EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

INTRODUCTION

The education system is moving away from segregated classrooms of students with

special needs and towards inclusive classroom settings. To allow students of all backgrounds to

feel included, many teachers are doing their best to provide inclusive spaces. However, there

are four major barriers to inclusion: time, professional development, administrative and

emotional support, and resources. In a lecture in EPSE 509, Jennifer Katz discussed that in order

to successfully implement change in the education system, teachers need at least 30 hours of

professional development to make change. Additionally, teachers often feel as though they

work in isolation. The challenge is how to make change when teachers feel that they are

working alone. The solution to this is the idea of co-teaching through collaboration and

consultation. However, with collaboration and consultation between teachers, barriers arise

such as differing viewpoints, teaching styles, levels of experience, and curriculum expectations.

The new BC curriculum redesign is an indication that co-teaching and collaboration

between teachers will soon be the new norm. Cross-curricular learning outcomes are taking

front stage in the curriculum. To meet such outcomes, consultation between teachers will be

required to ensure adequate learning goals are being met. By bringing together teachers from

varying backgrounds, we help to meet the needs of students through enhancement of

curriculum and instruction.

Whether a brand new teacher, or a teacher with years of experience, there is a struggle

with inclusion relating to students with special needs. Through consultation, collaboration and

co-teaching, the needs of individual learners can be met. Establishing relationships with co-

workers, recognizing needs, finding time to plan, and implementing system change are all

1
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

strategies to help the classroom teacher find the role of consultant and enable inclusion to

occur at the secondary level.

THE PROBLEM

According to Statistics Canada (2008), 3.1% of children aged 5 to 14 have a physical

disability and 2.8% have a cognitive or emotional disability. This does not take into account

students older than 14, or students who were not surveyed or not assessed. A study by the

Canadian Teacher’s Federation examining classroom composition across the country found that

the average number of students with a disability in a classroom is 3.5 and this did not include

students with a learning disability or those waiting to be identified (Towle, 2005). The study

also found that 80% of classrooms nationwide had at least one student with a disability and

28% of classrooms contained more than five students with a disability (Towle, 2005). In two of

my four classes, I have at least eight students with either physical or learning disabilities in

addition to three or four students who are English Language Learners.

The issue at hand is not that there are students with disabilities in the classroom. The

issue is that many teachers lack comfort in relation to teaching students with special needs.

One study examining secondary school music teacher’s comfort level when teaching students

with special needs found that 85% of teachers were able to adapt instruction, goals, and

objectives but only 9% felt their skills were competent at doing so (Hammel & Gerrity, 2012).

Similarly, Sokal and Sharma (2014) found that 38% of practising teachers in Manitoba do not

feel comfortable teaching students with special needs and 43% of teachers in Manitoba have

no formal training on how to teach such students. The research is consistent throughout the

country; many teachers are unsure of exactly how to teach students with special needs. The

2
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

British Columbia Teacher Federation’s recently won a Supreme Court case, in which ruling

favoured the 2002 contract, allowing for only two students in a general classroom with

designations. This win was considered monumental for British Columbia Teachers. However, if

teachers were better equipped to deal with all students, regardless of background, there would

be no need to bring this situation to the Supreme Court. If we can address the issue of teacher’s

lack of comfort in the classroom through co-teaching, where two teachers of differing

backgrounds come together to teach, this will eliminate the need for more training and the

stress teachers feel from not being able to meet the needs of all learners.

Due to the lack of efficacy and teacher training amongst current practicing teachers,

there needs to be a movement towards more support for teachers which will allow for inclusion

to take place. Looking at inclusive classrooms, “it is not enough to merely place students with

[disabilities] in general class settings without providing appropriate training, materials, and

support to them and their teachers. To do so surely invites their failure” (Dieker & Murawski,

2004, pg. 52). As time, professional development, administrative and emotional support, and

resources are all in limited availability, we need to look within the school to see how internal

consultation can take place in order to meet the needs of all learners. A solution to such issues

as supported by the research is through co-teaching.

CO-TEACHING DEFINED

Co-teaching is not a new concept and the proposition of working with another educator

has been around for some time. Researchers in the 1970s defined co-teaching as “two or more

teachers working together to plan, instruct, and evaluate a subject” (Rahmawati, 2016, p. 148).

An alternate definition of co-teaching is, “redefined co-teaching for teacher education as two or

3
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

more teachers delivering instruction to a diverse classroom of learners in one classroom or

space” (Rahamwati, 2016, p. 148). With two teachers in a classroom, there is double the

amount of experience and one teacher can act as a coach to the other teacher at times when

they are not feeling comfortable with content or with assisting diverse learners. Dieker and

Murawski (2003) emphasized that though co-teaching was developed specifically for students

with learning or behavioural needs, it actually benefits students from all backgrounds.

An important aspect of co-teaching is the relationship between the teachers. Dieker and

Murawski (2003) discussed what co-teaching is not:

Co-teaching is not when the gen ed teacher plans all the lessons and sped teacher

comes in and says “what are we doing now?” or one teacher who disagrees with

another teacher’s practice saying you’re doing it wrong, let me show you how to do it

(p. 2).

The effort between co-teachers needs to be a collaboration and roles need to be clearly defined

before the co-teaching takes place. Co-teaching allows for professionals in the same building to

collaborate to help meet the needs of diverse learners (Morton & Binky, 2015). So not to have

to look externally for a consultant, it is vital to have collaboration and support between staff to

create opportunities for all students to succeed and maximize the resources available to

teachers within the school.

CHANGING CLIMATE

Though there is no national law that requires students to be included in a general

classroom, this is the way that educational settings are headed. Currently, every province and

territory has some form of legislated commitment to inclusion (Sokal & Katz, 2015). In the

4
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

United States, there is a law “requiring that students with increasingly diverse learning

characteristics have access to and achieve high academic performance in the general education

curriculum” (Cramer et al., 2010, p. 7). While students with special needs were once

institutionalized, it is clear that the education system is progressing towards an inclusive

environment for students with special needs in order to promote acceptance and improve

educational and social outcomes for such students.

There is much work to be done and co-teaching can help to lead the way. Secondary

school teachers want to ensure student’s successes and prepare them to become citizens who

are active and responsible (Dieker & Murawski, 2004). To help all students succeed, skills need

to be acquired, particularly social skills. If students are segregated with other students with

special needs, not only will they not gain the academic skills needed to succeed post-secondary,

they will not attain skills relating to social settings. Often, as teachers are not sure how to teach

students with special needs, they slip under the radar. Dieker & Murawski (2004) spoke to the

fact that there is often miscommunication with secondary teachers, difficult assignments, and a

lack of diversity in assignments to meet the needs of diverse learners due to focus on content

mastery. As the classroom becomes diverse, general education teachers must alter their

practice to meet the needs of all learners (Morton & Binky, 2015).

Without sending all untrained teachers back to school or revamping all current

practices, co-teaching allows for teachers to share ideas towards inclusion while the students

reap the benefits. As teachers are strapped for time, resources, and support, co-teaching helps

to meet some of these unmet areas. While initially working with another teacher will take time,

once lessons are planned, with the support of one another, more time will be saved. Having an

5
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

additional support person to assist in lessons also addresses lack of resources in the classroom.

Through co-teaching, students with a variety of instructional needs have been found to benefit

at the secondary level (Cramer et al., 2010). If the education system wants to take inclusion

seriously, they need to consider mandating co-teaching to meet the needs of all learners.

CHALLENGES TO CO-TEACHING AND CONSULTATION

Like any relationship, a co-teaching relationship requires work. Most teachers are

trained in isolation and expect to teach in isolation for the duration of their career as co-

teaching is not common practice in pre-service training. Keefe & Moore (2004) suggested that

pre-service teachers should be trained in how to properly co-teach so they may feel

comfortable in a co-teaching situation in their career. In their research, Keefe & Moore (2004)

found that many teachers were ill prepared on the dynamics of a co-teaching relationship

which further lead to feelings of frustration and lack of motivation regarding continuing co-

teaching. If teachers are not adequately prepared on how to co-teach, the process will not

work.

As discussed in EPSE 551A, communication is vital when building a relationship between

consultant and consultee. If communication channels are not addressed and strengthened in

the beginning, a solid foundation will not be built and the co-teaching process will break-down.

One of the two partners in a co-teaching duo must open the door to communication. Keefe and

Moore (2004) found that many secondary school teachers had problems with communication

between them and related the co-teaching relationship to a marriage. Of importance is that

more than elementary school teachers, secondary school teachers have been noted with having

more negative attitudes towards inclusive education (Keefe & Moore, 2004). If there are

6
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

already barriers, such as a negative attitude, this only makes communication more important

for success to occur.

Another significant finding from the research is the ability to choose a partner to co-

teach with. In regards to not having a choice, one teacher stated, “And now when they bring

new people in it’s just here, you’re working with so-and-so, and they don’t have a clue what

their job is” (Keefe & Moore, 2004, p. 81). In order to build rapport with another teacher, it is

important for teacher choice as the task of co-teaching can seem daunting to some. Having to

teach in the same room at the same time can be what is most disconcerting to some teachers

(Morton & Binky, 2015). This is why building a strong relationship from the get-go with a co-

teacher is important to making the partnership work and to help eliminate the negative

connotations.

Furthermore, teachers need to discuss their grading systems with each other. As grades

at the secondary level are vital to post-secondary plans, both teachers in a co-teaching

relationship need to establish how they will be evaluating students. Dieker and Murawski

(2004) found that teachers need to have discussions and form a consensus on what is

appropriate assessment for each student. An issue for grading is that special education teachers

often do not have the appropriate training in general education curriculum and are therefore

unable to assess accurately. In one study, both special and general education teachers felt

unprepared to meet the demands of co-teaching in relation to collaboration, content

knowledge, and knowledge of curriculum (Keefe & Moore, 2004). This brings the argument

back to post-secondary institutions, where training can be provided to pre-service teachers so

they are able to meet such demands.

7
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

BENEFITS OF CO-TEACHING

While there are many challenges, there are also many benefits to co-teaching. With two

teachers, comes the ability to address common challenges that arise in classrooms. Co-teaching

has found to have a reduction in behavioural problems and easier classroom management for

the teachers involved (Morton & Binky, 2015). In addition to a reduction in behaviour problems,

students were found to be safer in a science lab with co-teachers (Morton & Binky, 2015).

Principals and students both remarked on the benefits of co-teaching, stating:

[Co-teaching] creates smoother transitions and less waiting time for students.” A

principal commented that “learning is dynamic, kids are engaged, and kids are

benefitting.” One student summed up her experience with co-teachers, saying, “When

there are two teacher figures, they learn teaching techniques from each other, which in

turn brings out the best methods for the class. (Morton & Binky, 2015, p. 122).

With two teachers in a room means another set of eyes for safety, behaviour, engagement, and

questions that arise.

As mentioned, a couple barriers to inclusion are a lack of resources and support. Having

two teachers in a classroom address both issues. Co-teaching allows for more individual

instruction and attention for students in need. Morton and Binky (2015) found that there was a

higher student to teach ratio in co-teaching, and principals were pleased with levels of

engagement in the classroom and growth of the teachers. Students reported increased levels of

support, more engaging lessons, and more timely feedback of course content because of two

teachers (Morton & Binky, 2015). As teachers already have enough on their plate, by

collaborating with another, this helps to reduce the workload that teachers face.

8
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

Teachers are benefitting from co-teaching in that they gain a different perspective on

students and on teaching because every teacher has their own style. They are also benefitting

with a reduced marking load, finding ways to implement new strategies, and meeting the needs

of more students. While teachers benefit, so do students. A three year cumulative student

study showed improvements in reading and math when comparing students from a co-taught

class to a non-co-taught class. The improvements were noted in students who were from a low

socioeconomic status, English language learners, and special education students (Morton &

Binky, 2015). This indicates that with the strain of trying to meet the goal of inclusion, there are

solutions available to reduce the load and make education more enjoyable for both teachers

and students.

KEYS TO SUCCESS

The importance of communication, collaboration and relationships between co-teachers

are all vital to success. In a Florida Secondary Teachers’ survey on the highest rated items

relating to co-teaching; role definition, flexibility, fun, support, sharing of ideas and resources,

and dedication to teaching were all listed amongst the top items (Cramer et al., 2010). Through

role definition, teachers can establish expectations and routines of how their co-teaching is

going to work. If missing any of the key steps listed above, the co-teaching process will not

benefit students or teachers involved. A co-teaching relationship is parallel to a marriage, if it is

dysfunctional, the children involved will not benefit and it could be better off for the teachers

to educate in isolation.

In relationships, boundaries and communication need to be started early so that both

partners are clear of expectations. Dieker and Murawski (2003) found that the first key to

9
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

success is identifying how the co-teaching process will be implemented and evaluated. They

found that often in education, plans are not pre-conceptualized and difficulties arise as such.

Many teachers may feel that there is no time to plan and evaluate how the co-teaching process

will occur. Dieker and Murawski (2004) suggest getting administrative support through

allowance of common planning periods. When there is a will, there is a way, but administration

support can help pave the pathway to success.

SUMMARY

Teaching is a very busy profession. Regardless of subject area or district, all teachers are

faced with one of more: large class sizes, students with a wide variety of needs, endless

paperwork (such as IEPs, marking, lesson planning), and all have support staff such as social

workers, counsellors, and administrators, where collaboration is expected (Dieker & Murawski,

2003). There can always be more money in education for support staff but until the education

system is well-funded on all levels, teachers need to make do with what is available to them. To

begin to implement co-teaching, education needs to be start at the post-secondary, pre-service

level. Morton and Binky (2015) found that teacher candidates who co-taught during practicum

were better prepared to face classroom management, receive feedback, and differentiate

instruction. Additionally, with co-teaching relationships between classrooms teachers and

resources teachers, one usually has more content background from training. Special education

training programs tend to focus more on specific learning disabilities rather than curriculum

and regular training programs are the opposite. Co-teaching allows for both teachers to engage

in a classroom together and strengthen their knowledge in areas of weakness (Dieker &

Murawski, 2003). When paired together, a resource teacher and a classroom teacher can

10
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

collaborate and consult with each other on ideas that are appropriate and relevant to the

classroom.

Throughout the research the same theme kept occurring; teacher training in pre-service

programs in order to make co-teaching a part of the norm. Cramer at al. (2010) suggests

forming a partnership between school districts and universities to offer a blended training of

learning modules and clinical practices. Through establishing early partnerships, teachers will

be better equipped from the commencement of their careers to handle all that comes at them

while engaging students from diverse backgrounds and needs. Those teachers who have

already graduated can collaborate and consult with new teachers to learn about effective co-

teaching so that it becomes a system wide norm and inclusion goals can be met.

QUESTIONS

While there is a significant amount of research available on co-teaching in secondary

schools, there are gaps which need to be filled in. Morton and Binky (2015) suggest looking at

professional development relating to implementation of co-teaching in alternative high school

or middle school settings. Cramer and Nevin (2006) echo Morton and Binky reporting that all

co-teachers should receive in-service training and planning time to implement co-teaching in a

successful way. Cramer et al. (2010) suggest a recommendation for changes in policy at

national, state, local school districts to have better research on innovative teaching practices

such as co-teaching. They also suggest updating mandated legislature relating to collaboration,

co-teaching approaches, and effective instructional practices so that administrators are able to

adequately support co-teachers to mentor others while creating incentives and recognitions

showing value in their co-teachings (Cramer et al., 2010). It would also be nice to see some

11
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

literature from British Columbia relating to what is being done to implement co-teaching, if any.

Is it possible and cost-effective to implement co-teaching on a regular basis at the secondary

level in schools in British Columbia and Canada wide?

12
EPSE 551A Research Review Martina Cawker

REFERENCES

Bacharach, N., Heck, T., & Dahlberg, K. (2011). What Makes Co-Teaching Work? Identifying The
Essential Elements. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(3), 43-48.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19030/ctms.v4i3.5534

Cramer, E., Liston, A., Nevin, A. & Thousand, J. (2010). Co-Teaching in Urban Secondary School
Districts to Meet the Needs of All Teachers and Learnings: Implications for Teacher
Education Reform. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 6-10, 1-10.

Dieker, L., & Murawski, W. (2003). Co-Teaching at the Secondary Level: Unique Issues, Current
Trends, and Suggestions for Success. The High School Journal, 86(4), 1-13. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/40364319

Dieker, L., & Murawski, W. (2004). Tips and Strategies for Co-Teaching at the Secondary Level.
Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(5), 52-58. doi: 10.1177/004005990403600507

Hammel, A., & Gerrity, K. (2012). The Effect of Instruction on Teacher Perceptions of Competence
When Including Students With Special Needs in Music Classrooms. Applications of
Research in Music Education, 12(1), 6-13. doi: 10.1177/8755123312457882

Keefe, E., & Moore, V. (2004). The Challenge of Co-Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms at the High
School Level: What the Teachers Told Us. American Secondary Education, 32(3), 77-88.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/41064524

Morton, B., & Binky, G. (2015). Innovative University-School Partnerships. Issues In Teacher
Education, 24(2), 119-132.

Rahmawati, Y., & Koul, R. (2016). Fieldwork, co-teaching and co-generative dialogue in lower
secondary school environmental science. Issues In Educational Research, 26(1), 147-164.

Sokal, L. and Sharma, U. (2014) In-service teachers' concerns, efficacy, and attitudes about
inclusive teaching and its relationship with teacher training. Exceptionality Education
International, 23, 1, 59–71.

Sokal, L. and Katz, J. (2015), Oh, Canada: bridges and barriers to inclusion in Canadian schools.
Support for Learning, 30: 42–54. doi:10.1111/1467-9604.12078

Statistics Canada. (2008). Educational Services and the Disabled Child. Retrieved from
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-004-x/2006005/9588-eng.htm

Towle, L. (2015). Disability and Inclusion in Canadian Education. Retrieved from

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/disability-and-inclusion-
canadian-education

13