An in-depth case study of one team of co-teachers' practice from multiple perspectives is described. A high school science co-teaching team and their students with disabilities completed surveys about their perceptions of co-teaching. Additionally, observations of the two co-teachers occurred to determine roles and types of interactions for each co-teacher during science instruction. Observational data revealed effective teaching behaviors demonstrated by each co-teacher. Detailed descriptions of the co-teachers' instruction are provided. The science educator was observed interacting with the large group twice as often as the special educator. The science educator also presented new content nearly three times as often as the special educator. The co-teacher surveys were consistent with the observational data. Both educators disagreed that the special educator was primarily the lead for instruction. Both educators strongly agreed they had an effective coteaching relationship, although the science educator indicated stronger agreement for parity in roles and responsibilities than the special educator noted. Forty-three percent of the students identified the science educator as in charge of lessons, while 43% identified both educators. Most students thought teaching was divided in half, and all students enjoyed having two teachers in science. Eighty-six percent of the students indicated team teaching was the most frequently used co-teaching model, and 14% indicated one teach, one drift. Implications for co-teachers' reflections on their collaboration, including the relevance of student perceptions (i.e., Who is the ''real'' teacher?), and the extent to which educators are prepared at preservice and inservice levels for co-teaching are discussed.

Schema-based instruction (SBI) was used to teach nine middle school students with high-incidence disabilities (HID) to solve proportional reasoning word problems. A multiple-baseline-across-groups design was used to determine student understanding of the SBI process. The design consisted of three phases including baseline, SBI process, and maintenance. Training of the SBI process with worked problems occurred between baseline and SBI process. Students’ performance was measured using a five-category rubric, under two conditions: solving problems with and without calculator use. Results indicated that all groups improved problem-solving performance and maintained improvement 4 weeks after instruction. Implications for revising the rubric’s mastery criteria and future research are described.

Student understanding of content can be dependent on the pedagogies that co-teachers plan and implement, regardless of which co-teaching model they use. However, when co-teachers vary instruction using different co-teaching models, secondary students with and without disabilities have more opportunities to take advantage of having two teachers and more opportunities to be taught using evidence-based practices. In this article, 'PEDAGOGY' is used as an acronym to describe ways in which co-teachers can design and deliver instruction using various co-teaching models in multiple content areas at the secondary level.

No abstract

No abstract