All Things PLC

Have you ever searched for a website that will provide tools you can use right away? A great site I recently found is doing just that. It is so easy to navigate it and find the tools we need as we work together in our PLCs.

Collaboration is critical in schools today. Anything that will make teachers' jobs easier is an added bonus. I believe  in collaborating and sharing information anyway I can.  Keeping it in the spirit of collaboration please consider this question: What strategies have you used to improve the effectiveness of your PLC?

What is Coteaching?

Coteaching is a developmental process (Gately, 2001) that special and general education teachers undergo as they work together in the inclusion classroom. The key word here is "process."

Many school administrators have the expectation that the two professionals gel as soon as they are assigned to work together. They want to see them teaching and be equals in the classroom. As the intent holds true at some point, it is neither realistic nor research-based to have such expectations from beginning teams.

Gately (2001) delineated three stages in this process: beginning, compromise, and collaborative. Teachers assigned to a coteaching team (a.k.a inclusion team, collaborative team) will save time and lessen role anxiety if they understand these stages and adjust their expectations accordingly. Learning something new it is not easy and could create a certain kind of anxiety (Schein, 2002 Learning Anxiety). Gately (2001) presented eight components that look different in each stage:

1. Interpersonal communication
2. Physical arrangement
3. Familiarity with curriculum
4. Curriculum goals and modifications
5. Instructional planning
6. Instructional presentation
7. Classroom management
8. Assessment

For each one of the three stages, teachers can assume different coteaching models and effective relationships (Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, 2007; Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2008; Friend, 2011):
1. One teach, one assist
2. Supportive
3. Station teaching
4. Parallel teaching
5. Alternative teaching
6. Complimentary teaching
7. Team teaching

The coteaching process has its challenges and rewards. As with any process, the changes should be gradual. Only through open communication and trust building, coteachers will be able to lessen their role anxiety and reach the collaborative stage.



Bibliography:

Friend, M. (2011). Best practices in co-teaching: Practical solutions for difficult and challenging issues. Bellevue, WA: Bureau of Education & Research.

Gately, S. E., & Gately, F. J., Jr. (2001, March/April). Understanding co-teaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4), 40-48

Gately, S. E. (2005). Two are better than one. Principal Leadership, 5(9), 36-41.

Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007). Co-teaching in Inclusive classrooms: A methasynthesis of qualitative research. Council for Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392-416.

Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., & Nevin, A. I. (2008). A guide to co-teaching: Practical tips for facilitating student learning. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press & Council for Exceptional Children.

Peer 2 Peer: Is Coaching the only solution?

Coaching helps educators improve by “transferring learning to classroom practice” (Bowgren & Sever, 2010, p. 65).  Directive, collaborative, and nondirective coaching are three approaches that take into consideration teachers’ needs (Bowgren & Sever, 2010).  Good coaches are change agents who identify teachers’ goals by using data, listen and ask questions, explain teaching practices, provide feedback by collaboratively discussing data gathered, and understand school improvement plans (Knight, 2011; Fullan & Knight, 2011).  A role such as this can be assumed by the school principal who “must be the epicenter of school change” (Nidus & Sadders, 2011, p.31).  One trend that changes the principal from solely the instructional leader to a coach is formative coaching.  Teachers and principals look at formative data to reflect on student work and understand their learning needs.

Although it increases teachers’ efficacy and classroom practice, coaching does not necessarily promote collaboration between content area teachers.  City (2011) looked at improving collective teaching practices by using a model based on medical rounds.  Instructional rounds are about a group of teachers who observe each other to understand the interaction between the teacher, students, and content in the classroom.  These rounds focus on the instructional core and are descriptive and analytic, rather than evaluative like coaching.  According to City (2011), when teachers are involved in instructional rounds, there is a “shift of attention from the teacher to the students and the tasks they’re engaged in” (p.38).

Another peer-to-peer approach is the lesson study.  This approach involves a team of teachers who study the curriculum and plan a lesson together.  While one person teaches the lesson, the others observe and collect data related to students and their responses to the lesson.  Data collected direct teachers’ conversation toward improving the lesson and developing questions for the next cycle of planning and observation.  In contrast to instructional rounds, lesson study “can expand and extend the effect of coaching” (Lewis et al., 2011, p. 65).  The coach and group of teachers study the problem together and design the lesson based on student data collected during observations.  Lesson study helps group members (teachers and coaches) improve their knowledge in a natural context.  It challenges teachers to grow as learners, and “build[s] a network of collegial relationships” regardless of level of expertise (Lewis et al., 2011).

In conclusion, through coaching teachers develop a relationship with one coach.  Instructional rounds stimulate conversations and peers hold one another accountable; they coach each other.  Lastly, lesson study is a cross between the first two, in that coaches are part of the small team of teachers and together join in designing the lesson, collection, and data analysis to improve student achievement. 

Annotated Bibliography

Bowgren, L., & Sever, K. (2010).  Differentiated professional development in a Learning Community. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

City, E. A. (2011, October).  Learning from instructional rounds.  Educational Leadership, 69(2), 36-41.

Fullan, M., & Knight, J. (2011, October).  Coaches as system leaders.  Educational Leadership, 69(2), 50-53

Knight, J. (2011, October).  What good coaches do.  Educational Leadership, 69(2), 18-22

Lewis, C., Perry, R., Foster, D., Hurd, J., & Fisher, L. (2011, October).  Lesson study: beyond coaching.  Educational Leadership, 69(2), 64-68.

Nidus, G., & Sadder, M. (2011, October).  The principal as formative coach.  Educational Leadership, 69(2), 30-35.