The Effectiveness of Co-Taught Classrooms: For Teachers and Students

Presented to the Department of Educational Leadership

and Postsecondary Education

University of Northern Iowa

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the

Master of Arts in Education

By

Ashley Reimer

West Waterloo High School

Waterloo, Iowa

April 20, 2016

Dr. Pace and Dr. Boody

Author Note: My name is Ashley Reimer. I am a high school special education teacher at West Waterloo

High School. For questions on this research please email me at reimera@waterlooschools.org

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 2

Introduction

This study was conducted at West Waterloo High School in Waterloo, Iowa between

February 2016 and April 2016. This high school currently serves approximately 1,650 students.

The population is quite diverse, with around 10% of the students (between 175-220 kids) entitled

to receive special education services from any given year. There are 17 special education

teachers working within the school currently, which is down from 20 last year. Each teacher

serves a roster of between nine and fourteen students (this number fluctuates throughout the year

as students are exited from services, leave the district, or enter the district).

On top of the roster students that each special education teacher serves, these teachers are

also responsible for a full teaching load. Many of the teachers are co-teachers all day long, while

some also teach level two, or self-contained special education classes, throughout their day. This

year, teachers are mostly in content-specific classes all day long, which is a new model West

Waterloo High School is trying. In other words, one special education teacher will move between

all world history classes to serve as a collaborative co-teacher in those classes, for example.

To put it into perspective for the reader, I have two examples of teachers from West. One

teacher, called Teacher 1 for this project, currently serve 13 students on her roster. Each of these

students is in collaborative classes mostly, with some being in level two classes a few times a

day. Additionally, Teacher 1 is a co-teacher in Algebra I Part I and Algebra I Part II classes all

day long. Teacher 1 works with four different co-teachers throughout the day and moves from

the third floor to the first floor, to the second floor, and back to the third floor between first and

eighth periods. This is typical for each special education teacher whose assignment is to

collaborate they work in the same content area all day, but they work with several teachers in
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 3

several rooms. It makes it difficult to forge relationships and feel at home in each classroom

setting.

Another teacher interviewed for this project, Teacher 2, works as a co-teacher in the

World History Department for most of the day. He works with three general education teachers,

all of whom have different teaching philosophies. Additionally, he teaches two level-two special

education world history classes. While it may seem like there is not a lot of prep work because of

all of the classes being in world history, each co-teacher teaches using a different style and

grades differently, so the work load adds up quickly.

All of this comes into play when looking at the effectiveness of inclusion, and more

specifically, the idea of co-taught settings. Are these environments really the most effective and

least restrictive environments for students with special needs? The teachers need to feel both

comfortable in the content and comfortable in the setting in order to provide the most effective

teaching. Additionally, the teachers need to have a reasonable amount of students to serve, as

well as the resources readily available to provide support to these students. Therefore, the

questions I am looking at more deeply are the following: Is full inclusion (co-taught classes) an

effective method at meeting the needs of students with IEPs? Is the current model of co-teaching

at West High School effective for teachers and students?

Background for Research Question

These two questions have been on my mind since the first month of my job. I was

constantly reflecting on whether or not we, as a special education department, were using best

practices and actually meeting the needs of our students with special needs. Now, four years

later, this question is still burned in my mind. On top of it, though, is something deeper. Now I
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 4

want to know if the entire model of these co-taught classes is the problem. Are these classes

setting both the teachers and the students up for failure? What can we be doing differently to

help these students not only feel successful in the classroom, but also improve their skills in the

areas of math, reading, writing, and/or employability skills? With all that is expected of a special

education teacher, it is beginning to feel like our entire department has become more focused on

checking off a task on our to-do list than actually doing what we came here for in the first place:

providing accommodations, modifications, re-teaching, or any other supports to students entitled

to special education services.

The most alarming piece of information that caught my eye in regards to the lack of

success many of the students with special needs are seeing, though, was the D and F list, a list

compiled at the last mid-term (February) of all students in the building who had Ds and Fs.

Teachers were expected to call the parents of all students on this list. According to both Teacher

1 and Teacher 2, in the classes they co-teach in daily, they each called all of the students who

were identified as special needs on the list. Teacher 1s list was rather large (over 30 kids). When

I heard this, it left me wondering if all of my fellow colleagues were experiencing these

similarities, so I asked.

For the most part, they were. This got me thinking again about why this is happening to

these specific students in this setting. In my eyes, it is clear that there is a flaw somewhere in the

system, thus a systemic problem, and I would like to lay out all of the information and identify

what it is and how it can be fixed, or at least how it can be addressed.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 5

Literature Review

Today, there is quite a bit of literature out on co-teaching models and why it is the best

thing for schools to use, but there is not as much literature surrounding the struggles teachers

face making it an effective model to use. I found a few pieces through Rod Library at the

University of Northern Iowa, however, and thoroughly enjoyed reviewing them. I will highlight

the three I gained the most knowledge and support from below.

The first piece of literature listed five steps to follow for effective implementation of co-

teaching within the classroom (Murwaski & Bernhardt, 2015). I enjoyed this because it was

rather similar to Fullans six secrets, but instead it geared it toward co-teaching specifically. It

listed such as things as partnering the right teachers and providing learning opportunities for the

teachers to try to improve. This periodical was packed full of helpful information for this topic.

The second piece of literature I reviewed was an e-book called Purposeful Co-teaching:

Real Cases and Effective Strategies. This book was full of chapters on how to teach differently

so students remember, are engaged, make connections, and become more independent. This book

also had an entire chapter dedicated to strategies to help co-teachers co-teach more effectively

and with less stress for themselves. This book noted that teachers often get worked up about little

things the other does, similar to couples, and they do not say anything. This book offers up the

power of being authentic and professional and the importance of communicating. If one never

speaks up about concerns, how will the other ever know to fix it? As the results of the survey I

administered become apparent further down, the ideas in this book really come to light.

The third piece of literature I reviewed was from an academic journal (Magiera &

Zigmond, 2005). The piece focused on whether or not the instructional experience offered
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 6

through co-teaching versus solo-teaching really differed for students with disabilities. This piece

was my favorite to review because the title was one of the very questions I wondered about when

my research began two months ago. This piece of literature opens up about the reauthorization of

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1997, which essentially stated that the

preferred placement for students with disabilities is in the general education setting. This piece

backed my theory that there is indeed a gap between what is supposed to be occurring in the

classroom with a second teacher present and what is actually happening. It also backs the idea

that more training is needed for both teachers (general education and special education) for co-

teaching to truly be effective. Above all else, time is needed. This coincides with what my own

research on the topic concluded.

Research Plan

When I started my research on this topic, I was simply going off of a theory I had

developed after listening to informal conversations in staff meetings and informal conversations

with teachers in everyday dealings. To get a more accurate read on the feelings of all co-teachers,

I decided to create an anonymous survey using Google Forms and send it to all general education

and special education teachers who are currently co-teaching at least one period of the day. All in

all, there were 38 individuals: 12 special education teachers, 22 general education teachers, and

four administrators/instructional coaches.

The first question on the survey was What is your role in the building? and the possible

choices were special education teacher or general education teacher. There were two

pathways the survey took and those depended on which role one identified as being their own. In

the end, though, the areas regarding roles and responsibilities were shared by both general
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 7

education teachers and special education teachers. I chose to have two pathways because I had

more questions specific only to special education teachers, so this was the only way to accurately

find this information.

The second step in my research process was to gather evidence on the topic of co-

teaching from scholarly sources. These were reviewed in the above section Literature Review.

I found this to be a crucial part of the process because inclusive teaching is the law, but many

people are not really sure on what the law is actually saying. This part of the research plan was a

necessity to the authenticity of the overall outcome.

Lastly, I interviewed four students on their stances regarding co-teaching. Since I was

well aware that many of them might not even realize that the second teacher in their classroom

was actually a teacher, I was very vague on what co-teaching actually is, hoping to get a clearer

view on what they thought it meant to be in a co-taught classroom.

Data Collection and Analysis

The information in Figure 1.1 below demonstrates the breakdown of roles of those who

answered the survey. Of the 38 people I sent the survey to, 21 people responded. As shown in

Figure 1.1 below, of those 21 responses, 57.1% were general education teachers and 38.1% were

special education teachers. The other category was either an administrator or an instructional

coach who answered the survey.

Figure 1.1
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 8

I was pleasantly surprised to see such a great response from the general education

teachers, and after careful review of their responses, it was clear to see that the current co-

teaching model used at West High is not a fan-favorite of the general education teachers. As

evidence for this, note Figures 2.1 and 2.2 below. Figure 2.1 is a culmination of responses from

general education teachers to the question What are some constraints to the current co-teaching

model at West High? Figure 2.2 is a culmination of responses from general education teachers

to the question What are some solutions you have to improve the co-teaching model at West

High?

Figure 2.1
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 9

Figure 2.2

At continued review of the survey results, it became clearer that evidence from both

general education and special education teachers supported the theory that no, the current co-

teaching model at West High is not effective for either teachers or students. For instance,

research supports the fact that teachers need time to collaborate together in order to have a more

effective system. Murawski and Bernhard (2015) suggest a common planning time, or even

investing in a sub or other teachers covering for co-teaching pairs once a week to allow them to

co-teach together if that is not possible. It does not take research to see the logic behind that,

however. In looking closer at the results of the survey, it became clear that co-teachers rarely, if
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 10

ever, plan together. In fact, of the 21 responses, 17 people stated that if they communicated about

planning, it occurred before/after class on the same day of instruction. To see this clearer, note

Figures 3.1 and 3.2 below. Figure 3.1 shows the responses of the general education teachers in

regards to planning and Figure 3.2 shows the responses of the special education teachers in

regards to planning.

Figure 3.1 Figure 3.2

Another piece of rather alarming data I pulled from the survey was in regards to how

many teachers work together in a given day. Figure 4.1 below demonstrates this breakdown. As

the research shows, having fewer teachers working together would be ideal for the most effective

classroom setting. Murawski and Bernhardt (2015) suggest starting with just one or two co-

teaching partners and staying within the same content area. As shown in Figure 4.1 below, 25%

of those who answered this survey co-teach with four different teachers throughout the day.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 11

Figure 4.1

The survey also asked both general education teachers and special education teachers

what they thought their roles were in the classroom. The answers said a lot about why there may

be a stigma in the world of co-teaching. The question asked on the survey read as follows: What

do you view as the role differentiation between you and your co-teacher(s)? In other words, what

are your responsibilities and what are their responsibilities? The responses from general

education teachers can be seen below in Figure 5.1, and the responses from the special education

teachers can be seen in Figure 5.2. As Conderman and Bresnahan state in their work, however,

often times teachers do not communicate these things between one another (p. 20). That is most

likely due to a lack of initiative from one or both teachers or feelings of awkwardness.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 12

Figure 5.1
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 13

Figure 5.2

While the information from the perspectives of the teachers could be easily summed up

saying that no, the current model of co-teaching at West High School does not help the students

as much as it is supposed to, the students had a slightly different opinion. I interviewed four

students that are in co-taught settings in at least three periods of their day. While four is not

enough to base a strong opinion off of, it is all I could get from willing participants during a busy

time of the year for all. Of the four students interviewed, two were freshmen and two were

sophomore; two were boys and two were girls; and two were identified as qualifying for special

education services and two were not qualified.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 14

They were each handed a short survey to answer using pencil and paper. The survey

asked what a co-teaching setting meant to them. Without being prodded a little by me, all of

them originally said, IDK or some version of that. After hinting slightly, most of them

understood that it meant there were two teachers in the room. What I gathered from them,

however, is that they did not realize that the second adult in their rooms was actually a teacher. I

was not surprised by this as I often get questions such as, When are you going to become a full

teacher? or Why dont you have a classroom if youre a teacher? It does not register with kids

that we, the special education teachers, are there to provide accommodations, extra supports,

help manage behavior, teach the content, and re-teach the content just the same as the general

education teacher.

When asked if having two teachers is helpful to these students, though, each replied with

some variation of yes, it was very helpful. Two students stated that it was nice to raise your hand

and have one teacher explain it quietly and individually walk through a problem or an

explanation. Another student said they felt more comfortable talking to one teacher over the

other, so it was nice to have two there. All in all, the feeling from the students was that they felt

more comfortable in a classroom with two teachers.

The research I found from one study in a middle school reiterated this claim. In this

study, the interactions among teachers and students were monitored in several co-taught classes

and several solo-taught classes. According to Magiera and Zigmond (2005) students in a co-

taught setting were engaged in individual instructional interactions 2.2 percent of the time. On

the other side of things, more than half of the classes that were solo-taught did not record any

individual instructional interactions during the study.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 15

While that is wonderful to hear, it does not necessarily answer the question of whether or

not those students who are identified as having special education needs are receiving adequate

supports in the current co-taught setting. While half of the special education teachers answered

that they felt they were providing the supports needed, half stated that they were not. This could

be due to a variation of students being served throughout the day in various classrooms. See

Figure 6.1 below to see the breakdown of students served in these settings.

Figure 6.1

Recommendations and Implications

The overall goal of this study was not to point out the flaws in the co-teaching model at

West High, but to see, from both the perspectives of the students and the teachers, if they felt the

model was working to adequately serve students who receive special education services. While

the students seem to feel supported (based only on the few I interviewed) the overwhelming

response from teachers was that something needed to change in order for them to feel like they

are doing their job to the best of their ability when it comes to support students in their endeavors

to be successful.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 16

Based on the responses I received from the teachers, I have compiled a list of the areas

needing to be reviewed within our current co-teaching model.

1. Teachers want to work with the same teachers over time. This helps build relationships and helps create
confidence in content.
2. Teachers want the same planning time so they can work together on the lesson and create accommodations
ahead of time together.
3. General education teachers feel that special education teachers often do not take initiative; special
education teachers often feel like they are stepping on toes when they do so. Professional development
needs to occur where teachers are able to see both perspectives of why it can be uncomfortable.
4. Teachers only want to work with a maximum of two different co-teachers. It makes it difficult to build
relationships otherwise.
5. Special education teachers and general education teachers do not have a clear understanding of what the
other does on a day-to-day basis. Professional development and time built into the schedule to
communicate these things will help co-teachers develop accurate, realistic, and achievable expectations of
roles and responsibilities.

Concluding Remarks

In conclusion, the evidence for this topic points in the direction that changes need to be

made to the current model of co-teaching at West High School. Overall, teachers request to have

input in the decision-making process behind who teaches with who because otherwise it can feel

like an arranged marriage. Additionally, teachers request to work with two teachers and no

more within the same content area for multiple years at a time. It helps develop knowledge of

topic and of the relationship between co-teaching pairs. Lastly, teachers wish to have common

planning time to ensure that they feel prepared to work together and can offer the most to all

students. If a special education teacher is not able to know the content or more specifically the

lesson ahead of time, he or she struggles to make accommodations for students. The research

backs these ideas behind co-teaching. Ultimately, the fix seems rather small, but there are always

outside forces that make it harder to accommodate these requests than it appears. In the end,

though, what is currently taking place is not what is best for kids, and that should always be the

focus.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO-TAUGHT CLASSROOMS 17

References

Conderman, G., Pedersen, T., & Bresnahan, V. (2009). Purposeful Co-teaching : Real Cases and

Effective Strategies. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin.

Magiera, K. & Zigmond, N. (2005). Co-teaching in middle school classrooms under routine

conditions: does the instructional experience differ for students with disabilities in co

taught and solo-taught classes?. Learning disabilities research & practice (Wiley

Blackwell), 20(2), 79-85. Doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00123.x

Murwaski, W. W., & Bernhardt, P. (2015). An administrators guide to co-teaching. Educational

Leadership, 73(4), 30.

Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making inclusion

work in general education classrooms. Education & treatment of children, 35(3), 477.