This document provides an overview of strategies and frameworks for improving learning for all students. It discusses reviewing and revising school plans, collecting student information to inform classroom learning, collaborating in co-teaching models, and ensuring approaches meet the needs of diverse learners through strengths-based assessments and the universal design for learning. Specific co-teaching models like one teach one support are presented to facilitate collaborative problem-solving between teachers. The goal is to shift toward an inclusive model that supports students within the regular classroom.
1. 2013-‐14
L.I.F.
Focus
Improving
Learning
For
All
Crea%ng
Schools
and
Classrooms
Where
All
Students
Belong
Faye
Brownlie
www.slideshare.ca
2. Learning Intentions:
• We
have
reviewed
and
edited
our
school
plan.
• We
have
grown
our
ways
of
collecCng
and
using
informaCon
on
our
students
to
make
class
learning
plans
from
class
reviews.
• We
have
polished
our
mental
models
of
learning
frameworks.
• We
have
new
ideas
of
HOW
to
collaborate
in
co-‐
teaching.
• We
are
leaving
with
a
revised
school
plan
of
acCon.
3. Big Ideas…
As
a
school
community
we
want
to
work
together
to
meet
the
needs
of
all
students.
Inclusion
is
not
a
special
educaCon
model;
it
is
a
school
model.
As
professionals
we
want
to
constantly
examine
and
refine
our
pracCce.
CollaboraCve
problem-‐solving
and
teaching
results
in
new
ideas,
new
products
and
a
feeling
of
connecCon.
Our
students
conCnue
to
change
and
learn
and
their
needs,
just
like
the
school’s,
will
change
over
the
course
of
the
year.
Brownlie
&
Schnellert
It’s
All
About
Thinking
4. C
Class
Review
-‐gathering
informaCon
-‐strengths-‐based
-‐acCon
oriented
5. “You
can
see
what
the
teachers,
teams,
and
schools
value
by
what
actually
goes
on
in
the
classrooms.”
(Brownlie,
Fullerton,
Schnellert,
2011,
p25)
“Pedagogy
trumps
curriculum.”
(Dylan
Wiliam)
6. Your
Plan
• Examine
your
plan
from
last
year
– What’s
working?
– What’s
not?
– What’s
next?
7. Frameworks
It’s All about Thinking (English, Humanities, Social Studies) –
Brownlie & Schnellert, 2009
It’s All about Thinking (Math, Science)– Brownlie, Fullerton,
Schnellert, 2011
8. Universal Design for Learning
MulCple
means:
-‐to
tap
into
background
knowledge,
to
acCvate
prior
knowledge,
to
increase
engagement
and
moCvaCon
-‐to
acquire
the
informaCon
and
knowledge
to
process
new
ideas
and
informaCon
-‐to
express
what
they
know.
Rose
&
Meyer,
2002
9. Backwards Design
• What
important
ideas
and
enduring
understandings
do
you
want
the
students
to
know?
• What
thinking
strategies
will
students
need
to
demonstrate
these
understandings?
McTighe
&
Wiggins,
2001
10. Approaches
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assessment
for
learning
Open-‐ended
strategies
Gradual
release
of
responsibility
CooperaCve
learning
Literature
circles
and
informaCon
circles
Inquiry
It’s All about Thinking – Brownlie & Schnellert, 2009; Brownlie,
Fullerton, & Schnellert, 2011
11. “Every
Child,
Every
Day”
–
Richard
Allington
and
Rachael
Gabriel
In
EducaConal
Leadership,
March
2012
6
elements
of
instrucCon
for
ALL
students!
12. 1. Every
child
reads
something
he
or
she
chooses.
2. Every
child
reads
accurately.
3. Every
child
reads
something
he
or
she
understands.
4. Every
child
writes
about
something
personally
meaningful.
5. Every
child
talks
with
peers
about
reading
and
wriCng.
6. Every
child
listens
to
a
fluent
adult
read
aloud.
13. Rationale for Collaboration:
• By
sharing
our
collec%ve
knowledge
about
the
whole
class
and
developing
a
plan
of
ac%on
based
on
this,
we
can
be?er
meet
the
needs
of
all
students.
14. Goal:
• to
support
students
to
be
successful
learners
in
the
classroom
environment
15. A Key Belief
• When
interven%on
is
focused
on
classroom
support
it
improves
each
student’s
ability
and
opportunity
to
learn
effec%vely/successfully
in
the
classroom.
16. The Vision
A
Shif
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
17. Transforma%ons
within
the
Inclusive
Model
Pull-‐out
Support
/
Physical
Inclusion
•
sCll
a
remedial
model
–
to
make
kids
fit
•
In
the
class,
but
ofen
on
a
different
plan
Inclusion
•
Classroom
Teacher
as
central
support
•
Resource
Teacher
–
working
together
in
a
co-‐teaching
model
19. Co-Teaching Models
(Teaching in Tandem – Effective Co-Teaching in the Inclusive Classroom – Wilson
& Blednick, 2011, ASCD)
•
•
•
•
•
1
teach,
1
support
Parallel
groups
Sta%on
teaching
1
large
group;
1
small
group
Teaming
20. 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
piNall:
easiest
to
go
off
the
rails
and
have
one
teacher
feel
as
an
‘extra
pair
of
hands’,
no
specific
task
(buzzing
radiator)
21. 1 Teach, 1 Support: Examples
• demonstra%ng
a
new
strategy
so
BOTH
teachers
can
use
it
the
next
day
–
e.g.,
think
aloud,
ques%oning
from
pictures,
listen-‐
sketch-‐draW
• Students
independently
working
on
a
task,
one
teacher
working
with
a
small
group
on
this
task,
other
teacher
suppor%ng
children
working
independently
22. Parallel
Groups
• both
teachers
take
about
half
the
class
and
teach
the
same
thing.
• must
be
co-‐planned,
requires
trust
in
each
other,
• must
each
know
the
content
and
the
strategies.
• advantage:
half
class
size
-‐
more
personal
contact,
more
individual
a?en%on
23. 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
ac%vi%es.
• Focus
teaching
from
class
assessment.
Westwood
Elementary:
Came
about
as
a
result
of
an
ac%on
research
ques%on:
How
do
we
be?er
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
informa%on
from
the
performance
standards
(Text
features,
Oral
Comprehension,
Risk
taking,
Cri%cal
thinking
with
words,
Gecng
the
big
picture,…
,
repeat
process
– NOT
paper
and
pencil
prac%ce
groups…teaching/thinking
groups
24. Sta%on
Teaching
• mostly
small
groups,
more
individual
a?en%on,
• can
be
heterogeneous
sta%ons
or
more
homogeneous
reading
groups.
• each
teacher
has
2
groups,
1
working
independently
at
a
sta%on
or
wri%ng,
1
working
directly
with
the
teacher.
• Requires
student
self
regula%on
(which
needs
to
be
taught)
and
planning
for
meaningful
engagement.
25. Station Teaching: Examples
• Guided
reading:
4
groups;
RT
has
two
and
CT
has
two
• math
groups
–
Michelle’s
pa?erning
(1
direct
teaching,
2
guided
prac%ce,
1
guided
prac%ce
with
observa%on)
• science
sta%ons:
CT
and
RT
each
created
two
sta%ons;
co-‐planning
what
they
would
look
like
to
ensure
differen%a%on,
teachers
moved
back
and
forth
between
groups
suppor%ng
self-‐
monitoring,
independence
on
task
26. 1
Large
Group,
1
Small
Group
• advantage:
either
teacher
can
work
with
either
group,
can
provide
tutorial,
intensive,
individual
• possible
piNall:
don’t
want
same
kids
always
in
the
‘get
help’
group
27. Station Teaching: Examples
• Guided
reading:
4
groups;
RT
has
two
and
CT
has
two
• math
groups
–
Michelle’s
pa?erning
(1
direct
teaching,
2
guided
prac%ce,
1
guided
prac%ce
with
observa%on)
• science
sta%ons:
CT
and
RT
each
created
two
sta%ons;
co-‐planning
what
they
would
look
like
to
ensure
differen%a%on,
teachers
moved
back
and
forth
between
groups
suppor%ng
self-‐
monitoring,
independence
on
task
28. Teaming
• most
seamless.
• co-‐planned
• teachers
take
alternate
roles
and
lead-‐taking
as
the
lesson
proceeds.
• advantages:
capitalizes
on
both
teachers’
strengths,
models
collabora%on
teaching/learning
to
students,
can
adjust
instruc%on
readily
based
on
student
need,
flexible
• possible
piNalls:
trust
and
skill
• Most
oWen
in
whole
class
instruc%on
and
could
be
followed
up
with
any
of
the
other
four
co-‐teaching
models
29. Teaming: Examples
• Brainstorm-‐categorize
lesson
–
1
teacher
begins,
other
teacher
no%ces
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,
no%ng
things
they
do
differently.
• Graphic
organizer:
Teachers
model
how
to
use
a
seman%c
map
as
a
post
reading
vocabulary
building
ac%vity,
teacher
most
knowledgeable
about
seman%c
mapping
creates
it
as
other
teacher
debriefs
with
students;
both
flow
back
and
forth
40. • Trust
your
professional
experCse
• Collaborate:
2
heads
are
bemer
than
1
• Follow
the
lead
of
your
children
–their
interests,
their
needs
• NO
program
exists
that
can
replace
YOU!!!
