References

Bennett, D., & Fisch, A. (2013). Infusing Coteaching Into the General Education Field
Experience. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 18-37.

Bennett & Fischs explain the study was done on co-teaching in an inclusive setting
with students with and without disabilities, using secondary level content areas of
English, Math, and Social Science. This study included sixteen participants, whom
did had not had much previous training with co-teaching. The data collection was
done both quantitatively and qualitatively. The findings identified the model of one
teach, one assist as being unproductive and ineffective. It also indicated that
challenges were interpersonal communication and instructional presentation. Some
problems included the special education teacher being viewed as an assistant, as well
as only focusing on and assisting the students with disabilities. Problems around the
general education teacher were noted to be taking the primary role in instruction and
discipline. Overall, the study concluded that teacher perspectives and knowledge of
co-teaching, along with flexibility and communication could make a large impact on
the effectiveness of co-teaching.

Fenty, N., & McDuffie-Landrum, K. (2011). Collaboration through Co-teaching. Kentucky

English Bulletin, 60(2), 21-26.

Fenty and McDuffie-Landrum conducted a study with the purpose to examine how
teachers collaborate when co-teaching in the same class and to determine the benefits

and barriers in the collaboration. This study included three different co-taught
classrooms, two in English, and one in math. The participants were from varied level
including elementary, middle, and high school. They also varied from rural to urban
settings. The data was collected using qualitative methods through interviews and
observations. Observations showed that the general education teachers were most
likely to have the lead role, as responsibilities were not equally shared. In addition,
the interviews showed that the special education and general education teachers
identified planning time and lack of training as a barrier. However, there were
differing opinions on the barrier noting that special education teachers had difficulty
with having to co-teach with multiple teachers, as well as sharing classroom
responsibilities and team teaching. Fenty and McDuffie-Landrum also reported on
ways to enhance common planning time by using an agenda to stay on track, choosing
the co-teaching model to be implemented with each lesson, as well as utilizing
technology as a form of communication.

Kurth, J. (2013). A Unit-Based Approach to Adaptations in Inclusive Classrooms.

Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(2), 34-42.

Kurth addresses research on adaptations that are needed in a general education

setting to properly address the need of special education student in an inclusive
setting. She noted that adaptations are accommodations and modification that
are made to the curriculum or assignments in a variety of ways ranging from

general to specific. Universal design is identified as one framework that is

often used. There are six steps that must be taken to ensure this is effective
including: identify student needs, evaluating classroom routines, defining
student outcomes, gathering material needed, implement the adaptations, and
evaluating them. This is important because many teachers struggle with what
to do to help these students. This includes examples and pictures of how to
adapt assignments for multiple students, and it also includes detailed sections
on how to add these into lesson plans.

Mackey, M. (2014). Inclusive Education in the United States: Middle School General Education
Teachers' Approaches to Inclusion. International Journal of Instruction, 7(2), 5-20.

Mackey describes a study that was done to examine how three teachers (chosen
through purposive sampling) included students with disabilities in their classroom
focusing on middle school, grades 6 through 8 in the content areas of science, math,
and social studies. The purpose was to identify themes in the structure of inclusion
and the areas of: teacher attitudes, planning time, co-teaching collaboration and
support, and differentiated instruction strategies.

Data was collected using qualitative techniques including interviews, field note,
informal conversations, and observations. The results showed that there was little
time to collaborate and plan, there were varying amounts of supports such as: some
teachers did not have student IEPs, some teacher received in class support while

others didn't etc. It was determined that despite these inconsistencies, these teachers
were able to differentiate their instruction and effectively include students with
disabilities in their classes.

Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., Graetz, J., Norland, J., Gardizi, W., & McDuffie, K. (2005). Case
Studies in Co-teaching in Content Areas: Successes, Failures, and Challenges.
Intervention in School & Clinic, 40(5), 260-270.
doi:10.1177/10534512050400050201

This article discusses previous findings of case studies that were done on co-teaching
in content specific areas in upper elementary, middle school, and high school classes.
The purpose was to determine what factors make co-teaching most effective and if it
promotes student progress. The themes identified were cooperation and teacher
relationships, different styles of teaching and using strengths as motivators, time
allotted for collaboration, effective skills for instruction (expertise in the content
areas), adaptations made for students needs and differentiated instruction strategies
used.

Data was collected using a mixed method of both qualitative and quantitative by using
interviews, field notes, videotaped classes, parent, student, and teacher surveys, as
well as collecting students class work and assessments. The results showed that
collaboration time is a key component to an effective co-teaching team. This resulted
in positive teacher interactions and shared responsibilities. Once this was established,

it was determined that the students performed better than the co-teachers that did not
have not ample amount of time to plan and the relationships were not as cooperative.
Another challenge that was identified was that many special education teacher do not
have expertise with the specific content areas such as: high school math, which also
had a negative impact on student learning and co-teaching as well. This is important
because all of these factors play a major role in ensuring co-teaching is effective for
the teachers and for students growth.

Schmidt, S., & Venet, M. (2012). Principals Facing Inclusive Schooling or Integration. Canadian
Journal of Education, 35(1), 217-238.

Schmidt and Venet base this article on a research project that was done with focus on
how the Principal perceptions and views impact the inclusion of students with
disabilities in the general education setting Principals set the tone for their schools.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Principals views on inclusion with the
educational theories and hypotheses, as well as data that was previously collected.
Data was collected qualitatively through interviews and questionnaires. The results
indicated that there are several factors that influence inclusive programs: the type of
school, school environment, culture of the school, and Administrative influence based
on their own philosophies. It was determined that this is very complex and requires
more investigation and analysis.

Simmons, R., & Magiera, K. (2007). Evaluation of co-teaching in Three High Schools within One

School District. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus;, 3(3), 1-11.

Simmons and Magiera conduct this research study to determine if teachers were truly
co-teaching. This was done in three schools, within one school district. The purpose
of this study was to identify what co-planning looked like at the secondary level and
how the teachers were co-planning to make instructional decisions. The data
collection method used was qualitative by interviews, surveys, and classroom
observations. The data identified themes indicating barriers in the areas of shared
roles and responsibilities, co-planning time to be able to effectively identify and
address students diverse learning needs, accommodations and modifications needs.
One school was identified as having more effective co-teaching due to having
personal and professional compatibility among the co-teachers, equality of the
teaching roles and responsibilities, as well as teacher remaining a pair over several
year, as these teachers have co-taught with each other for over three years.

Tkachyk, R. (2013). Questioning Secondary Inclusive Education: Are Inclusive Classrooms

Always Best for Students? Interchange, (44), 15-24. doi:10.1007/s10780-013-9193-z

Tkachyk, the author and researcher of this article discusses multiple topics/areas that
are taken into consideration when to comes to inclusive education for students with
special needs. Tkachyk initially took the stance that all students should be included in
the general education setting, but later came to realize that this may not be the best fit
for everyone. She discussed the scores of the cognitive subtests and difficulties and
differences based on the disability.

Tkachyk stated that there are several issues around inclusion which include the
following: there is no clear outline of what inclusion/co-teaching should entail, lack
of experience and knowledge of to differentiate instruction, especially as the students
age increase to more content specific areas, isolation and less socialization among
disabled and non disabled peers due to bullying, and negative teacher attitudes toward
inclusion (particularly at the secondary level) due to mandated testing. Surveys were
conducted that included teachers and parents. It was determined that based on these
findings, the majority of both of these groups felt that the teachers were unprepared
for these students, due to not knowing enough about their disability or how to properly
service them. Their schools did not provide them with enough support personnel for
helping with modifications within the curriculum. It was also determined that students
achieved more in classes that we co-taught. Therefore, this is indicated that inclusion
if carefully planned and with enough support, can be successful and beneficial for
students.

Tzivinikou, S. (2015). COLLABORATION BETWEEN GENERL AND SPECIAL EDUCATION

TEACHERS: DEVELOPING CO-TEACHING SKILLS IN HETEROGENEOUS
CLASSES. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 26, 108-119.

Tzivinikou discusses a study that was conducted regarding co-teaching. The study
involves 15 sets of co-teachers who were trained with the five co-teaching strategies.
The purpose of this was to see if cooperation among the pair would increase as well as

result in more effective teaching. The data was collected quantitatively through
evaluation rubrics that were completed by each teacher before and after. The results
indicated that at the end of the study, teachers were able to work cooperatively and
provide more effective instruction/education for the students. It was determined that
although the one teach, one support approach was most simple, the parallel teaching
and team teaching were the most popular and effective. This is important because
inclusion usually involves co-teaching and co-teaching cannot be effective if the
teachers are not working together towards the best interest of the students.

Walther-Thomas, C. (1997). Co-Teaching Experiences: The Benefits And Problems That Teachers
And Principals Report Over Time. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 395-407.

Walther-Thomas describes a study that was conducted over a three-year period. This
was done primarily in elementary schools, but included several middles school. The
methods used were interviews, informal conversations, and observations. The
purpose of this was to investigate the benefits and challenges of the co-teaching
models that were currently being implemented, in the early stages of inclusion. The
results of this study indicated consistent benefits and challenges across all participants
and schools. Benefits were identified as student growth in the areas of academics,
social skills, self-confidence, and more time for teacher support. Teacher benefits
were identified as professional growth, support, and increased collaboration with
faculty. There were also challenges that persistently grew worse over time. These
included scheduled planning time, student scheduling, caseload concerns,

administrative support, and staff training opportunities. Overall, the factor deemed to
be the one component of the most successful schools, was teacher commitment to
overcome these challenges.