Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … Co-Teaching (Collaborative Teaching Model) Benefits Students Socially, Academically or Behaviorally.
Co-teaching or collaborative teaching is a method of delivery that involves delivering instruction to students in a diverse environment. Typically two or more teachers are employed in a co-teaching classroom. At this point in time the literature available on co-teaching suggests that co-teaching may have positive effects on students, particularly from a social and academic viewpoint. However all of the authors surveyed suggested that further systematic and empirical studies must be explored to fully examine the benefits or negative effects co-teaching has on the classroom.
Murawski & Swanson (2001) conduct a meta analysis to synthesis data-based articles related to co-teaching. Specifically the researchers intent is to examine the effects co-teaching has on the general and special education personnel and students. In particular the professionals show interest in finding new methods for increasing teacher efficiency for meeting the needs of students including those with mild to moderate disabilities. One commonly adopted delivery service choice for special education teachers is a collaborative teaching model.
The researchers cite Cook & Friend (1995) who suggest that co-teaching may be defined as "two or more professionals delivering substantive instruction to a diverse or blended group of students in a single physical space" (Murawski & Swanson, 258). Alternate teaching methods according...
The results of the analysis conducted by Murawski and Swanson suggest that co-teaching is "moderately effective" for "influencing student outcomes" whether behaviorally, socially or academically (258). Among the more commonly cited benefits collaborative teaching has to offer both general and special education students according to the researchers include "positive social outcomes" (Murawski & Swanson, 258).
The researchers note however that at the time of the study little empirical research exited directly supporting collaborative teaching as a tool for improving academic outcomes. The authors conclude that additional research is necessary for co-teaching to be considered "a valid service delivery option" for special education students in particular (Murawski & Swanson, 258). Lastly the researchers note some problems with co-teaching include a lack of a clear definition between general and special education teachers as to what constitutes co-teaching, and other factors that may influence student success such as teacher personality.
Gerber & Popp (2000) in their article point out that despite a growing interest in collaborative teaching, little "systematic" evidence exists that supports whether this model of teaching is effective or not for raising student achievement (229). These researchers cite a popular definition of co-teaching…
References:
Austin, V.L. (2001). "Teachers' beliefs about co-teaching." Remedial and Special
Education, 22(4): 245
Gerber, P.J. & Popp, P.A. (2000). "Making collaborative teaching effective for academically able students: Recommendations for implementation and training." Learning Disability Quarterly, 23(3): 2000
Murawski, W.W., & Swanson, H.L. (2001). "A meta-analysis of Co-teaching research."
The next three categories deal with the lack of information: 4) lack of information about the career decision-making process, itself; 5) lack of information about one's own capabilities, personal traits or interests; 6) lack of information about occupations and what work is involved and the type of work available; and 7) lack of information about ways of obtaining career information. The final three categories deal with the inconsistent information
The shift toward standardized testing has failed to result in a meaningful reduction of high school dropout rates, and students with disabilities continue to be marginalized by the culture of testing in public education (Dynarski et al., 2008). With that said, the needs of students with specific educational challenges are diverse and complex, and the solutions to their needs are not revealed in the results of standardized testing (Crawford &
Pedagogic Model for Teaching of Technology to Special Education Students Almost thirty years ago, the American federal government passed an act mandating the availability of a free and appropriate public education for all handicapped children. In 1990, this act was updated and reformed as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which itself was reformed in 1997. At each step, the goal was to make education more equitable and more accessible to
positive outcome in the educational progress for the students resulting from applying the Z. Model framework. In Mr. Zander's classroom, the average improvement in test scores is 16.75 points. The is the rise in test scores resulting from the students taking the same standardize test, once at the beginning of the school year, and a second time after 6-7 months Z. Model application. The baseline group data was taken form
Early Childhood Special Education Curriculum, Instruction and Methods Projects This beginning chapter delineates education to the young children with special needs. In particular, early childhood special education mirrors impact and acclaimed practices resultant from the special education and early childhood fields. In the present, emphasis that is laid on early childhood does not encompass whether these young children can be provided with special needs service in typical settings but focus is
In their study, "Thinking of Inclusion for All Special Needs Students: Better Think Again," Rasch and his colleagues (1994) report that, "The political argument in favor of inclusion is based on the assumption that the civil rights of students, as outlined in the 1954 decision handed down in Brown v. Board of Education, which struck down the concept of 'separate but equal,' can also be construed as applying to special