# data[].attributes.body
This website brings it altogether to speak to the benefits for teachers and students.

# data[].attributes.body
This website focuses on the benefits primarily for special education purposes as well as for early childhood education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
High Stakes Testing - At the core for everyone at every grade level in every district is the issue of how co-teaching may impact testing. As mentioned earlier, clear evidence does not indicate a conclusive outcome for co-teaching, but with that said, some things are critical to consider in relation to the impact of co-teaching on standardized assessment.

# data[].attributes.body
This website describes the importance of incorporating co-teaching for the students. It goes into depth on why it is beneficial and how to go about doing it in the best way.

# data[].attributes.headline
General and Special Education Collaboration

# data[].attributes.subject
General and Special Education Collaboration

# data[].attributes.body
This publication defines what it means for a collaboration between general and special education teachers. It examines the legal considerations, transitions, and challenges that exist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Issue Brief

Examining Current Challenges in Secondary Education and Transition

July 2003 • Vol. 2, Issue 1

Collaboration Between General and Special Education: Making it Work

By Michael N. Sharpe and Maureen E. Hawes

Defining the Issue

Throughout the last decade, nearly every state in the nation implemented some type of standards-based reform. Sharing a common mission that all students should be held to high standards of learning, many states have dramatically restructured their educational systems in an effort to demonstrate greater accountability for student results. While most of these efforts have helped states to more clearly articulate what students should know and be able to do, they have also resulted in questions concerning the participation of students with disabilities in accountability systems.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 (IDEA) (P.L. 105-17) explicitly emphasize the importance of providing access to the general curriculum, so that students with disabilities can meet the educational standards that apply to all children. As a result, special education and general education teachers nationwide now find they need to develop new skills and strategies to meet these challenges. Signifying a period of genuine professional transformation, these changes are leading many in the field to reevaluate service delivery and collaborative partnerships needed to support students with disabilities in general education settings.

What We Know

Legal Considerations

Schools are required to provide access to the general curriculum by giving students with disabilities the opportunity to achieve the same standards as all other students. IDEA stresses the importance of participation of students with disabilities in the general curriculum.

In addition to IDEA, the recently passed Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) legislation, also known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, (P.L. 107-110), seeks “to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach or exceed minimum proficiency on challenging state academic achievement standards and state academic assessments” (Sec. 1001, Part A, Title I of ESEA; 20 U.S.C. 6301). This includes participation in assessments used to measure the achievement of all students at the same grade level (Sec. 1111, Part A, Title I of ESEA; 20 U.S.C. 6311 [b][3]).

Like IDEA, it is anticipated that this legislation will become a major catalyst in influencing the way in which supplementary aids and services are provided in the context of the general education curriculum. As such, there will be a need to increase collaborative teaching initiatives among the entire array of instructional services (e.g., general education, special education, Title I) available to targeted populations.

Research Considerations

A significant challenge faced by all educators will be to maintain high educational standards for all students, while also ensuring that each child’s unique instructional needs are met. These goals need not be viewed as mutually exclusive. Standards can serve as the impetus for focused instructional planning for students with disabilities within the general education classroom, resulting in improved achievement. For example, McLaughlin, Nolet, Rhim, and Henderson (1999) reported that many special education teachers believe students have access to a wider array of learning opportunities as a result of standards-based reforms. In addition, they found that special education teachers felt that standards helped them focus their instruction and better define what is required of students. Research findings have suggested that “rather than focusing on deficits, Individual Education Program (IEP) teams now have an opportunity to focus on helping students work toward high educational standards” (Thompson, Thurlow, & Whetstone, 2001, p. 6).

Implementation Considerations

Despite findings indicating that standards can help students with disabilities to achieve, many special educators continue to voice concerns about how to effectively align standards with the individualized goals and objectives of the IEP. In the report, Educating One & All: Students with Disabilities and Standards-Based Reform (McDonnell, McLaughlin, & Morison, 1997), the Committee on Goals 2000 and the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities acknowledged that standards-based reform initiatives pose many challenges to special educators, especially in regard to implementation. For example:

The complicated part is determining how to accommodate individual student needs and provide the special services that some may require, while still affording each student appropriate access to the common curriculum and ensuring accountability for his or her outcomes (p. 176).

Research (McDonnell et al. 1997; Sands, Adams, & Stout, 1995) also suggests that, in addition to facilitating inclusion, special education teachers need to develop a more consistent approach to determining curricula and appropriate content standards for students with disabilities. For example, to what degree should curricula be driven by the special educator and the planning team as opposed to being dictated by local curricular standards?

A further challenge is for both general and special education teachers to acquire the capacity to identify and focus on skills a student needs to meet the standard. To accomplish this goal, some researchers have suggested creating a curriculum base that would provide guidance for teachers on how to include students with disabilities in the general education classroom (McLaughlin et al. 1999). A “curriculum base” generically refers to a set of agreed-upon curriculum practices designed to meet the needs of students in special education. According to Sands et al. (1995), “the absence of establishing such a base that provides direction for special education programs only increases the likelihood that instructional decision-making and practices will continue to be haphazard and widely divergent” (p. 69). Special educators must become more adept in content knowledge and curriculum development, and general educators must understand their role in implementing IEP goals and objectives—that is, how to accommodate students with disabilities within the general education classroom.

Jorgensen et al. (1997) observed that one of the problems associated with the implementation of standards-based reform and participation of students with disabilities is related to the type of curriculum available to students. Advocating for a “preferred” curriculum that is broad enough to work with a wide range of students, Jorgensen suggests that “all teachers use some common curricular elements to design teaching and learning experiences that transcend philosophical differences and that result in a learning environment that challenges and supports all students” (p. 5).

Even though a number of effective collaboration strategies have been developed over the last decade, current research suggests that general educators are still more likely to interact collaboratively with other general educators than with special education staff (McGregor et al. 1998; Prom, 1999).

Changing Roles

As states increase their efforts to implement standards-based curriculum for all students, educators of all types must develop a wider range of collaboration skills that facilitate cooperative planning and instructional activities. Recent developments indicate the beginnings of an infrastructure to support more collaborative efforts. For example, in their efforts to promote policies and practices to improve educational performance for students with disabilities, the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002) recommended that “teachers in general education learn about special education.” This recommendation is consistent with the legislative priority, Unified System of Education, established by the National Association of State Directors of Special Education, which focuses on the infusion of quality teaching on the part of both general and special education teachers. This priority explicitly acknowledges that “the success of all children is dependent on the quality of both special education and general education…and that special education is not a place apart, but an integral part of education” (NASDSE, 2002).

Challenges

In our current model of education, teachers typically maintain a high degree of autonomy and individual decision-making. This has historically been the case for both general and special education teachers. But now, many general educators feel they are being called upon to teach students with an increasingly diverse range of educational needs, and do not feel they are prepared to undertake such a responsibility (Monahan, Marino, Miller, & Cronic, 1997). Similarly, there appears to be growing concern among special educators that the individualized nature of specialized instruction is becoming increasingly diluted in the face of standards-based reforms.

Regardless of how many professional development and training initiatives are implemented, a key factor in the establishment of a collaborative culture is administrative support at the local level. The findings of several studies (da Costa, Marshall, & Riordan, 1998; Bunch, Lupart, & Brown, 1997; Idol & Griffith, 1998) involving collaborative activities share a theme that school administrators are highly influential in shaping the school culture and are often looked to as a source of leadership necessary to cause systemic change.

What Works

There is no shortage of creative and innovative strategies to promote collaborative relationships between general and special education personnel. Even though effective ideas and strategies abound, the real problem is how to provide general and special education teachers the opportunity to apply newly learned collaborative and instructional strategies in the classroom. It follows, then, that a long-term commitment must be made to provide the necessary training and technical assistance. This requires the active involvement of general and special educators and the support of school administrators.

In recognition of the necessary prerequisites for effective collaboration, researchers at the Institute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota, and staff of the Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning, Division of Special Education, have designed a training model that provides general and special education personnel with the collaborative planning and instructional skills necessary to meet the needs of students with disabilities within the context of high standards and educational reform. This model, Collaboration: Access to the General Education Curriculum (or, more simply, “Applied Collaboration”) represents a compilation of collaborative and instructional strategies that general and special educators can apply—as a team—in the general education classroom. It should be noted that the Applied Collaboration model represents one specific approach with a clear focus on the applied aspects of teacher collaboration. Effective methods and strategies for collaboration have been developed by others (Cook & Friend, 1993; White & White, 1992; Bauwen & Hourcade, 1995; Walter-Thomas, Korinek, & McLaughlin, 1999), and it is likely that even more approaches will emerge in the future.

Intended to be both interactive and dynamic, Applied Collaboration is a professional development training model in which teams of general and special educators work together to identify mutual goals and use negotiation skills to address the needs of students with disabilities. An important aspect of the training is that it is always delivered by a training team consisting of a general educator and a special educator.

Within the general framework of the training, teams are provided with (a) collaborative strategies to increase communication and facilitate cooperative working relationships between special education and general education staff, and (b) instructional strategies in which teams learn about various teaching strategies (e.g., differentiated instruction, shared classroom management) that are “practiced” in the classroom setting. The model is quite simple and kept intentionally so: it relies on a few effective, yet easily implemented collaborative and instructional strategies. For example, Table 1 outlines the progression of activities in the Five Step Process (Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning, Division of Special Education, 2002) that each team completes in order to make decisions regarding the instruction of students.

Table 1. The Five Step Process

Activity

Description

Step 1:

Review the standard, performance task, and curricular demands.

The collaborative general and special education team communicate about the standard that students will encounter.

Step 2:

Discuss the learning needs of the student and the availability of resources.

This step is an opportunity to talk about the specific needs and concerns relevant to the placement of the student. Modifications may be discussed at this stage.

Step 3:

Decide on accommodations for the student and determine responsibility for implementing them.

The general and special education teacher creatively explore the changes that will be implemented to allow the student to more fully participate in instruction.

Step 4:

Monitor, adjust, and provide formative feedback.

This step provides an opportunity for the collaborative team to determine who will be responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of the accommodation.

Step 5:

Evaluate students using established criteria.

Step five provides an opportunity for the collaborative team to clearly identify the target and discuss how students will be evaluated in relation to the target.

The Five Step Process represents a simple but effective strategy for bringing general and special education teachers together to address the academic and social needs of students with disabilities in the general education setting. This process recognizes the unique roles and responsibilities as well as the expertise that each teacher brings to the collaborative relationship. The Five Step Process, as well as other strategies used in Applied Collaboration, are based on the premise that, irrespective of how effective a particular instructional strategy may be, it must still be practiced and applied in the classroom in order to add to the collaboration and instructional skills available to teachers.

In a survey of applied collaboration pilot sites that took part in training, both general and special education teachers felt that the information presented was relevant to their job roles. Figure 1 shows the percentages of 67 teachers in response to a question about relevancy.

Figure 1: Percentages of 67 teachers who participated in Applied Collaboration activities in response to the question:
How relevant was this training to your current job?

One of the most critical aspects of Applied Collaboration training is a component designed for school administrators to support training activities. This component of the training largely involves leadership development, including strategies for conducting a self-assessment of the school’s collaborative culture and techniques for fostering collaboration between general and special education staff. Similar to the process used in Applied Collaboration, training is provided to teams of general and special education administrators by their counterparts who have successfully implemented collaborative activities in their districts.

Applied Collaboration represents just one approach to promoting access for students with disabilities in the general education, however, it embodies a wide array of strategies and techniques that have been developed by others for more than two decades. Currently, Applied Collaboration activities are embedded in Minnesota’s State Improvement Grant as part of a continuous effort to increase access and improve results for students in standards-based reform initiatives.

Resources

For further information, contact:
Maureen Hawes
Project Coordinator
Institute on Community Integration
Rm. 12, Pattee Hall, 150 Pillsbury Dr. SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
(612) 626-8155
hawes001@umn.edu

Web sites:
Applied Collaboration
www.appliedcollaboration.net

LD OnLine
www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/teaching_techniques/strategies.html

References

Bauwen, J., & Hourcade, J. J. (1995). Cooperative teaching: Rebuilding the schoolhouse for all students. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Bunch, G., Lupart, J., & Brown, M. (1997). Resistance and acceptance: Educator attitudes to inclusion of students with disabilities. Wolfville, Nova Scotia: Acadia University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. AN 410713).

Bush, G. W. (2001). No Child Left Behind. Retrieved January 8, 2000, from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OIIA/pfie/whoweare/nochild.html

Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1995). Co-teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28(3), 1-16.

da Costa, J. L., Marshall, J. L., & Riordan, G. (1998). Case study of the development of a collaborative teaching culture in an inner city elementary school. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Diego, CA, April 13-17, 1998). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. AN 420630).

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, P.L. 105-17; 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1997).

Jorgensen, C. M. (1997, July). Curriculum and its impact on inclusion and the achievement of students with disabilities [Issue Brief (2)2]. Pittsburgh, PA: Allegheny University of the Health Sciences, The Consortium on Inclusive School Practices.

McDonnell, L. M., McLaughlin, M. J., & Morison, P. (1997). Educating one and all: Students with disabilities and standards-based reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

McGregor, G., Halvorsen, A., Fisher, D., Pumpian, I., Bhaerman, B., & Salisbury, C. (1998, November). Professional development for “all” personnel in inclusive schools [Issue Brief, (3)3.]. Pittsburgh, PA: Allegheny University of the Health Sciences, The Consortium on Inclusive School Practices.

McLaughlin, M. J., Nolet, V., Rhim, L. M., & Henderson, K. (1999). Integrating standards, including all students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(3), 66-71.

Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning (2002). Five Step Process. St. Paul, MN.

Monahan, R. G., Marino, S. B., Miller, R., & Cronic, D. T. (1997). Rural teachers’, administrators’, and counselors’ attitudes about inclusion (Report No. 021000). Greenwood, SC: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 406099).

National Association of State Directors of Special Education (2002). Legislative Priorities. Retrieved August 15, 2002, from http://www.nasdse.org/government_relations/legislative_priorities.htm

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA), Public Law 107-110, (2002).

President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Retrieved August 15, 2002, from http://www.ed.gov/inits/commissionsboards/whspecialeducation/reports/pcesefinalreport.pdf

Sands, D. J., Adams, L., & Stout, D. M. (1995). A statewide exploration of the nature and use of curriculum in special education. Exceptional Children, 62(1), 68-83.

Title 1, Part A of Elementary Secondary Education Act , 20 U.S.C. § 6311 et seq. (1965).

Thompson, S., Thurlow, M., & Whetstone, P. (2001, March). Recommendations for Addressing Standards and Assessments on State and District IEP Forms. (Policy Directions No. 12). Minneapolis: National Center on Educational Outcomes, University of Minnesota.

Walter-Thomas, C., Korinek., L., & McLaughlin, V. (1999). Collaboration to support students' success. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32(3), 1-18.

White, A. E., & White, L. L. (1992). A collaborative model for students with mild disabilities in middle schools. Focus on Exceptional Children, 24(9), 1-10.

Authors Michael N. Sharpe and Maureen E. Hawes are with NCSET.

^ Top of Page ^

There are no copyright restrictions on this document. However, please cite and credit the source when copying all or part of this material.

This report was supported in whole or in part by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, (Cooperative Agreement No. H326J000005). The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, and no official endorsement by the Department should be inferred.

This publication is available in an alternate format upon request. To request an alternate format or additional copies, contact NCSET at 612.624.2097.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Publication of the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition

# data[].attributes.headline
Collaborative Teaching with Special Education Classrooms

# data[].attributes.subject
Collaborative Teaching with Special Education Classrooms

# data[].attributes.body
This discusses the variety of ways that a teacher can provide services to special education students.

# data[].attributes.body
There are many different formats of co-teaching. The main one was team teaching and it explains this with a video and explanation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Co-Teaching Formats - Collaborate to Co-Teach - Curry School of Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Review the implementation tips and videos given below to gain an understanding of each co-teaching format. Also, observe the 'What do you notice?' videos to see if you can describe the co-teaching formats. Check your responses with those provided. The five common co-teaching formats are

# data[].attributes.body
This shares many co-teaching examples and strategies that can exist in a classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
This website discusses six elements that are necessary when utilizing collaboration in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teacher collaboration-when it's good, it's very, very good, but when it's bad, it's horrid.

Many educators believe that implementation of the Common Core Standards offers an unprecedented opportunity for collaboration among teachers. What do educators already know about the benefits and pitfalls of collaboration?

Marsha, a science teacher from Kansas, posed this question to colleagues on the Center for Teaching Quality's Teacher Leaders Network discussion board. Drawing on their own successful (and miserable) experiences, teachers identified key attributes of effective collaboration:

Clarity of Purpose

Top-down mandates for collaboration often fail. But systemic collaboration is not necessarily impossible-just tricky to design. And clarity of purpose is critical.

Some teachers noted that there are times-like when data shows students are struggling with a certain subject area-when mandated collaboration can work, as long as everyone understands its purpose.

Anne, a former state teacher of the year, described how she'd seen a school district achieve remarkable results after one middle school principal formed "small learning teams of teachers to accomplish a specific purpose." Their goal? Improving reading instruction.

The teams cut across all instructional staff and had training in how to collaborate successfully. They studied about reading strategies together; designed, implemented, and assessed lessons; and made adjustments. All teams exchanged "big ideas" with each other regularly. The process spread from school to school-and the district saw impressive achievement gains.

"So I actually don't think professional learning communities have to be made up of volunteers who see the value of collaboration at first," Anne said. "Sometimes collaboration has to be mandated in order to ratchet up teacher learning in areas of student need. But if it is mandated, there must be training in the 'how to' and a culture of positive support, coupled with time, recognition, and incentives."

Individual Commitment

A high school English teacher quoted a blues standard: "If it don't fit, don't force it."

She pointed out, "Each member of the collaboration team would have to be convinced that their time and energy would benefit students, and there would have to be a process of coming to real consensus on what the intended outcomes for students should be. Commitment to that baseline focus would be necessary to hold the group together long enough for trust to develop."

Time

Bill, a Massachusetts teacher, observed that there's a difference between "the professional, collegial trust I'll give anyone on first blush" and the deeper kind of trust that is necessary for collaboration. And the latter takes time.

Time. This word came up over and over again-along with "money." As Steve in Vermont put it, "Sooner or later, boards and administrators will have to confront the fact that if collaboration is desirable, it will have to be purchased, either with cold, hard cash or by eliminating vestigial tasks that don't contribute to student learning."

Many teachers had seen "good ideas" fail because they were mandated system-wide by those who underestimated the time needed to support the effort. One teacher offered a highly technical term for such scenarios: "a hot mess."

Also important is how collaboration time is structured-or not structured.

Steve's district has mandated "collaboration times" before and after school-but they are highly scripted, with protocols and reports. He suggests a different approach: "Why not create unstructured times in the school work day and avoid filling that time with stuff? Then encourage people to break out of their routines and talk with each other. See if it happens organically."

Indeed, several teachers reported that their best collaborative experiences took place informally during shared planning time. Bill explained: "So many good initiatives for the school emerged from us bouncing ideas off each other randomly as we stumbled on them, then built off each other's excitement."

Understanding How to Collaborate and Communicate

Ernie, a Nevada educator, pointed out that the effectiveness of shared planning time depends on teachers' understanding of how to use that time.

Noting that Learning Forward's standards for professional learning address this, Ernie wrote, "Unfortunately, so much of what we do in schools comes in a neat little package with checksheets-and teachers aren't encouraged to dig deep into discussing their practice and creating strategies to address the needs of their students." Some teachers may need guidance in how to make the most of opportunities to collaborate.

Gail, an instructional coach, agreed. Active listening (as opposed to multi-tasking) is key: "When group members truly listen to one another, they are able to communicate their ongoing regard for one another and build the trust that allows them to collaborate effectively."

Susan in Virginia added that establishing norms can help keep things running smoothly, even though some group members can find this to be an "unnecessary formality."

Supportive Administrators

At Kathie's school in California, the collaboration opportunity afforded by early release for students on Tuesdays was "a total waste of time in most departments." But that changed when a new principal informed teachers "how close we were to being taken over by the district due to flat test scores" and "made it clear that teachers were accountable for improvement, but also trusted to come up with their own solutions." The principal "added fun to the mix as well." The results? Focused, meaningful collaboration quickly led to significant increases in test scores.

Freedom to Explore

Freedom to explore can refer to the ability to choose one's own professional learning community-within the school building or even beyond it. As a couple of teachers asked, why not look to Twitter as a home for substantial collaboration?

Even when collaboration occurs in formal groups, a skilled facilitator can amp up the freedom factor. A group at Mary's school was focused on improving writing instruction, but the leader often seized upon ideas and (without discussing them) immediately began planning for implementation. Mary cringed, thinking, "That is the way to kill a good idea." When the leader shifted her approach to give teachers more voice and room for creativity, lively discussion and action resulted.

There's no magic formula for successful collaboration. But this dialogue demonstrates that teachers know a great deal about what works-and what doesn't.

What do you think contributes to effective collaboration? What should teachers, administrators, and policymakers keep in mind when facing Common Core implementation? Weigh in here, or join the conversation at Teaching Ahead this month.

Web Only

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teacher collaboration-when it's good, it's very, very good, but when it's bad, it's horrid. Many educators believe that implementation of the Common Core Standards offers an unprecedented opportunity for collaboration among teachers. What do educators already know about the benefits and pitfalls of collaboration?

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses the importance of co-teaching with learning partners from the community. This can truly bring to life certain lessons in the classroom and make a meaningful connection for the student.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Crellin first developed the idea of learning partners several years ago when teachers realized that they might need some help with the school's stream cleanup and reclamation project. After students had wondered why the water in the stream behind the school was orange, teachers and administrators learned that the discoloration was due to the area's history as a mining town. So Crellin set about cleaning up the land as a schoolwide project to turn it into an outdoor learning lab. But they came up against some questions along the way.

"I don't have a degree in science," Dana McCauley, Crellin principal, explains. "My teachers aren't experts in science."

This was the point when the school brought in some local professionals and parents as advisors. It was extremely helpful for the teachers, but what they didn't expect was how much their students embraced the learning. McCauley vividly remembers when she and her staff started working with outside experts.

"They began team-teaching with us," she says. "This just took the walls of the school down and opened it up to the community. Then the community became sort of the schoolyard, and everybody could come in."

As Crellin began inviting more and more people into the school, the idea of learning partners was born.

Involving the Community

McCauley suggests these steps for anyone who wants to bring learning partners into the school or classroom:

1. Start Asking for Help

When Crellin first began using learning partners, they did a lot of asking. McCauley talked to community members, parents, people at conferences, and local businesses. She looked for people who could help with certain lessons in which teachers wanted extra support, or subject areas where the kids had a lot of interest.

"If the kids are expressing an interest in the birds that they're seeing in the schoolyard, and the teacher doesn't know anything about them, that's when you go to the bird club," says McCauley. "We're always looking for people who can teach us all something, kids and teachers alike."

McCauley and her teachers still seek to meet specific needs, but they found that once they began opening their doors to the community, more and more people came to those doors offering to help.

2. Realize Everyone Has Something to Offer

Some of the learning partners that come to Crellin are chemists, engineers, or even an occasional rocket scientist, but you don't have to be a professional scientist to help students learn. Crellin teachers and staff believe that everyone has something to teach others, a philosophy that helps make people comfortable approaching the school.

"Some of our dads are construction workers," says McCauley. "When we need a composter built, or we need some kind of work like that done, we can call those dads, and they become the experts."

Past learning partners have included locals who found a beehive on their property and brought it in to show kindergarten students (sans bees, of course); and a stay-at-home mom who is passionate about cooking and healthy eating, and teaches students about culinary arts and creating healthy meals from what grows in the school's garden.

"There's something here for everyone," observes McCauley. "Actually, there's something in every school for everyone. You just have to build those relationships, and you'll learn what somebody has to offer."

3. Make It Fun

Learning partners are not paid for coming to the school and have to make time for it in their schedule. Crellin recognizes this and works hard to make sure that their learning partners feel appreciated and valued by both students and teachers.

"Crellin goes out of the way to make you feel appreciated," says Dave Miller, a Crellin learning partner. "They go out of their way not to waste my time. I don't feel there's one minute of time I spend here or prepping that isn't valuable."

Learning partner Sarah Deacon agrees. "This is the highlight of my week when I get to come here," she says. "I get to share things that I love and I'm really passionate about with an audience that's very appreciative."

Often she can visit only once or twice a week, yet the school works to accommodate her schedule. Making partners feel valued and their team-teaching experience enjoyable keeps them coming back.

Making Teaching a Partnership

Learning partners can lighten a teacher's considerable workload.

"I think a lot of teachers feel like, because they're the teacher, they have to know everything about everything," says second-grade teacher Carrie Hordubay. "That's really a hard burden to bear. I certainly don't know everything."

Fifth-grade teacher Brittany German agrees, saying the pressure can stifle teachers from asking for help.

"I think at first it was like, 'Oh, my goodness, I can't say I don't know this. This is fifth grade material,'" she says. "But after a while, we all realized we just can't be experts at everything, and in order to give the kids what's best, partnering is the way we can do it."

However, while learning partners are helpful in easing a teacher's burden, they aren't meant to take the teacher's place for an hour or two. Instead, the relationship is a partnership. While the partner's job is to bring in the content expertise, the teacher's job is making the curricular ties to what the partner wants to share. This involves planning ahead of time via phone, email, or in person so that the teacher can learn what content will be delivered and work with the partner to make those curricular connections.

Teachers also use their expertise in working with students to shape the delivery in a way that's best suited for the grade level or class. German cites a recent example of a learning partner who wanted to teach her fifth grade class about how different birds' beaks can tell us what they eat and where their habitats are. She was able to fold that into her lesson to connect the experience to learning objectives.

"Say the learning partner is talking and uses a new vocabulary word," says German. "The teacher sees the look on the kids' faces and can say, 'Wait a minute. Let's talk about those vocabulary words.'" In this way, the teacher is paying attention to the big picture, and helping to guide the lesson by filling in the gaps to make sure that the students are learning.

Being Flexible

Working with learning partners means working around their schedule, McCauley says. Whether that means shifting class schedules or moving a morning activity to afternoon, it's absolutely essential to making these partnerships possible.

"We're blessed to have people who want to come in and spend time with us, so we have to be extremely flexible," says McCauley, who sees flexibility as the school's responsibility, "because they are giving us a gift of time, and time is a precious, precious gift, and we value it."

Crellin teachers acknowledge that this kind of flexibility means surrendering a little bit of control -- control of their class schedule, of what the partners are going to say next, of their room, and of their time, since they may often have to return a learning partner's email or a phone call. But while German admits it can be hard to let go of some of that, she doesn't feel like she's giving up anything at all.

"Oh, no, you're not giving up any curriculum time, no, no, no," insists the fifth-grade teacher. "You're not giving up anything -- you're gaining so much. Those kids are learning. They're learning math. They're learning science. They're learning reading. They're going to write and reflect on all those wonderful things that they've learned. They're not missing any instruction. They're actually gaining instruction because all of these things are coming at them at one time, and they're learning it all together."

Other Benefits Beyond Curriculum

While all the teachers at Crellin agree that the learning partners help their students with mastery of and engagement in the content, they also see other benefits:

1. Students See the Relevance of Their Learning

Through the learning partners, students begin to see that what they're learning can influence their future -- the partners model how learning doesn't stop. So a project with a sundial, for example, helps them understand a math class emphasis on protractors and angles. They're grasping the connectedness of the subject areas.

2. Students Develop Self-Confidence

Interacting with adults other than their teachers gives students additional confidence and poise. "I've seen them grow academically, but also as people, with the way they present themselves when they ask questions from adults," German says. She credits the learning partners with helping students practice developing their verbal communication skills.

3. Students Come Into Contact With Role Models

When students see professionals using the skills that they're learning in school and having successful careers with them, it's a powerful motivator and influence. "They see Sarah Deacon as really fantastic," says Hordubay. "They see her as incredibly smart. They like that she is a girl, and a scientist, and she's doing all these things that they like to do at school. They see her doing all these fun things as a profession."

Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Using Community Experts to Extend Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Crellin first developed the idea of learning partners several years ago when teachers realized that they might need some help with the school's stream cleanup and reclamation project. After students had wondered why the water in the stream behind the school was orange, teachers and administrators learned that the discoloration was due to the area's history as a mining town.

# data[].attributes.headline
Co-Teaching for Students with Special Needs

# data[].attributes.subject
Co-Teaching for Students with Special Needs

# data[].attributes.body
The website describes the concept of co-teaching as a service delivery model. Many research has been done to share the effectiveness that students with special needs can experience when co-teaching occurs in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We all know that a student with special needs has the right to a free and appropriate public education. This is mandated under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA 2004). This law also states that a student should be educated in their least restrict environment. Ideally, this would be the general education classroom.

We know this is not the best placement for all students to meet their unique learning needs. However, for those students who are included in the general education setting, I would encourage educators to consider co-teaching as a service delivery model.

Research studies have shown that co-teaching can be very effective for students with special needs, especially those with milder disabilities such as learning disabilities. When implemented correctly, co-teaching can be a very successful way to teach all students in a classroom setting. On the other hand, uninformed teachers can poorly implement this model which will not yield positive results for students.
Here is a basic explanation of what co-teaching means along with the benefits and different models of Co-teaching.
The Definition of Co-teaching:

Two or more teachers delivering instruction at the same time in the same physical space to a heterogeneous group of students (Friend and Cook, 2004).

Benefits of Co-teaching:

1. Students with disabilities are provided access to the general education curriculum and general education setting

2. Students with disabilities will still receive specialized instruction

3. Students will have the opportunity to be taught in an intense, individualized manner

4. Greater instructional intensity and differentiated instruction

5. Teachers will learn from each other's expertise and expand the scope of their teaching capacity

6. Reduces negative stigma associated with pull-out programs

7. Students with disabilities may feel more connected with their peer group

Models of Co-teaching:

(defined by Friend and Cook, 2004).

1. One teach, one observe:
one teacher delivers instruction while the other observes student learning and assesses student understanding and academic functioning

2. One teach, one assist:
one teacher will take the lead in providing instruction while the other moves around the classroom and assists students who may be struggling

3. Parallel Teaching:
The class is divided in half and the same material is presented at the same time by both teachers (teacher to student ratio becomes more manageable)

4. Station Teaching:
Both teachers are actively involved in instruction and the students rotate from one station to the next, learning new material

5. Alternative Teaching:
One teacher takes a small group of students and provides instruction that is different than what the large group is receiving

6. Team Teaching:
Both teachers instruct on the same lesson with all students present

Tell us what you think... Have you found co-teaching to be a helpful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Benefits of Co-Teaching for Students with Special Needs - Friendship Circle - Special Needs Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We all know that a student with special needs has the right to a free and appropriate public education. This is mandated under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA 2004). This law also states that a student should be educated in their least restrict environment. Ideally, this would be the general education classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
This article describes the benefits and challenges with collaborative team teaching. This teacher has used this method in a first grade, sixth grade, and second grade classroom. The article describes what makes a strong partnership and the benefits that co-teaching has to offer a classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collaborative Team Teaching: Challenges and Rewards

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Veteran special ed teacher Marisa Kaplan shares the challenges and rewards of co-teaching, including the fun of having another adult in the classroom.