Co-Teaching Framework
Maryland’s Co-Teaching Framework
The purpose of the Co-Teaching Framework is to specify co-teaching components for enhanced instructional practices and greater access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities. This framework provides guidance and consistency of quality implementation for local school systems using co-teaching as a service delivery model for improving achievement of students with disabilities. An extended use of this tool would be to embed the essential co-teaching components into strategic planning at the district and school levels to address the needs of all learners.
This framework was developed as a component of one of the Solutions incorporated in Maryland’s State Improvement Grant (MSIG III) to improve outcomes for children and youth with disabilities and their families. The Grant is funded by the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education. The Solution’s purpose is to develop a Maryland Co-Teaching Network to support collaboration for capacity building of administrators and teachers, special education site content development, and high quality professional development related to the Maryland framework for co-teaching and best practices.
Vision Statement: General and special educators have gained capacity to regularly collaborate and have joint accountability and ownership for planning, delivering instruction, and assessment for the success of all students in the general education curriculum resulting in systemic change that is sustainable.
Mission statement: To improve achievement of students with disabilities by supporting the professional growth of administrators and teachers by:
▪ Giving teachers high quality tools and meaningful and engaging learning experiences to implement effective evidence-based co-teaching practices resulting in improved student achievement and more inclusive opportunities for students with disabilities.
▪ Giving system leadership and school-based administrators high quality tools and meaningful and engaging learning experiences to support and monitor effective evidence-based co-teaching practices resulting in improved student achievement and more inclusive opportunities for students with disabilities.
▪ Providing online social networking opportunities and learning communities, for administrators and teachers to engage in dialogue, access resources, and exchange information for professional growth in the Maryland model for co-teaching and collaboration.
▪ Establishing the Co-Teaching Network as a place to find valuable techniques, strategies, protocols, examples, media to improve co-teaching to increase student academic achievement and the number of students with disabilities in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) A. (students participate in general education classes 80% or more of the school day).
|Collaborative Development and Implementation Stages of the Co-Teaching Framework |
| |
|Personnel |Collaborative |Collaborative |Collaborative |Collaborative |
| |Development |Implementation |Monitoring |Evaluation |
| | | |-Monitor and provide tools to support |–Assess the impact on co-teaching |
|Central Office |–Facilitate the development of a shared system-wide vision that|–Assist school-based administrators and school |Instructional Leadership Teams in |implementation of factors including |
|Administration |ensures that schools consider co-teaching as a service delivery|Instructional Leadership Teams in their support |monitoring the alignment of curriculum,|adequate collaborative planning time,|
| |method to provide more inclusive programming for students with |of the implementation of co-teaching |instruction, and assessment in |appropriate scheduling of staff and |
| |disabilities | |co-taught classrooms |students, and focused, sustained, |
| | |– Ensure that schools strategically assign an | |research-based professional |
| |–Determine system-wide goals and timelines for co-teaching |appropriate proportion of general education |-Review LRE data to consider if |development |
| |implementation |students and students with disabilities to |co-teaching as a service delivery | |
| | |co-taught classes (no more than 1/3) |method should be expanded to provide |- Assess the impact of system and |
| |–Determine staffing allocations based on the co-teaching model | |more inclusive programming for students|school-wide co-teaching on student |
| |of service delivery |–Provide staff focused, sustained, research-based|with disabilities |achievement using multiple sources of|
| | |professional development based on assessed needs | |student-achievement data |
| |–Consider administrator and teacher skills/knowledge and school|related to co-teaching, Universal Design for |- Support co-teaching through: | |
| |readiness when assigning resources (including technology) for |Learning, and differentiation strategies |--Prioritizing collaborative |–Evaluate the effectiveness of the |
| |co-taught classes | |planning time |professional development provided in |
| | |-Provide staff focused, sustained, research-based|--Ensuring class schedules |alignment with the MD Teacher |
| |-Provide guidelines for scheduling for efficient and effective |professional development specifically related to|accommodate co-planning and co- |Professional Development Standards |
| |staff assignment that include adequate collaborative planning |co-teaching including understanding selecting and|teaching | |
| |time to co-taught classes |implementing the 5 approaches of co-teaching |--Ensuring appropriate | |
| | |1- One Teach-One Assist |student grouping | |
| |–Plan system professional development for administrators and |2- Station Teaching |--Ensuring parent | |
| |school-based staff aligned with the Maryland Teacher |3- Parallel Teaching |communication | |
| |Professional Development Standards based on assessed needs that|4-Alternative Teaching | | |
| |is focused, sustained, and research-based related to |5-Team Teaching |-Ensure that schools use student data |– Evaluate school and system-wide |
| |co-teaching as an instructional delivery model with the clear |based upon Friend & Cook, 2007* |and data collected during the |data related to co-teaching as an |
| |understanding that Universal Design for Learning and | |observation process to make |instructional model and disseminate |
| |differentiation are expected strategies within the co-taught | |recommendations for the improvement of |results related to the specified |
| |classroom |– Procedures in place for the periodic, |instruction in co-taught classrooms |goals and interim benchmarks with |
| | |collaborative review of the system-wide |- Conduct classroom fidelity checks for|appropriate stakeholders |
| | |co-teaching vision and allocation of resources |implementation of co-teaching, | |
| |-Train administrators and school-based staff in the use of the |aligned to support the vision and address |Universal Design for Learning, and | |
| |co-teaching tool for monitoring appropriate implementation |barriers to implementation |differentiation | |
| | | | | |
| |-Specify measurable outcomes, establish baseline data of |–Implement centralized data collection procedures|- Plan for ongoing support to ensure | |
|Central Office |current system-wide classroom practice in co-teaching, and |for established outcomes |sustainability | |
|Administration |interim benchmarks related to co-teaching implementation and | | | |
| |student achievement to be collected |– Ensure that schools use technology and multiple| | |
| | |sources of data to improve classroom instruction.| | |
| |-Develop procedures for the periodic collaborative review of |Student data will be used for ongoing root cause | | |
| |the system-wide co-teaching vision with resources aligned to |analysis of student performance that drives | | |
| |support the vision |instructional decision making | | |
| | | | | |
| | |-Provide sufficient technology for integration in| | |
| | |instruction, progress monitoring and assessment | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Personnel |Collaborative |Collaborative |Collaborative |Collaborative |
| |Development |Implementation |Monitoring |Evaluation |
| |-Facilitate the development of a shared school-wide vision that|-Assist school-based Instructional Leadership |–Utilize the co-teaching monitoring and|–Assess the impact on co-teaching |
|School-based |ensures that schools consider co-teaching as a service delivery|Team in their support of the implementation of |support tools with the Instructional |implementation of factors including |
|Administration |method to provide more inclusive programming for students with |school-wide co-teaching |Leadership Team to monitor the |adequate collaborative planning time,|
| |disabilities | |alignment of curriculum, instruction, |appropriate scheduling of staff and |
| | |– Ensure procedures are in place for the |and assessment in co-taught classrooms |students, and focused, sustained, |
| |-Determine school-based goals and timelines for co-teaching |periodic, collaborative review of the school-wide| |research-based professional |
| |implementation |co-teaching vision with resources aligned to |– Use of student data and data |development |
| | |support the vision and address barriers to |collected during the observation | |
| |-Make staffing decisions based on co-teaching model of service |implementation |process to make recommendations for the|- Assess the impact of system and |
| |delivery including overall size of classroom and proportion of | |improvement of instruction in co-taught|school-wide co-teaching on student |
| |students with disabilities |–Develop schedule to include co-teaching as a |classrooms |achievement using multiple sources of|
| | |service delivery model | |student-achievement data |
| |–Ensure scheduling allows for efficient and effective staff | |–Conduct classroom fidelity checks for | |
| |assignments to co-taught classrooms |–Strategically assign an appropriate proportion |appropriate implementation of |– Evaluate school and review |
| | |of general education students and students with |co-teaching, Universal Design for |system-wide data related to |
| |–Consider staff skills/knowledge and readiness when assigning |disabilities to co-taught classes (no more than |Learning, and differentiation |co-teaching as an instructional model|
| |teachers to co-taught classes |30% with a balance of students with behavioral |strategies |and disseminate results related to |
| | |and academic issues) | |the specified goals and interim |
| |–Consider student strengths and needs when assigning students | |–Support co-teaching through: |benchmarks with appropriate |
| |to co-taught classes |-Implement school-based data collection |*Prioritizing collaborative |stakeholders |
| | |procedures for established outcomes |planning time | |
| |–Specify baseline data and interim benchmarks for school-wide | |*Ensuring class schedules | |
| |co-teaching implementation and student achievement prior to |-Use technology and multiple sources of data to |accommodate co-planning and co- | |
| |initiation of co-teaching |improve classroom instruction |teaching | |
| | | |*Ensuring appropriate | |
| |-Create opportunities for leadership, collaborative | |student grouping | |
| |decision-making, and co-planning | |*Ensuring parent | |
| | | |communication | |
| | |-Provide staff with focused, sustained, | | |
| | |research-based professional development based |-Review LRE data to consider if |–Evaluate the effectiveness of the |
| | |upon assessed needs related to co-teaching |co-teaching as a service delivery |professional development provided in |
| |-Plan school-wide professional development based on assessed |including understanding, selecting, and |method should be expanded to provide |alignment with the MD Teacher PD |
| |needs that is focused, sustained, research-based professional |implementing the (*) 5 approaches of co-teaching|more inclusive programming for students|standards |
| |development related to co-teaching as an instructional delivery|1- One Teach-One Assist |with disabilities | |
| |model that is aligned with the Maryland Teacher Professional |2- Station Teaching | | |
| |Development Standards |3- Parallel Teaching |-Plan for ongoing support to ensure | |
| | |4-Alternative Teaching |sustainability | |
| |-Plan focused, sustained, research-based professional |5-Team Teaching | | |
| |development related to co-teaching, Universal Design for | | | |
|School-based |Learning, and differentiation to establish teacher baseline |–Provide staff with focused, sustained, | | |
|Administration |data |research-based professional development based on | | |
| | |assessed needs related to Universal Design for | | |
| |–Review with staff the co-teaching tool and any other tools for|Learning, and differentiation strategies | | |
| |monitoring co-teaching for appropriate implementation | | | |
| | | | | |
| |- Review school LRE data to consider co-teaching as a service | | | |
| |delivery method to provide more inclusive programming for | | | |
| |students with disabilities | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
|Personnel |Collaborative |Collaborative |Collaborative |Collaborative |
| |Development |Implementation |Monitoring |Evaluation |
| | |–Participate in professional development | | |
|General and Special |–Share the vision and commitment to co-teaching with colleagues|regarding selecting appropriate approaches to |–Complete the co-teaching tool for |–Analyze student data collected |
|Educators | |co-teaching and apply to classroom instruction |appropriate implementation of |regarding established outcomes, goals|
| |–Engage in collaborative planning with parity | |co-teaching, and review practices for |and interim benchmarks |
| | |–Deliver co-taught lessons and assessments |Universal Design for Learning and | |
| |–Identify clear roles and responsibilities |incorporating Universal Design for Learning and |differentiation strategies |–Assess impact on instructional |
| | |differentiation strategies | |delivery and student achievement |
| |–Self assess professional development needs related to | |–Conduct ongoing monitoring of student | |
| |co-teaching, Universal Design for Learning, and differentiation|–Ensure instruction and assessments provide |performance |–Share results with appropriate |
| |to establish teacher baseline data |access to general education curriculum with | |stakeholders |
| | |appropriate accommodations to meet individual |–Self-assess periodically the parity in| |
| |–Actively participate in professional development related to; |student needs |planning and responsibilities | |
| |the 5 approaches of co-teaching | | | |
| |1- One Teach-One Assist |–Implement data collection procedures for |–Determine if intended outcomes have | |
| |2- Parallel Teaching |established outcomes |been achieved for lessons implemented | |
| |3-Station Teaching | | | |
| |4-Alternative Teaching |–Address barriers to implementation |–Implement adjustments based upon | |
| |5-Team Teaching | |student performance and needs | |
| |and other co-teaching practices, Universal Design for Learning,|–Demonstrate shared accountability for planning, | | |
| |and differentiation |instruction, assessment and progress of all | | |
| | |students that exhibits shared understandings of | | |
| |–Establish mutually agreed upon classroom procedures |student instructional needs | | |
| | | | | |
| |–Design lessons and assessments using Universal Design for |–Document shared communications with parents | | |
| |Learning and differentiation strategies |– Integrate technology in instruction, progress | | |
| | |monitoring, and assessment processes | | |
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- flipped lesson plan new york university
- teaching plan for high blood pressure management
- co teaching framework
- 25 ways for teaching without talking geoff petty
- introduction to psychology a collection of teaching ideas
- comprehensible input teaching method
- basic methods of instruction
- direct instruction lesson plan format
- the effects of synthetic phonics teaching on reading and
- philosophy of education social reconstructionism
Related searches
- framework for customer relationship management
- co signer vs co borrower
- teaching jobs columbus co nc
- co signer vs co buyer
- co teaching lesson plan example
- co teaching lesson plans
- co bower vs co signer
- co teaching activities for teachers
- co teaching lesson plan template
- co teaching lesson plans sample
- co teaching planning template
- co teaching strategies and examples