CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 1

Co-teaching in Humanities to Enhance EAL Learning

Marian Bradshaw

EDFN 508: Introduction to Educational Research

The College of New Jersey

July 8, 2015

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 2 Co-teaching in Humanities to Enhance EAL Learning

For the past seven years, I have worked as a humanities teacher four years as a seventh

grade humanities teacher and three years as a sixth grade humanities teacher at Shanghai

American School Pudong, China (SAS). In our school, humanities, is a combination of the

traditional social studies and language art classes; students study history, writing, reading, and

grammar in this class. Seventh grade humanities is organized thematically by the following units:

Identity, Society, and Change. My colleagues and I developed this curriculum three years ago

and continue to modify and make improvements to it every year. However, in August, I will

begin teaching English as a Second Language (EAL) to seventh grade students, both pull-out and

push-in. In order to fully comprehend the action research I intend to carry out, a review of the

current EAL program at SAS is important.

Currently, there are three EAL teachers at the middle school, one for each grade level.

Each teacher has both pull-out and push-in students they are responsible for. At SAS, pull-out

students get an extra support class for 75 minutes every other day. Students take this pull-out

class instead of a foreign language class. In addition, the EAL teacher pushes into her/his

students core classes (math, science, and humanities), though the majority of the time is spent in

the humanities class, as it is where the most help is needed.

Push-in students, on the other hand, only get support when their EAL teacher comes into

their core class. However, push-in students are also encouraged, though not required, to send

their work, particularly writing, to their EAL teacher for review and feedback. In addition, their

elective class during the first quarter is with their EAL teacher (normally, each student in middle

school can choose their elective, but this EAL elective is not a choice; it is a requirement). This

elective is an opportunity for the EAL teacher to get to know his/her charges on a personal level

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 3 their personality, their strengths/weaknesses, and their ability levels them as individuals. This

is done so that the EAL teacher is not a stranger to them.

The former EAL teacher, as far as I know, did not co-teach with any of the core teachers.

She went into classes, observed what was happening, assisted her students during individual and

group work, and may have viewed this as co-teaching. She stayed for duration of five to forty-

five minutes, depending on the activity and need. This is the structure I hope to modify so I can

co-teach with the humanities, and possibly the science, teachers.

In regards to my own experience with co-teaching, I have never done it formally, but

informally. When I taught sixth grade humanities from 2008-2010, the EAL teacher that was

assigned to the sixth grade team had been the former humanities teacher. Therefore, she was very

informed and knowledgeable about the curriculum, though new changes had been implemented.

She sat down with my teaching partner, the other humanities teacher, and me every week when

we did our planning for the upcoming week. As a result, she knew all the lessons and activities

we would be doing during that week. During the week, she would come into my classroom,

observe my class, and help out her EAL students, and other students, during individual and group

work. However, at times when I was giving instructions or lecturing about a certain teaching

point, I would ask her to take on the subject or her approach to a subject. For instance, while

teaching about showing v. telling in writing, I might have said, Mrs. C., how would you make

this telling statement come alive, move from a telling statement to a showing statement? She

would then give her approach to do so. This is how we operated for the two years she was the

sixth grade EAL teacher.

This year I operated in a similar fashion with the seventh grade EAL teacher, though she

did not sit down and plan with the seventh grade humanities team on a weekly basis (she was not

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 4 able to come to our weekly meetings because her pull-out class was scheduled at the same time

as our planning period, an issue I am also concerned about for my co-teaching aspirations).

However, she was aware of the topics and activities we were doing since her son was also in my

class. At times, she would also inform me what my teacher partner, who also had her EAL

students, was doing with his class since she was observing and working in both our classes. This

was very valuable information for me. Though we planned the same content, assignments, and

assessments and had similar activities, our approaches and activities would sometimes be

different as we are individuals and expect to teach differently.

Though both of my colleagues were great at on-the-spot instruction, I aspire to do at least

one planned co-teaching lesson a week, with the humanities teacher during the school year and

then possibly add the science teachers once I become comfortable being a co-teacher. Since I am

transferring from Humanities 7 to EAL 7, I know the content of the curriculum very well and

will be able to instruct my EAL students in the content, assignments, assessments, and activities

being done in their humanities classes. However, as happens naturally every year, there will be

changes as there is a new humanities teacher on the team and the program is always developing

and improving. Hence, co-teaching with the humanities team will be a natural fit.

In addition, when my principal informed me that I would be moving from Humanities 7

to EAL 7, she charged me with the task of bringing more strategies to teach EAL students to the

core teachers. Therefore, I thought that learning more about co-teaching models would be one

way I could fulfill this directive while being an integral part of the academic lives of my EAL

students. My action research question in the end is How can I use co-teaching in humanities to

enhance the learning experiences of my EAL students?

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 5 Literature review

Before researching about co-teaching (also called team teaching, collaborative teaching,

or cooperative teaching), I didnt know there were so many models. I thought co-teaching

involved two teachers up at the front of a classroom teaching together, engaged in a back-and-

forth exchange. Upon reading the articles, I found out that there are many different co-teaching

models.

Throughout the literature, co-teaching is defined as two equal professionals

collaboratively working together to deliver instruction to a diverse group of students. In the past,

the definition applied to teachers in general education, but has since been expanded to include

special education and English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers (Dove & Honigsfeld, 2010;

Bryant Davis, Dieker, Pearl, & Kirkpatrick, 2012). Cook and Friend first defined the term in

1995 (Bryant Davis et al., 2012). Walter-Thomass (1997) definition also includes the words

active, ongoing classroom involvement for one to two hours per day (p. 396). Each model

includes different degrees of teacher involvement, depending on the model used. In the modern

co-teaching model, ESL students and students with disabilities are integrated into the general

education classes instead of being removed to their own separate classes, which lead to

disconnected instruction experience, lack of increased achievement, and no sense of

belonging (Dove & Honigsfeld, 2010, p. 9). In an effective co-teaching class, there is no my

students or your students but our students as there is a shared responsibility for the

emotional, academic, and social growth of all students.

The articles I reviewed were a summary article by Dove and Honigsfeld (2010), which

described seven co-teaching models and explored the possibilities of collaboration between

general education teachers and specialist teachers using vignettes. The second article by Walter-

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 6 Thomas (1997) described a naturalistic inquiry method using classroom observations, semi-

structured individual interviews, school-developed documents, and informal conversations. The

third article by Bryant Davis et al. (2012) used a content analysis approach to evaluate 155

lesson plans, which were further broken down into 755 days of plans from three cohorts of

middle school co-taught teams.

Collaborative models

The co-teaching models outlined by Bryant Davis (2012) and Dove and Honigsfeld

(2010) included the following: one lead, one support (one teacher guides the lesson while the

other teacher supports by redirecting, coaching, or assessing students); alternative (dividing the

class into one large group and one small group, which was retaught, pre-taught, or given

reinforcement in some content); station, also called multiple-group (using stations to instruct

content that has been divided); parallel (dividing the class into two smaller groups and teaching

the same content); and team teaching (both teachers sharing the instructional stage) (Bryant

Davis, 2012, p. 213, 215-216).

Benefits of co-teaching

All three articles discussed the benefits of co-teaching. Some of these benefits included

better alignment of the curriculum, increased self-confidence and self-esteem of students,

improved academic success of students, improved social skills, improved classroom

communities and increased professional satisfaction by teachers. However, Walter-Thomas

(1997) three-year study of eighteen elementary and seven middle schools pointed out the benefits

to all the stakeholders: students with disabilities, general education students, and the teachers of

these students in much detail.

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 7 In terms of alignment, Bryant Davis team analysis of the 755 lesson plans they reviewed

revealed that the general education and special education teachers were aligned 65% of the time

(2102). Though not conclusive, this quantitative data is strong empirical evidence that co-

teaching works, at least on paper. A critique of this study is that the analysis was solely focused

on lesson plans. Planning a lesson together is one thing, but, as most experienced teachers know,

lesson plans are often modified on the spot due to student engagement, teachable moments that

pop up, or other interruptions that arise.

Students, especially low-achieving students, who are in co-taught classrooms had better

academic success because they were getting more individualized attention from the teachers; this

resulted in better academic performance. Naturally, this would lead to better self-confidence and

better self-esteem in the students. It was not surprising to find that many participants reported

that their low-achieving students did better in co-taught classrooms than they did in more

traditional settings (Walter-Thomas, 1997, p. 400).

Other benefits to both students with disabilities and general education students were

improved social skills. This fell into the behaviors of fewer fights and verbal disagreements,

less name-calling, better problem solving, overt acts of kindness, better material sharing, fewer

classroom cliques, and more cooperation during group work assignments (Walter-Thomas,

1997, p. 401). As a result, classrooms felt more like inclusive family-like settings where

people cared about one another.

As for teachers, they generally felt more professional satisfaction as their students were

achieving at higher levels than before and that their efforts were paying off (Walter-Thomas,

1997, p. 401). Moreover, they noted that they had never worked harder, but felt more satisfied

with their achievements. Finally, they were sharing and collaborating more, both formally and

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 8 informally, which also lead to greater professional satisfaction (Walter-Thomas, 1997, p. 401-

402).

Persistent problems

There were a number of persistent problems that were pointed out in the studies, among

which included sufficient planning time, communication issues, and lack of administrative

support and staff development. In all of the articles, a consistent theme was insufficient planning

time. Dove & Honigsfeld (2010) pointed out that administrators need to provide the time for

teachers to have professional conversations with their colleagues on an ongoing basis (p. 11).

Otherwise, if enough time is not allotted to planning, much of it becomes informal in the

hallway, in the cafeteria, and on the fly. Common planning time should be a routine, scheduled

part of the school day.

Bryant Davis referenced a report by Scruggs and colleagues (2007) of a fear that special

education teachers [and ESL teachers] were being relegated to that of assistant, p. (220) a point

my interviewee also cautioned against (see First hand account section). This dynamic would

create an unequal relationship that would negatively affect the working relationship of the

teacher-partners and would often lead to a pair not working together in the future.

In addition, communication between the co-teachers is crucial: co-teaching demands the

identification of individual teacher roles and responsibilities as well as firm agreement on the

decision-making process for instruction, student behavior, communication with students and

their parents, and evaluation of student progress. Additionally, each co-teaching member must

possess a common view of co-teaching models and knowledge of effective ways to execute

selected model (Dove & Honigsfeld, 2010, p. 10). Therefore, it is essential that the co-teachers

are communicating on a regular basis, both inside and outside of the classroom.

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 9 Finally, administrative support to organize and arrange resources for collaboration is vital

to the success of the implementation of a co-teaching program. By putting forth this effort, the

administrator is demonstrating a commitment to this paradigm shift. Dove & Honigsfeld (2010)

also referenced reviews by Darling-Hammond and Richardson (2009) who reviewed 20 years of

research to support effective teacher learning, one of which was professional development.

Dove and Honigsfelds (2010) work also confirmed professional development that is ongoing,

subject specific, and collaborative allows teachers to practice their new skills and provide a

mechanism to debrief and gather new information (p. 12).

First hand account

I had the opportunity to interview a teacher who had engaged in co-teaching at her

school. The interviewee is a middle and high school ESL teacher who was involved in three

instances of co-teaching. These were the questions I asked her:

1. What experience did you have with co-teaching? What classes? And how many students?

2. What kind of co-teaching did you do? one lead, one support, etc. 3. How much did you plan beforehand? 4. How often did you co-teach? 5. What were the shortcomings or difficulties of co-teaching? 6. What recommendations do you have for me as I embark on co-teaching?

The first instance she co-taught was two years ago when she pushed into a humanities

class (I put co-taught in parenthesis because essentially the situation she described was not co-

teaching). My interviewees teacher-partner was often unprepared or prepared his lessons at the

last minute, which left her frequently in the position of being an observer at the back of the room

and an unequal partner. The co-planning was improvised on the spot. Therefore, she mostly

supported her students whenever and wherever she could. She reported that she did not have a

good relationship with this teacher.

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 10 The second instance when she co-taught was in a mixed ESL, academic support, and

regular education grade 7 English class. Since she was teaching the same English 7 class as her

teacher-partner, she co-planned with her on a weekly basis, though the teaching partner did most

of the planning and she used to the same lesson. They followed this dynamic because her

teacher-partner was more experienced at teaching English than she was; the interviewee also had

four preps and this arrangement helped her out workload. The teaching model they followed was

one lead, one support.

Last year, the interviewed teacher co-taught a Humanities 6 class with another colleague.

The circumstances of this arose as the parent community had little or no confidence in the

teacher who had replaced the original Humanities 6 teacher, who had to leave the school due to

personal reasons. The principal asked the interviewee to co-teach with the replacement teacher

to assuage the feelings of the parents. They worked well together, co-teaching 2-3 days a week,

and equally shared in the duties and responsibilities of helping their students. They could provide

more individualized attention to their students, as there were two teachers in the room. They

were also able to give better feedback to their students and could focus on language arts

development, like the Six Traits of Writing. Most times they shared the teaching responsibilities

by having one teacher writing on the board while the other instructed the class. The model they

followed was team teaching.

The interviewee made the following recommendations about co-teaching: for an effective

co-teaching program to be work in a school, it has to be implemented properly. First of all, the

administration has to inform the faculty if a paradigm shift is being made from individual

teaching to co-teaching, with whom and how; this was also noted out by Walter-Thomas (1997)

in her article. If the staff is not informed of changes, it can lead to a lot of unpleasant surprises on

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 11 the part of one, or both, of the teachers. Secondly, its important to discuss the roles each teacher

will play during the co-teaching lesson. Third, ensure that there is parity between the two

teachers. Otherwise, a hierarchical relationship will be established that might be hard, if not

impossible, to change. The ESL teacher has to assert himself/herself as an equal, contributing

partner in the relationship.

The overall sentiment I got from doing the literature review and conducting the interview

is that co-teaching is a relatively new teaching technique fraught with difficulties, but one that

holds a lot of promise.

Methods

Setting

The setting for my action research project will be in the middle school of an independent

school in Shanghai, China the Shanghai American School (SAS), Pudong campus. SAS is a

coeducational, preparatory school with a population of about 3,200 students spread out over two

campuses. The make up of the student body is comprised of students from about 40 nations.

The curriculum is American-based and includes AP and IB Diploma offerings. There is a large

ESL population primarily Chinese-Americans and Koreans. As I begin teaching EAL students in

August 2015, the teacher research project will be invaluable to me to a paradigm shift from an

independent humanities classroom teacher to an ESL teacher-partner with the humanities

teachers.

Participants

The participants in this qualitative teacher research project will be primarily my seventh

grade pull-out EAL students. In addition, my push-in EAL students and general education

students will also be directly included as they will be instructed during the co-teaching lessons in

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 12 their humanities class. Most of these EAL students are Chinese-American or Korean nationals,

with a smattering of other nationalities. I have purposefully chosen these students because they

are the ones I will be working with most closely during the school year.

Currently, I do not know if one, two, or all three of the humanities teachers will have

EAL students in his/her class (usually each humanities teacher has 2-5 EAL students in each of

his/her classes). Last year, only two of the four humanities teachers, myself included, had EAL

students. Therefore, I may be co-teaching with one, two, or maybe all three of the humanities

teachers. My co-teaching possibilities are also dependent on whether or not these teachers are

receptive to co-teaching. I have worked, planned, and collaborated with two of the three

humanities teachers, since I worked with them during the last school year; I think they will be

receptive to co-teaching with me based on my past collaborative experiences with them. I have

not worked with the newest humanities teacher and will have to build a relationship with her

before I can introduce the idea of co-teaching to her.

Data collection

The way I will be collecting data for this research project is by the traditional

triangulation instruments in a qualitative study: interview, observation, and documents.

Interview. The first logical place to start with my data gathering is with my science

colleagues, James and Kevin, both of whom co-teach Science 7 at the middle school level. From

what I have observed casually when I have walked past their rooms and have seen them planning

together, they seem to have a very amicable working relationship. I want to delve into why their

partnership seems to be working. From this interview, I hope to get a personal glimpse as to how

co-teaching works and what the characteristics of a positive co-teaching relationship is.

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 13 The other possibility for an interview is another science team in the middle school, the

science 6 team. These teachers, like the humanities team I was a part of, have to give the same

assessments to their students; therefore, they do a majority of their planning together. It is not

mandated by the school that teachers co-teach, but they must give the same assessments, which

has lead to significant planning together, but not necessarily co-teaching.

The questions I will ask the teacher-partners are contained in Appendix A.

Observations

Co-teachers. After interviewing these science colleagues, I will observe them at work,

co-teaching their science classes. This will be an opportunity for me to see them in action: how

co-teaching works logistically, how they share the responsibilities, what model they employ,

how students respond to the lesson, and observe what the students do and say during the lesson.

I intend to observe them at least four times in September and October before I venture to do it

with my humanities colleagues. I will use the observation chart I created in Appendix B.

Video observations of self: When I co-teach a lesson with one of my humanities

colleagues, I will video tape it and review it afterwards, using the same observation chart that I

will use when I observe my science colleagues (see Appendix B). I will also keep a journal about

the experience in my e-journal (see Appendix D). From this self-study, I hope to gain an

understanding of how I operate as a co-teacher. I intend to review the videotape within one day

of its recording.

Documents

Lesson plans: I will create lesson plans with my co-teacher before the intended lessons.

These lessons will be detailed as to the objective of the class, the materials being used, the co-

teaching model being utilized, the role of each teacher during the lesson, the content to be

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 14 covered, and the activities to be completed during the lesson. The lesson plan needs to be

thorough and detailed to allow little room for disagreement or confusion as to who is doing what.

This does not mean that it is inflexible as good teaching is based on flexibility and modification.

Teachers have to make on-the-spot judgments that are in the best interest of the students.

Journaling: Throughout this action research project I will keep a journal of my findings,

observations, thoughts, and feedback from my teacher-partners. I think it is extremely important

to get feedback from my co-teacher in order to make adjustments and improvements for

subsequent lessons. I will also place an electronic copy of the lesson in the e-journal, which will

be kept in the web-based application, Evernote. At the midway point of this action research

project (end of October 2015) and at the end of the study (December 2015), I will review the

entire journal to see what patterns arise.

Anticipated Timeline

I have created a timeline to ensure timely collection of data during this action research

project (see Appendix C).

Next Steps?

I expect this action research project to be one of discovery and invention since I have

never (formally) done this type of collaborative teaching before to this depth and magnitude.

Upon return to SAS in August, I will begin by talking to the primary stakeholders: the principal,

my seventh grade team and the humanities teachers. I intend to start small by conducting the

interviews with the science teams and what works for them. At this time it would be good to do a

needs assessment as suggested by Bryant David et al (2102). As stated on p. 212 of the article,

Teams were given the opportunity to complete a needs assessment to evaluate their current

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 15 efforts and to develop a plan of action to ensure more systematic support of co-teaching. This

suggestion goes along with the advice given by the teacher I interviewed.

Another crucial step I need to do at the beginning of this action research is to find critical

friends to support me as I begin practicing co-teaching. As Pine explains, it is important to

engage colleagues in a process of collaborative inquiry to advance the developing research

effort (Pine, 2009. p. 235). My science colleagues would be the two natural people to turn to

as they are creative and have relevant and personal insights into the study of my phenomena. In

addition, my humanities colleagues, James, Mark, and Hank would be the ones I would be

engaging the most time with as they will be the ones with whom I would be co-teaching with.

Other periphery members will be math teachers as they are also on my team. These seven

people will be the core of my critical friends who will help me to discuss and analyze the data

and outcomes of the study.

The barrier I anticipate that I will encounter is that some members of my team may be

resistant to co-teaching since they have not done it before. Some people might feel insecure or

threatened by my request to co-teach with them, especially using the team teaching model. In

that case, I will turn to those members who are more receptive and hope the resistant members

they will reverse their thinking as I share my findings with them. The last thing I want to do is to

make any of my colleagues uncomfortable with my presence in their classroom or to feel that

Im forcing a paradigm shift on them. I hope that sharing the knowledge I gain from this action

research will urge them to consider co-teaching as an option for themselves.

My ultimate goal, however, will be to work to the best of my abilities to make co-

teaching a fulfilling experience for my EAL students. In the end I hope to gain a fuller, more

comprehensive understanding of co-teaching that would best suit needs of the participating

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 16 teachers while furthering the academic growth of my EAL students. Finally, I hope that this

systemic, intentional inquiry of my practice will help me to become a better teacher for all

students who will be taught by or interact with me.

References Bryant Davis, K. E., Dieker, L., Pearl, C., & Kirkpatrick, R. M. (2012). Planning in the Middle: Co-Planning between General and Special Education. Journal Of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 22(3), 208-226. Dove, M., & Honigsfeld, A. (2010). ESL Coteaching and Collaboration: Opportunities to Develop Teacher Leadership and Enhance Student Learning. TESOL Journal, 1(1), 3-22. Pine, G.J. (2009). Teacher action research: Building knowledge communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Walther-Thomas, C. (1997). Co-Teaching Experiences: The Benefits and Problems that Teachers and Principals Report over Time. Journal Of Learning Disabilities, 30(4), 395-407.

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 17

Appendix A

Interview Questions

1. What experience have you had with co-teaching? What classes? And how many students?

2. What kind of co-teaching model did you follow? one lead, one support, etc.

3. How much do you plan beforehand?

4. How often do you co-teach?

5. What are the shortcomings or difficulties of co-teaching?

6. What are the benefits of co-teaching?

7. What recommendations do you have for me as I embark on co-teaching?

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 18 Appendix B

Observation Chart

Co-teaching model used: _______________________________

What am I seeing? What am I hearing? Running Commentary (thoughts and questions going through my mind)

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 19 Appendix C

Anticipated Timeline

August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015

*interview co-teaching science 7 partners *observe co-teaching science 7 teaching-partners (at least twice, if possible) *develop a teaching relationship with all humanities teachers *create a critical friends group

*observe co-teaching science 7 teaching-partners (at least three times) *continue to develop a teaching relationships with the humanities teachers *use the traditional form of co-teaching teaching used by the previous ESL teachers (one lead, one support) to assist my EAL students in their humanities class

*teach at least two lessons using the team teaching model; video tape and journal after each lesson *meet with my critical friends to discuss the progress and findings I have made to date (end of October)

*continue to co-teach with humanities teachers, at least once during the week; journal about it within one day *co-teach a lesson, if possible, with one of the science 7 teachers; videotape and journal within one day

*design a systematic approach to analyze the data *analyze the data gathered over the course of the study: interviews, observations, lesson plans, co-taught lessons, journaling determine any patterns that arise *write up my findings; share with my critical friends and my principal *determine next steps

CO-TEACHING IN HUMANITIES 20 Appendix D

Journaling Questions

1. How did the co-teaching lesson go? What worked? What can be improved?

2. Do I dominate the lesson delivery? I am too submissive? What can I do to improve this

condition?

3. In what ways were the students engaged while I delivered the lesson?

4. What can I do to improve my delivery and be an equal partner in the experience?

5. What feedback did my co-teaching partner give me? In what ways was it reliable and

valid? In what ways was it not?

These are some of the questions I anticipate I will be asking myself and reflecting upon when

I review the videotapes of the co-teaching lessons.