Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All Action Research Study Jenny Rinehart University of Northern Iowa Spring, 2013

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All Context Southeast Polk Junior High serves the seventh and eighth grade students in the Southeast Polk Community School District. The school serves approximately 970 students. The school has a free and reduced population of 30%, minority population of 14%, and an IEP population of approximately 10%. In regards to academic achievement, on the 2012 Iowa Assessments, 69.56% of eighth graders were proficient in reading comprehension. The lower proficiency scores in reading and continued status as a SINA school; led to the development of co-taught, inclusive courses which also initiated this study. Introduction The co-teaching model is a requirement at Southeast Polk Junior High in the areas of language arts and math. Specific members of the general education teaching staff were approached by administration in April of 2012 to discuss the possibility of becoming a member of the co-taught team at each grade level. General education teachers that chose to participate in this initiative were then invited to several meetings where co-teaching was discussed and partnerships with special education staff were developed. The students with IEPs that required co-taught courses were placed on the team with the co-taught opportunities. The administrations belief of placing all of the cotaught students with one teacher was to provide the opportunity for the general education and special education teacher to build a working relationship that was focused on student learning, differentiation, and planning. This system also allows for the general education and special education teacher to have a common planning that is

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All solely focused on collaboratively planning lessons that are truly collaborative and differentiated for student needs. This model results in all IEP students being placed on the same general education teachers roster. 2012-2013 is a pilot year for the co-teaching model at Southeast Polk Junior High. The purpose of this study is to gather data and draw conclusions to evaluate the effectiveness of co-teaching for all studentsspecial education, as well as the general education population. The driving question of the research is Does a co-taught EnglishLanguage Arts classroom positively impact student achievement for all students? In order to evaluate this question, data was collected from unit pre and post assessments and student feedback on their perceptions of co-teaching was collected. Literature Review The idea of co-taught classrooms has been the subject of numerous studies throughout the education field. Since the inception of the No Child Left Behind legislation, schools have been adopting the idea of inclusive classrooms and co-taught settings. According to Ferguson, inclusionary schools seek to establish communities of learners by educating all students together in age-appropriate, general education classrooms in their neighborhood schools. Although the inclusion movement has focused on individuals with disabilities, it is designed to alter the philosophy for educating all students. (Salend & Garrick Duhaney, 1999, p. 114)

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All Much of the research available is in reference to students with disabilities and their inclusion in the general education setting. Many of these studies also support that inclusion is beneficial for students with disabilities. In one study by Banerji and Dailey (1995), both qualitative and quantitative research methods to study the effect of inclusion and co-taught courses. Academic performance measures in reading and writing were collected after students had been in the co-taught setting for three months. The results revealed that the reading and writing progress of the students with LD was similar to the progress of their peers without disabilities (Salend & Garrick Duhaney, 1999, 115). The study by Banerji and Dailey supports inclusion as beneficial for students with disabilities. The research on benefits for students without disabilities is less common and more inconclusive. According to conclusions made by Salend and Duhaney in 1999, A co-taught, inclusive classroom does not interfere with the academic performance of students without disabilities with respect to the amount of allocated and engaged instructional time, the rate of interruptions to planned activities, and the students achievement test scores and report card grades. (p.120) Their findings did not find that co-teaching impacted students without disabilities negatively; but at the same rate, the findings did not indicate that the academic performance of students without disabilities is positively impacted either. Similar to the above research, Katz and Mirenda of the University of British Columbia found that students without disabilities were not negatively impacted by

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All participating in inclusive, co-taught settings. Katz and Mirenda looked at three variablesaffected the time allocated for instruction, the actual time used for instruction, and students engaged time. Classrooms with and without students with disabilities were compared on all three variables. Katz and Mirenda concluded that There were no differences in the percentage of time typical students were engaged in instruction across the two classroom types. This was a significant finding, as it demonstrated that the presence of students with severe disabilities, even those with challenging behaviors, did not negatively impact the amount of engaged time for typical learners. (2002, p. 18) This action research is aligned with the findings of the above studies co-taught, inclusive classes do not negatively impact students without disabilities. The one inconclusive in the studies cited above is the documented benefits or positive impacts of co-taught, inclusive classrooms for students without disabilities. Data Collection/Analysis The district has a mandated unit pre and post assessment requirement for all language arts courses third through ninth grade. The pre and post assessment are evaluative measures for the unit priority standards that are derived from the Iowa Core. For the basis of this study, the pre and post assessment scores were collected for units three and four of the eighth grade curriculum. Data was collected from the co-taught language arts course as well as a non-co-taught section of language arts. In order to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of a co-taught language arts setting, the growth and percent of students that made proficiency from pre to post were analyzed. The pre

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All assessment non-proficiency percentage and number of students was collected. For the post assessment, the growth and proficiency percentage was collected. Proficiency on unit assessments is defined by Southeast Polk Community School District as students achieving 80% or higher on the assessment. The students in both sections of the course were provided with the same instructional materials, concepts, and methods of delivery throughout the units. In addition to the pre and post assessment scores being collected and analyzed; students in the co-taught setting were given a four question survey regarding their perceptions of their learning in the co-taught setting. The survey was administered to a sampling of ten students without disability. Students completed the survey through Google forms. The survey included the following questions for students to answer: 1) Teachers use instructional time effectively to work with all students. 2) Working with two teachers in this classroom has helped your learning of English-Language Arts. 3) My instructional needs are met in this classroom by one or both teachers on a daily basis. 4) The classroom instruction provides challenging, engaging educational opportunities. Survey response options included: 5-strongly agree, 4-agree, 3-neutral, 2-disagree, and 1-strongly disagree. The responses were anonymous and tabulated within the Google forms program.

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All Results The quantitative data collected and analyzed show that students in the co-taught, inclusive language arts course had a greater rate of growth from pre to post assessment on both the unit 3 and unit 4 assessments. The non-proficiency categories are depicted by the Core (yellow), Classroom Support (orange), and Intensive Core (red)these categories are totaled to reach the non-proficiency percentage. Proficiency will be depicted as proficient (green) or advanced (blue). The unit 3 pre-assessment shows that 31 students or 100% of students in the cotaught course were non-proficient. In the non-co-taught section, 20 students or 74% were non-proficient. Unit 3 pre-assessment: Co-taught Setting

Unit 3 pre-assessment: Non-co-taught Setting

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All After six weeks of instruction on the curricular standards, the unit 3 postassessment was administered. In the co-taught setting, twelve students (38%) remained non-proficient on the unit 3 concepts. The percentage of growth between the pre and post assessment was 62% as 19 students shifted from the non-proficiency category into the proficient category. In the non-co-taught setting, seven students (26%) remained non-proficient on the unit 3 concepts. The percentage of growth between the pre and post assessment was 48% as 13 students shifted from the non-proficiency category into proficiency. The students with and without disability made growth and in the co-taught setting all students without disability scored in the proficient to advanced categories on unit 3 standards. Unit 3 Post-Assessment: Co-taught Setting

Unit 3 Post-Assessment: Non-co-taught Setting

The unit 4 pre and post assessments were evaluated in the same manner as unit 3. The proficiency and non-proficiency bands remain the same (depicted by the color

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All coordinated categories). On the unit 4 pre assessment, 27 students (92%) in the cotaught language arts setting were non-proficient. In the non-co-taught setting, 19 students (73%) tested in the non-proficient range. Unit 4 Pre-Assessment: Co-Taught Setting

Unit 4 Pre-Assessment: Non-co-taught Setting

The unit material and standards were taught over the course of six weeks prior to the unit 4 post assessment being administered. The results of unit 4 post assessments showed growth for both type of educational settings. In the co-taught setting, 10 students (33%) remained non-proficient on unit 4 standards. The rate of growth from pre to post was a positive gain of 17 students (59%) in the co-taught setting. On the unit 4 post assessment in the non-co-taught setting, 9 students (33%) remained non-

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All proficient on unit 4 standards. The rate of growth from pre to post was a positive gain of 10 students (40%) in the non-co-taught setting. Unit 4 Post-Assessment: Co-Taught Setting

10

Unit 4 Post-Assessment: Non-co-taught Setting

Along with the quantitative data collected from the pre and post assessments, students perceptions of their learning in a co-taught setting were collected. Ten students participated in the survey. All of the students that participated in the survey had a favorable perception of a co-taught setting as a learning environment. Survey response options included: 5-strongly agree, 4-agree, 3-neutral, 2-disagree, and 1strongly disagree. The students agreed when asked about the instructional time allotted being used effectively to work with all students. Students were also in agreement that their learning had been enhanced by having access to two teachers in the classroom setting.

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All Student Survey Responses

1) Teachers use instructional time effectively to work with all students.

11

2) Working with two teachers in this classroom has helped your learning of EnglishLanguage Arts.

3) My instructional needs are met in this classroom by one or both teachers on a daily basis.

4) The classroom instruction provides challenging, engaging educational opportunities.

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All Conclusions and Recommendations While students in the non-co-taught setting have a higher number of overall students proficient, it can be established that students in the co-taught setting are making substantial growth and students without disabilities are not being negatively impacted as these students are able to reach proficiency on the standards for each curricular unit. It should also be noted that while the students in the non-co-taught courses have a higher rate of students in the proficiency categorynone of the students in that setting have an IEP or 504 plan that would outline a diagnosed learning disability. Through this study, it can be concluded that students without disability in a cotaught setting can experience positive benefits. This conclusion stems from the student perceptions survey. Students without disability were in favor of having access to two teachers in the classroom and felt that it improved their learning. Student perceptions also rebuked the common notion that co-taught classes are not as rigorous or challenging for students without disability. It would be recommended that co-taught courses remain implemented within Southeast Polk Junior High. The co-taught setting is beneficial for students with and without disability when it is implemented correctly. Southeast Polk Junior High has established common collaborative time for all teachers that are involved in the co taught setting; which should be viewed as an integral part of the success of this implementation. The building administration also strategically selected general education and special education teachers that they felt would be able to build a positive, effective collaborative partnership. The administration provided opportunities for these

12

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All teachers to learn about one another through personality surveys and analysis during the spring prior to the partnership being implemented. While the data collected for this study did not measure the effect of the teacher relationship with the co-teacher, it would be recommended that further study be placed in this area. Currently, this building only has co-taught math and language arts. It would be the recommendation of this study that co-taught courses be expanded into the science and social studies facets of the curriculum. This study will remain ongoing for the remainder of the 2012-2013 academic year as the data collection for the final units is ongoing. At the conclusion of the academic year, all unit data will be compared to establish further conclusions and recommendations for other subject areas within the building.

13

Co-Taught Classrooms: Benefits for All References Katz, J., & Mirenda, P. (2002). Including Students with Developmental Disabilities in General Education Classrooms: Educational Benefits. International Journal of Special Education, 17(2), 14-24. Retrieved from http://www.internationaljournalofspecialeducation.com Salend, S. J., & Garrick Duhaney, L. M. (1999). The Impact of Inclusion on Students With and Without Disabilities and Their Educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20(2), 114-126.

14