Improving Students' Social-Emotional Outcomes through Effective Teacher-Paraeducator Collaboration By Tia N. Barnes and Christina Crowe

1. Please fill out a blank index card with your:
• Position ( principal, paraeducator, general educator,
special educator, social worker, etc.)
• Gender
• Years of experience in current position
• Level of education ( Associate’s, Bachelor’s, Master’s,
etc.)
• Biggest challenge you face in creating a collaborative
teacher-paraeducator relationship

2. Improving Students'
Social-Emotional
Outcomes Through
Effective Teacher-
Paraeducator
Collaboration
ei.yale.edu | ruler.yale.edu
TWITTER: @rulerapproach | FACEBOOK: the RULER approach
Tia N. Barnes, Ph.D.
Christina C. Crowe, Ph.D.
Lisa Flynn, B.A.

3. Introductions
• Name
• School
• Biggest collaboration challenge

4. Objectives
Participants will ……
• Learn how teacher-paraeducator
collaboration nurtures student
social-emotional development
• Learn about the Yale Recognizing
Excellence in Learning and
Teaching (RELATE) project
• Identify strategies to promote
teacher-paraeducator
collaboration

5. Problem Behaviors
Problem Behavior Negative Outcomes

6. Problem Behaviors
• poor academic outcomes
(August et al., 2001; Gosch &
Flannery-Schroeder, 2006).
• strained family and peer
relationships (Weissman et al.,
2009).
• increased risk of substance
abuse and adult criminality
(Donoghue et al., 2006; Hudley
et al., 1998).

7. Problem Behaviors
Problem Behavior Negative Outcomes

8. Problem Behaviors
Problem Behavior Negative Outcomes

9. Teacher-Paraeducator Collaboration
What is it?
Teachers and
paraeducators working
together to provide a
quality learning
environment for students

10. Benefits of Educator Collaboration
EDUCATORS
• Increased
professional
satisfaction
• Increased personal
support
• Increased
professional
growth
STUDENTS
• Decreased problem
behavior
• Improved academic
performance
• Greater
understanding of
material
• Positive models

11. Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention and
Evaluation
The RELATE Project aims to promote quality
special education learning environments by
enabling:
ei.yale.edu | The RELATE Project is funded by the William T. Grant Foundation (Grant ID #180276)
The RELATE Project
ei.yale.edu
• effective instruction
• evaluation
• professional development

12. The RELATE Tool for Classroom Observation is
designed specifically for classrooms serving
students with special education needs.
ei.yale.edu | The RELATE Project is funded by the William T. Grant Foundation (Grant ID #180276)
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention and
Evaluation
What is RELATE?
ei.yale.edu
We are studying its utility for self-
contained or alternative setting special
education classrooms serving students
primarily with behavioral and social
challenges.

13. Need for RELATE
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention and
Evaluation
Current classroom observation tools do not
adequately capture the range of interactions.
After three years of research we have
arrived at three components necessary
for the meaningful observation of a
special education classroom
ei.yale.edu

14. Overview of the RELATE Tool
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention and
Evaluation
ei.yale.edu

15. Interactions between educators reflect unity
of purpose, clear classroom
management/instructional strategies, and
support a quality learning environment
Component 1: Collaboration
ei.yale.edu
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention and
Evaluation

16. Interactions between educator and students
identify, acknowledge and accommodate for
individual learning needs and goals
Component 2: Accommodations
ei.yale.edu
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention
and
Evaluation

17. Interactions between educator and students
promote a physical and psychologically safe
learning environment
Component 3: Prevention and Evaluation
ei.yale.edu
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention
and Evaluation

18. Interactions between educators reflect unity
of purpose, clear classroom
management/instructional strategies, and
support a quality learning environment
Component 1: Collaboration
ei.yale.edu
Collaboration
Accommodations
Prevention and
Evaluation
Today’s Focus

19. Meet our Educators

20. Elements of Collaborative Relationships
Solidarity
Utilization of Staff
Respect
Disrespect

21. Alone we can do so little.
Together we can do so
much.
-Helen Keller
Solidarity

22. Solidarity
the consistent
presentation of teamwork
among educators in the
classroom

23. Benefits of Solidarity
• Promotes consistency in
the classroom
• Undermines attempts to
challenge educator
authority

24. Solidarity
Deferring
“We” language
Reinforcing/Restating

25. A group becomes a team
when each member is sure
enough of himself and his
contribution to praise the
skill of the others.
-Norman Shidle
Utilization of Staff

26. Utilization of Staff
how the lead classroom
teacher utilizes the support
of the additional staff
member(s) to enable or
hinder the smooth
functioning of the
classroom

27. Utilization of Staff
Delegating
Self-Starting
Attending

28. Barriers to Utilization of Staff
Teacher
• Lack of supervision
training
• Not involved in hiring
process
• Lack of time
Paraeducator
• Lack of training
• Lack of time
• Unclear roles
Administrator
• Lack of information

29. Strategies for Utilization of Staff
• Involve teachers in the
hiring process
• Attend training on
supervising para-
educators
• Offer teacher-para prep
time at the beginning of
the year
• Create a communication
system

30. “Collaboration begins with
mutual understanding and
respect.”
― Astronaut Ron Garan

31. Respect and Disrespect
Respect is defined by
educators holding one
another in high regard and
acknowledging each
other’s work in the
classroom

32. Benefits of Respect
• increased productivity in the teacher-
paraeducator relationship
• easier to collaborate
• more likely to take risks

33. How do we foster respect?
School climate
valuing all school employees and their
contributions
Teaming up

34. How do we foster respect?
• use of each other’s name
• make eye contact
• presence of manners
• warm tone

36. Copyright © 2015 Yale University
All rights reserved. This publication may not be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in whole or in part, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without prior permission
from Yale University.
Research generously funded by a grant from the William T. Grant Foundation (ID#180276)