Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Frameworks for
Collaboration
CR4YR August 27th, 2013
Vancouver Hilton Hotel
Faye Brownlie and Randy Cranston
Learning Intentions
  I have a better understanding of collaboration and
co-teaching.

  I have a plan of how to increas...
Why Collaboration/Co-teaching?
  Based on the belief that collaborative planning,

teaching and assessing better addresse...
  Based on the belief that collaborative planning,

teaching and assessing better addresses the diverse
needs of students...
Why Collaboration/Co-teaching?
  Based on the belief that collaborative planning, teaching

and assessing better addresse...
Rationale:

 By sharing our collective

knowledge about the whole class
and developing a plan of action
based on this, we...
Goal:

  to support students to be successful

learners in the classroom environment
A Key Belief

  When intervention is focused on classroom

support it improves each student’s ability and
opportunity to ...
The Vision
A	
  Shi:	
  from….. 	
   	
   	
   	
  to	
  
A	
  Remedial	
  Model	
  
(Deficit	
  Model)	
  

An	
  Inclusiv...
Transforma)ons	
  within	
  the	
  	
  
Inclusive	
  Model	
  
Pull-­‐out	
  Support	
  /	
  Physical	
  Inclusion	
  
•	
...
No plan, No point
Questions to Guide Co-Teaching
  Are all students actively engaged in meaningful
work?

  Are all students participating...
A Co-teaching Question:
Is this the best approach to maximize student
learning:
• at this time
• for this task
• for this ...
  What is your co-teaching dream?
Co-Teaching Models
(Teaching in Tandem – Effective Co-Teaching in the Inclusive
Classroom – Wilson & Blednick, 2011, ASCD)...
1 Teach, 1 Support
  most frequently done, least planning
  Advantage: focus, 1:1 feedback, if alternate roles,

no one ...
1 Teach, 1 Support: Examples
  demonstrating a new strategy so BOTH teachers
can use it the next day – e.g., think aloud,...
Parallel Groups
  both teachers take about half the class and teach
the same thing.

  Advantage: half class size - more...
Parallel Groups: Examples
  word work. At Woodward Elem, the primary worked together
3 X/week, with each teacher, the pri...
Station Teaching
  mostly small groups
  can be heterogeneous stations or more homogeneous
reading groups

  each teach...
Station Teaching: Examples
  Guided reading: 4 groups; RT has two and CT has
two

  math groups – Michelle’s patterning ...
1 large group, 1 small group
  Advantage: either teacher can work with either
group, can provide tutorial, intensive, ind...
1 large group, 1 small group:
Examples
  Writing: 1 teacher works with whole class prewriting

and drafting, small groups...
Teaming
  most seamless.
  co-planned
  teachers take alternate roles and lead-taking as the lesson
proceeds

  Most o...
Teaming: Examples
  Brainstorm-categorize lesson – 1 teacher begins, other

teacher notices aspects the first teacher has...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

CR4YR collaboration.Aug 2013, Oct Prince Rupert

126

Published on

After school session in Prince Rupert to continue to conversation re: collaboration. Focus on different models of co-teaching, as first discussed at CR4YR in August.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
126
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "CR4YR collaboration.Aug 2013, Oct Prince Rupert "

  1. 1. Frameworks for Collaboration CR4YR August 27th, 2013 Vancouver Hilton Hotel Faye Brownlie and Randy Cranston
  2. 2. Learning Intentions   I have a better understanding of collaboration and co-teaching.   I have a plan of how to increase the effectiveness of my collaboration and my co-teaching.   I can create a class review and use it to plan for instruction.
  3. 3. Why Collaboration/Co-teaching?   Based on the belief that collaborative planning, teaching and assessing better addresses the diverse needs of students by creating ongoing effective programming in the classroom   It allows more students to be reached Learning in Safe Schools, page 102 Chapter 9
  4. 4.   Based on the belief that collaborative planning, teaching and assessing better addresses the diverse needs of students by creating ongoing effective programming in the classroom   It allows more students to be reached   It focuses on the ongoing context for learning for the students, not just the specific remediation of skills removed from the learning context of the classroom   It builds a repertoire of strategies for teachers to support the range of students in classes page 102 Chapter 9 Learning in Safe Schools,
  5. 5. Why Collaboration/Co-teaching?   Based on the belief that collaborative planning, teaching and assessing better addresses the diverse needs of students by creating ongoing effective programming in the classroom   It allows more students to be reached   It focuses on the ongoing context for learning for the students, not just the specific remediation of skills removed from the learning context of the classroom   It builds a repertoire of strategies for teachers to support the range of students in classes   Imperative students with the highest needs have the most consistent program Learning in Safe Schools, page 102 Chapter 9
  6. 6. Rationale:  By sharing our collective knowledge about the whole class and developing a plan of action based on this, we can better meet the needs of all students.
  7. 7. Goal:   to support students to be successful learners in the classroom environment
  8. 8. A Key Belief   When intervention is focused on classroom support it improves each student’s ability and opportunity to learn effectively/successfully in the classroom.
  9. 9. The Vision A  Shi:  from…..        to   A  Remedial  Model   (Deficit  Model)   An  Inclusive  Model   (Strengths  Based)   ‘Fixing’  the  student   ‘Fixing’  the  curriculum   Outside  the  classroom/   curriculum   to   Within  the  classroom/   curriculum  
  10. 10. Transforma)ons  within  the     Inclusive  Model   Pull-­‐out  Support  /  Physical  Inclusion   •  sDll  a  remedial  model  –  to  make  kids  fit   •  In  the  class,  but  o:en  on  a  different  plan   Inclusion   •  Classroom  Teacher  as  central  support   •  Resource  Teacher  –  working  together  in  a    co-­‐teaching  model  
  11. 11. No plan, No point
  12. 12. Questions to Guide Co-Teaching   Are all students actively engaged in meaningful work?   Are all students participating by answering and asking questions?   Are all students receiving individual feedback during the learning sequence?   How is evidence of learning from each day’s coteaching fueling the plan for the next day?
  13. 13. A Co-teaching Question: Is this the best approach to maximize student learning: • at this time • for this task • for this student?
  14. 14.   What is your co-teaching dream?
  15. 15. Co-Teaching Models (Teaching in Tandem – Effective Co-Teaching in the Inclusive Classroom – Wilson & Blednick, 2011, ASCD)   1 teach, 1 support   Parallel groups   Station teaching   1 large group; 1 small group   Teaming
  16. 16. 1 Teach, 1 Support   most frequently done, least planning   Advantage: focus, 1:1 feedback, if alternate roles, no one has the advantage or looks like the ‘real’ teacher, can capitalize one 1’s strengths and build professional capacity   Possible pitfall: easiest to go off the rails and have one teacher feel as an ‘extra pair of hands’, no specific task (buzzing radiator)
  17. 17. 1 Teach, 1 Support: Examples   demonstrating a new strategy so BOTH teachers can use it the next day – e.g., think aloud, questioning from pictures, listen-sketch-draft   Students independently working on a task, one teacher working with a small group on this task, other teacher supporting children working independently
  18. 18. Parallel Groups   both teachers take about half the class and teach the same thing.   Advantage: half class size - more personal contact, more individual attention   Possible pitfalls: more time to co-plan, requires trust in each other, each must know the content and the strategies.
  19. 19. Parallel Groups: Examples   word work. At Woodward Elem, the primary worked together 3 X/week, with each teacher, the principal and the RT each taking a group for word work. Some schools have used this with math activities.   Focus teaching from class assessment. Westwood Elementary: Came about as a result of an action research question: How do we better meet the needs of our students?:   primary team used Standard Reading Assessment, highlight on short form of Performance Standards, Resource, ESL, principal involved, cross-graded groups 2X a week, for 6 to 8 weeks driven by information from the performance standards (Text features, Oral Comprehension, Risk taking, Critical thinking with words, Getting the big picture,… , repeat process   NOT paper and pencil practice groups…teaching/thinking groups
  20. 20. Station Teaching   mostly small groups   can be heterogeneous stations or more homogeneous reading groups   each teacher has 2 groups, 1 working independently at a station or writing, 1 working directly with the teacher.   Advantage: more individual attention and personal feedback, increased focus on self regulation   Possible pitfall: self regulation (needs to be taught), time to plan for meaningful engagement.
  21. 21. Station Teaching: Examples   Guided reading: 4 groups; RT has two and CT has two   math groups – Michelle’s patterning (1 direct teaching, 2 guided practice, 1 guided practice with observation)   science stations: CT and RT each created two stations; co-planning what they would look like to ensure differentiation, teachers moved back and forth between groups supporting self-monitoring, independence on task
  22. 22. 1 large group, 1 small group   Advantage: either teacher can work with either group, can provide tutorial, intensive, individual   Possible pitfall: don’t want same kids always in the ‘get help’ group
  23. 23. 1 large group, 1 small group: Examples   Writing: 1 teacher works with whole class prewriting and drafting, small groups of 3-4 students meet with 1 teacher to conference   Reading: everyone’s reading. large group: teacher moving from student to student listening to short oral reads. Small group: 2 to 3 students being supported to use specific reading strategies or   small group is working on a Reader’s Theatre   Math: large group using manipulatives to represent shapes, small groups, rotating with other teacher, using iPads to take pictures of shapes in the environment
  24. 24. Teaming   most seamless.   co-planned   teachers take alternate roles and lead-taking as the lesson proceeds   Most often in whole class instruction and could be followed up with any of the other four co-teaching models   Advantages: capitalizes on both teachers’ strengths, models collaboration teaching/learning to students, can adjust instruction readily based on student need, flexible   Possible pitfalls: trust and skill
  25. 25. Teaming: Examples   Brainstorm-categorize lesson – 1 teacher begins, other teacher notices aspects the first teacher has missed or sees confusion in children, adds in and assumes lead role.   Modeling reading strategies: two teachers model and talk about the strategies they use to read, noting things they do differently.   Graphic organizer: Teachers model how to use a semantic map as a post reading vocabulary building activity, teacher most knowledgeable about semantic mapping creates it as other teacher debriefs with students; both flow back and forth
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×