or informally through self-evaluation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
#54. Evaluating Co-Teaching: 3 Indicators of Effective Co-Teaching - ELL Strategies | TanKHuynh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article on indicators of effective co-teaching is Part 11 of the Collaborating for ELLs Series . Lately, I've noticed an increasing number of people using wearable technology such as the iWatch. People who own iWatches talk about how it measures key health indicators: heart rate, steps walked, and hours slept.

# data[].attributes.headline
Assessing an Integrated Collaborative Model

# data[].attributes.subject
Assessing an Integrated Collaborative Model

# data[].attributes.body
Weekly Planning Template 2

# data[].attributes.body
See pages 23-25

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
InterEd Journal Winter 2020, Volume 48, Number 129

# data[].attributes.headline
NYS Policy Briefs written by Andrea Honigsfeld and Maria Dove (4 published, 4 more coming... soon?) 

# data[].attributes.subject
NYS Policy Briefs written by Andrea Honigsfeld and Maria Dove (4 published, 4 more coming... soon?) 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In Integrated ENL classes, students receive core content area and English language development instruction, including the use of the home/primary language as support and appropriate ELL instructional supports to enrich comprehension. Integrated ENL classes are taught by a teacher dually certified in the content area and ENL or are co-taught by a certified content area teacher and a certified ENL teacher.

# data[].attributes.body
Daily Planning Template

# data[].attributes.headline
New Teacher Advocate article -- how to get started 

# data[].attributes.subject
New Teacher Advocate article -- how to get started 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jeff has been sharing writing strategies with teachers and students for over 30 years. Whether presenting at national conferences like NCTE, ASCD, or in classrooms or writing his books for teachers or middle grade readers, Jeff's passion for writing and grammar inspires teachers and young writers to soar. When he's not writing with his "revising" dogs at home near downtown San Antonio, Texas, he's walking, talking, or doing staff development around the US (and sometimes New Zealand).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Listen to POPcast: A Patterns of Power Podcast Spotify Apple Audible Jeff has been sharing writing strategies with teachers and students for over 30 years. Whether [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Co-Planning: Five Essential Practices to Integrate Curriculum and Instruction for English Learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to the companion website for Co-Planning.Please use the chapter links on the left to download resources from the book.

# data[].attributes.headline
Essential Actions from WIDA (Scaffolding explained here)

# data[].attributes.subject
Essential Actions from WIDA (Scaffolding explained here)

# data[].attributes.headline
Collaboration and Co-Teaching Evaluation Survey

# data[].attributes.subject
Collaboration and Co-Teaching Evaluation Survey

# data[].attributes.body
Weekly Planning Template

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Co-Teaching for English Learners: A Guide to Collaborative Planning, Instruction, Assessment, and Reflection

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chapter 1Figure 1.1 - Cultural, Linguistic, and Academic Profile for... (blank version)Figure 1.2 - An EL Profile-at-a-Glance (blank version)Video 1.1 - Student Benefits

# data[].attributes.body
Deliver Tool

# data[].attributes.body
Collaboration Menu

# data[].attributes.body
Co-Planning

# data[].attributes.headline
Videos and templates for teacher collaboration

# data[].attributes.subject
Videos and templates for teacher collaboration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collaborating for English Learners: A Foundational Guide to Integrated Practices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to the Companion Website to Andrea Honigsfeld and Maria Dove's Collaborating for ELs, 2E!Chapter 1:Video 1.1- IntroductionVideo 1.2- The Collaborative Instructional Cycle

# data[].attributes.body
Observation of ELLs

# data[].attributes.body
Co-Teaching In Elementary School NYC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Co Teaching for English Language Learners in NYC

# data[].attributes.body
Unit Planning Template

# data[].attributes.body
Collaboration to Support English Learners

# data[].attributes.body
This  document offers important guidance on moving towards integrated services for ELLs.