COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 1
Collaboration and Coteaching
Jennifer Hitchcock
Liberty University
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 2
Abstract
This action research project analyzes how collaboration, communication, and data driven
coteaching models affects student learning by way of improving their overall growth. The study
includes collaborate meetings and discussions with a volunteer teacher who wanted to improve
in this area. The teacher and researcher met once to plan out what to do based off research, and
three times to discuss how the implementation was. Data was discussed in one final meeting as
well as how to continue growth in this area. An action plan was created to help the teacher
continue to improve in her desired area.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 3
Collaboration and Coteaching
Special Education is not a new program. Teaching children with disabilities has been
something done in the United States for several decades. In the past, it was often completed by
removing special needs children from other schools or classrooms and placing them into
segregated areas. With the rise of programs and laws like No Child Left Behind or Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act, this is becoming a thing of the past. Students with disabilities
are expected to be placed more often than not with their general education peers, working to
learn the same content and graduate with full high school diplomas. Due to this, teachers are
having to find ways to work together as a unit to provide legally required minutes. The result has
been a newer style of collaboration called co-teaching.
Coteaching is a concept where a special education and general education teacher work in
unison to educate all students. It is defined as “two or more educators who co-plan, co-instruct,
and co-assess a group of students with diverse needs in the same general education room”
(Murawski, p. 11, 2010). This process involves much more than just working together. It
requires training and hard work on top of collaboration, active listening skills, and
communication skills. Without those, there can be unnecessary struggles. To help improve
collaboration and coteaching, an area where the teacher was struggling, the researcher and
teacher decided to dissect what is involved in coteaching, how two teachers can collaborate to
improve upon it and work together to create a plan of action to better utilize it to improve her
students’ learning.
Action Research Question and Ethical Conduct Statements
Action Research Question
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 4
How will the implementation of data-driven collaboration and communication techniques
in a co-teaching environment affect instruction and the overall growth of student knowledge of
subject content?
Ethical Conduct Statements
This research proposal was approved by the administration at the school. The research
was conducted on best research practices. No children will be placed in harmful situations
during this action research.
Evidence-Centered Research and Goal
Evidence-centered Research Report
Working with students is an intense undertaking in the best of circumstances. It requires
a great deal of training, planning, and courage. Even in the perfect of circumstances, one sole
adult attempting to impart information to twenty to thirty little humans creates a situation that is
often daunting. Add in any number of potential variables that are certain to crop up, the task can
begin to feel almost impossible. The situation can become even more intimidating with the
addition of a second teacher whose job is to work with you doing what you do except with a
twist. This idea of co-teaching in a classroom is something many teachers struggle with. To do it
correctly, both teachers need to have training in the concepts of co-teaching, instruction in its
application, a willingness to work closely with another professional, and an ability to stay open-
minded and listen.
Co-teaching is defined as “two or more educators who co-plan, co-instruct, and co-assess
a group of students with diverse needs in the same general education room” (Murawski, p. 11,
2010). The idea of two educational professionals working together to instruct students is not a
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 5
novel one. It dates back as early as the 1960s and 1970s (Montgomery & Akerson, 2019) as the
laws leading up to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, came to pass.
Typically, this duo consists of one special education teacher and one general education teacher
who work together to instruct a variety of students: English language learners, students with
disabilities, and those without.
While it sounds like a simple solution to the concern about inclusion, co-teaching is not
as simple as it sounds. Working together also requires a great deal of commitment,
communication, and collaboration. Some teams may make this process look as if it is a simple
task for any set of educators to complete, but the reality is that it is not always easy. Research
and experience have shown this time and again.
Literature Review
This idea of co-teaching successfully has been the topic of many different peer-reviewed
articles. Five articles were explored for the purpose of this review: Facilitating Collaboration
through a Co-Teaching Field Experience (Montgomery & Akerson, 2019), Faculty modeling co-
teaching and collaboration practices in general education and special education courses in
Teacher preparation programmes ( Ricci & Fingon, 2017), Power Dynamics, common pitfalls,
and successful strategies associated with co-teaching (Monteblanco, 2021), Changing what we
might have done on our own: Improving classroom culture and learning through teacher
collaboration (Randall & Marangell, 2021), and Making inclusion work with co-teaching
(Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2017). Each article delved into either how to best prepare educational
professionals for coteaching in a classroom, what it entails, the six styles of co-teaching,
common pitfalls, and what it takes to be successful in this endeavor.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 6
As previously stated, co-teaching is not as simple as it sounds. It realistically should
require preparation or training for both parties involved. However, as stated by Ricci & Fingon
(2017), teachers are often left to figure it out on their own. General Education teachers are
prepared to teach the subject content to students while Special Education teachers are prepared to
work with a variety of disabilities and to modify assignments or provide accommodations. Both
parties are expected to do this seamlessly, working in a manner that hides which teacher is the
general education and which is the special education one. The problem is it does not always
work this way. Too many times, teachers fall into the common snares that surround it.
Co-teaching Pitfalls
One of the more common problems co-teaching teams face is the lack of the most
important part of this process: communication between the two educators. Why is this an
essential part of co-teaching? Working in this manner is a partnership, almost like a marriage in
some ways. Communication is simply key to making this relationship, like any other, work
(Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2017). Without it, the relationship falls apart, and, as Monteblanco
(2021) put it, one party begins to “bite their tongue” to avoid bringing up things or emotions that
make one party feel uncomfortable. When one partner feels as though they are not being listened
to by the other, then the cohesiveness of the team suffers as a result and the collaboration
process, which is another key part of co-teaching, breaks down as well. Why? Communication
is the backbone of collaboration.
Collaboration is important because it allows both parties to plan out the lessons. When it
is done effectively, each teacher is on the same page, and each party knows what the other is
doing. There are not two sets of expectations, there is one. Teachers do not fall into the concern
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 7
that they are competing with each other or that one is a student while the other is the true teacher
(Monteblanco, 2021).
How to be Successful
Knowing that communication and collaboration are essential to this relationship brings
the question of how to succeed at these. Montgomery & Akerson (2019), Scruggs &
Mastropieri, (2017), and Ricci & Fingon (2017) all explored how to answer that very question.
What was discovered was the idea that teachers first and foremost need training on how to co-
teach. Schools expect two leaders to just work well as partners despite different teaching styles,
expectations, and beliefs about their own classrooms. This is not a realistic expectation. It is a
skill that, like any other, needs to be explicitly taught and then practiced in a safe environment.
Ricci & Fingon’s (2017) and Randall & Marangell’s (2021) research provide data supporting
this.
Second, teachers need to be supported by their admin when assigned to co-teach. Lack of
common planning has historically been a major issue for co-teaching teams (Scruggs &
Mastropieri, 2017) yet it is one of the most essential. Teams should have common planning
times that allow for them to work together on lesson plans (Montgomery & Akerson, 2019) as a
group (when working in middle and high school) and as individual teaching teams. This allows
for teachers to utilize multiple styles of coteaching, allows for each partner to know what he or
she is doing, and for each one to have time to practice communication and collaboration.
Finally, teaching teams have to practice what they stress in their classes. This means they
should work on self-assessing themselves individually and as a unit (Scruggs & Mastropieri,
2017) just as it is expected for students to do so. This opens communication because each
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 8
partner has a chance to see where they feel they are weak as well as where their teaching partner
feels improvement is needed. It also gives them a chance to let their partner know what he or she
feels needs to be improved upon as a unit. Teachers expect students to be able to self-reflect due
to the benefits it provides. They should be able to do it as well.
Conclusion
On the surface, co-teaching appears simple. Two teachers, each an expert in his or her
prospective field, work together for the betterment of the students in their class. They should
complement each seamlessly and have no major issues in this process. The reality is that it is not
that simple. Research and data have shown that a lot more goes into the success of this team. It
requires training, support, communication, and collaboration. When one breaks down, the task
becomes more difficult to complete successfully.
Strategic SMART Goal
SMART
Goal
Learning Standard from Candidate's
State Department of Education
Website Link to State Department
Learning Standards
Elizabeth
will
collaborate
with her co-
teachers and
implement
one new
coteaching
strategy in at
least one class
by October
15, 2022.
NELP STANDARD 4: LEARNING AND
INSTRUCTION
COMPONENT 4.2: Program completers
understand and can demonstrate the
capacity to evaluate, develop, and
implement high-quality and equitable
academic and non-academic
instructional practices, resources,
technologies, and services that support
equity, digital literacy, and the school’s
academic and non-academic systems
Performance Standard 2:
Instructional Planning
NELP STANDARD (WEBSITE
LINKED)
VDOE PERFORMANCE AND
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 9
The teacher plans using the Virginia
Standards of Learning, the school’s
curriculum, student data, and engaging
and research-based strategies and
resources to meet the needs of all
students.
Performance Standard 3:
Instructional Delivery
The teacher uses a variety of research-
based instructional strategies
appropriate for the content area to
engage students in active learning, to
promote key skills, and to meet
individual learning needs.
Performance Standard 7:
Professionalism
The teacher demonstrates a commitment
to professional ethics, collaborates and
communicates appropriately, and takes
responsibility for personal professional
growth that results in the enhancement
of student learning.
STANDARD 4. CURRICULUM,
INSTRUCTION, AND
ASSESSMENT
Effective educational leaders develop
and support intellectually rigorous and
coherent systems of curriculum,
instruction, and assessment to promote
each student’s academic success and
well-being.
EVALUATION STANDARDS
(WEBSITE LINKED)
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS
FOR EDUCATIONAL LEADERS
(WEBSITE LINKED)
Strategy Proposal
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 10
Special Education is an ever-advancing field. The rise of laws such as No Child Left
Behind or Individuals with Disabilities Education Act pushing for all students to have access to
needed services (Harvey et al., 2013) and progress in educational standing (Coley, 2006) has
given rise to newer teaching styles. This along with data demonstrating that students with
disabilities do better when given access to general education classes and peers with simple yet
effective accommodations to meet needs (Cramer, Liston, Nevin, & Thousand, 2010) have
helped to advance the idea of co-teaching.
Co-teaching is not a new concept. It has been a documented form of teaching as far back
as the 1960s and 1970s (Montgomery & Akerson, 2019). Today it is utilized to help students
with disabilities to advance in a manner like their general education counterparts. It consists of
two teachers (general and special education) working in tandem using one of six different team-
teaching styles.
To first begin this project, a baseline was taken on how the teacher was working with her
co-teachers. It was determined that the teacher was struggling with communication,
collaboration, and implementation of multiple forms of co-teaching in her classes. For example,
in one class, the teacher did not communicate effectively with her co-teacher and was utilizing
only one teach, one assist. After speaking with her co-teachers, it was determined that this was
the norm for most of her experiences with the other co-teachers and with her teaching assistant.
The use of technology was extensive as she had implemented those last year when she began
working at her current school. The students would use digital games, a digital textbook, google
slides, and google docs to ensure students were working both in print and with technology.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 11
To help the teacher with working on increasing her communication, collaboration, and
co-teaching styles, the researcher met with her before the project began. They discussed the
concerns and where the teacher wanted to go with the project. The research was then conducted
on what was going to be the most effective ways to improve upon these areas and what
alternative coteaching styles can be used. The researcher then met with the teacher to discuss the
research and create a plan of action to help improve these areas. After each observation, the
teacher and researcher met again to tweak the plan and adjust things as needed.
REQUIRED ITEMS RESPONSES
VOLUNTEER’S NAME
Elizabeth Tran
TOPIC Improvement in communication and collaboration between
colleagues to ensure student growth and progress in curriculum.
BACKGROUND
INFORMATION
Elizabeth is currently in her second year teaching middle school at
J Michael Lunsford Middle School. Prior to this, Elizabeth taught
18 years in ESCE (early childhood special education), 7 years in
Arlington, VA, 4 years in NYC as a department chair, and 1 year in
Hudson, FL teaching elementary special education.
Last year Elizabeth struggled with acclimating to the middle
school level. Colleague communications was one area she
struggled which resulted in a need for admin intervention,
especially with her TA (teacher assistant). This impacted her
students as she would be at odds and unable to get her team on the
same page when it came to her special education students.
RATIONALE As stated in the previous box, Elizabeth is continuing to acclimate
teaching at a very different level. She is also struggling to work
effectively with her teaching staff and TA. This has resulted in her
students being impacted as she would be at odds and unable to get
her team on the same page when it came to her special education
students. This year she desires to work on this to ensure her
students are getting the necessary and legally needed
accommodations and to best provide for all the students they teach
as a team.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 12
RESEARCH QUESTION How will the implementation of data driven collaboration and
communication techniques in a co-teaching environment affect
instruction and the overall growth of student knowledge of subject
content?
NELP STANDARD
VDOE
PERFORMANCE AND
EVALUATION
STANDARDS
PROFESSIONAL
STANDARDS FOR
EDUCATIONAL
LEADERS
NELP STANDARD 4: LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION
COMPONENT 4.2: Program completers understand and can
demonstrate the capacity to evaluate, develop, and implement
high-quality and equitable academic and non-academic
instructional practices, resources, technologies, and services that
support equity, digital literacy, and the school’s academic and non-
academic systems
Performance Standard 2: Instructional Planning
The teacher plans using the Virginia Standards of Learning, the
school’s curriculum, student data, and engaging and research-
based strategies and resources to meet the needs of all students.
Performance Standard 3: Instructional Delivery
The teacher uses a variety of research-based instructional strategies
appropriate for the content area to engage students in active
learning, promote key skills, and meet individual learning needs.
Performance Standard 7: Professionalism
The teacher demonstrates a commitment to professional ethics,
collaborates and communicates appropriately, and takes
responsibility for personal and professional growth that results in
the enhancement of student learning.
STANDARD 4. CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, AND
ASSESSMENT
Effective educational leaders develop and support intellectually
rigorous and coherent systems of curriculum, instruction, and
assessment to promote each student’s academic success and well-
being.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 13
Date & Time of Scheduled Observations
Observation 1: 9/15/22 @ 9:30 am
Observation 2: 9/20/22 @ 7:30 am
Observation 3: 10/7/22 @ 1:10 pm
Observations Journal notes from each observation
Observation #1 9/15/22
Observation during co-taught class with Erin Holden.
Students were taking notes in class. Ms. Holden ran the notes with Ms.
Tran assisting students (One teach, one assist). Both teachers wired to see
students were completing their papers with a small amount of
communication between teachers to stay on the same page. Wait time was
provided for students who needed extra time to write. It was observed that
one student had completed notes and was highlighting. Only Ms. Holden
answered questions from students at first. This changed as the class went
on. Ms. Tran assisted with giving class information at about 9:40. She did
fill in as Ms. Holden was helping with student behavior.
Needs:
The teacher is used more as a TA than a teacher.
More interaction with students.
Assist students vs Holden assisting students.
Tran should also interact with the class as a whole.
Students with attention concerns have fewer blanks to fill in overall.
Strengths:
Implementation of modification for notes (student has fine motor
skills and attention concerns.
Completed notes and highlighted required to allow the student to
focus on teaching vs filling in notes.
Suggest students with attention concerns have fewer blanks to fill in
overall).
Moved around the room to ensure students had equal access to Tran
and Holden.
Some interrupting on notes to allow for Tran’s information added in.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 14
Date & Time of Scheduled Observations
Observation 1: 9/15/22 @ 9:30 am
Observation 2: 9/20/22 @ 7:30 am
Observation #2 (9/20/22)
This was the collaborative meeting with Ms. Tran’s co-teachers. During this
meeting, the team discussed the pre-assessment for an upcoming unit. They
discussed the need for modifications on the assessment. The team also
discussed the need to adjust for the shortened schedule today and tomorrow
due to standardized testing. Small group pull-out for diagnostic was also
discussed. One teacher insisted the read-aloud did not need to be
completed. Ms. Tran insisted it did despite the other teacher. This will be
completed by Ms. Tran. The team also discussed a playlist for students who
were out absent. Students will complete notes independently. Ms. Tran
insisted they still provide accommodations for students to do vocabulary.
Ms. Tran asked how to accommodate her students. Kennedy gave her some
ideas. It was expressed that the nearpod may be long.
The team discussed how the county changed the required project for
students. They determined it needs to be reprinted and adjusted to fit all
students. They also discussed how to modify for the students from honors
to those with disabilities. Ms. Tran met with Mr. Kelley after the CLT to
discuss implanting a new coteaching style. They worked out a plan.
Strengths:
active participation
asked for ideas when struggling with the content
gave ideas on what to do
Assertive of what needed to be done for her students.
Met with one teacher (Mr. Kelley) independently to discuss
implementing a new coteaching style.
Needs:
did not discuss the ideas we brainstormed in our last meeting with
her team.
May not have been a good idea yet given the PBA items needing to
be discussed.
Observation #3 10/7/22
This class was a self-contained class with TA. Ms. Tran did great
differentiating for her students. All her students were participating. She
utilized lots of visuals and positive rewards. During the class, Ms. Tran
initiated a project for students to work on learning about land runs and the
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 15
Date & Time of Scheduled Observations
Observation 1: 9/15/22 @ 9:30 am
Observation 2: 9/20/22 @ 7:30 am
Homesteading Act. She did so in small group sessions vs one large group.
Her co-teacher assisted. Students picked the land they claimed due to a
random drawing of names.
Strengths:
Worked in smaller groups with her students.
Used more visuals.
Students were not required to take notes. Instead, they actively
participated.
Needs:
Should use her TA more in teaching. TA knows the content and can
help with more.
Observation Cycle Criteria
Pre-observation Conference
The teacher and researcher met during the week of August 29, 2022. The two discussed
what it was Ms. Tran felt was an area of weakness and something she wanted to work on. It was
determined that Ms. Tran needed to work on increasing her collaboration and communication
with co-teachers to ensure her coteaching styles were effective with students. Ms. Tran felt she
was not as strong in this area as she should be which was resulting in her not being as effective
as she could be in her inclusion classes. The researcher then contacted the co-teachers with
which Ms. Tran worked and got a baseline for how they felt she was doing. It was determined
that while Ms. Tran had shown improvement in her knowledge of content in the past school year,
she still was not demonstrating confidence in the co-taught classroom. This was resulting in
some of the other staff not being willing to allow her to take more of a lead in class. This was
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 16
discussed with Ms. Tran who also felt she was not as strong as she could be but that this was
more due to the fact some of her co-teachers were not willing to allow her to work as needed or
provide the correct accommodations at times.
Post-observation Conferences
Conference Summary of Progress
Post-Observation #1
(9/15/22)
Agenda:
Observation discussion
Strengths and Needs discussion
Adjustment of the Action plan
Potential implementation strategies
Teacher Tone: Ms. Tran was receptive to the ideas discussed in the
meeting. She agreed that changing the plan of action would be good
but isn’t certain her co-teachers will all agree to it.
Discussion: Ms. Tran and I discussed what I saw in class and whether
or not this was typical for this coteaching situation. I was informed it
was and that this was part of why she was so concerned (this was a
reiteration of a prior conversation as well). We discussed ways to
help this other teacher become more receptive to the help. We
discussed ways to help with the behavior in class and ways to
communicate these concerns with her co-teacher in this class.
The next observation is scheduled to watch her work with planning
with all teachers on her team.
Post-Observation #2
(9/20/22)
Agenda:
Observation discussion
Strengths and Needs discussion
Adjustment of the Action plan
Potential implementation strategies
Teacher Tone: Ms. Tran appeared frustrated during this meeting.
Her attitude improved as we discussed what was going on and how to
implement the chosen coteaching style: alternative teaching. Ms.
Tran spoke with Mr. Kelley about implementing another style with
him specifically, team teaching.
Discussion: Ms. Tran was given feedback on her planning time with
her team. What was done well was discussed. Specifically, how she
worked well with ensuring her students were getting the proper
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 17
Conference Summary of Progress
accommodations and how she was working with others when she
needed help coming up with ideas. Some areas of improvement were
discussed as well given she was still not implementing more
coteaching styles. We scheduled another observation for 10/7/22.
Post-Observation #3
(10/7/22)
Agenda:
Observation discussion
Strengths and Needs discussion
Adjustment of the Action plan
Potential implementation strategies
Teacher Tone: Ms. Tran appeared receptive to the discussion. She
was active in the discussion and exhibited no negative body
language.
Discussion: Ms. Tran was given feedback on her lessons with her
alternative teaching. She did well overall, implanting the required
planning and work in class. Continued ideas for improving through
the school year were discussed. Ms. Tran will be attending a co-
teaching conference in December to assist with this and help to create
a PD on the topic.
Data Analysis
For this project, the researcher chose to use both qualitative and quantitative data from
multiple classes the teacher worked in. Qualitative data consisted of observational data on
coteaching methods, communication, and collaboration. This was taken multiple times during
the project. Quantitative data utilized were student formative and summative scores during the
time the project was being conducted.
It was determined that the teacher was improving her communication and collaboration in
certain areas. She was observed using new strategies and discussing how to implement them
with three of the four members of her team. She struggled with communicating and
collaborating with one but she did invite her to attend a co-teaching conference with her to help
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 18
continue to improve in this area. The co-teacher refused to attend and presented with body
language and tone of voice consistent with being angry at being asked.
It was also observed that the teacher was working diligently to implement more styles of
coteaching. Specifically, she implemented the alternative teaching style by working with a
smaller group of students. Prior, the teacher had been using only one teach, one assist.
Quantitative data consisted of student formative and summative scores in the class. Two
classes were provided for this final project. The teacher was able to initiate more collaboration
and coteaching in the two classes listed below. The second set of grades has the special
education students highlighted to denote which grades were used in the calculations. Names are
redacted for privacy. Comparing the grades in picture 1, you can see the student grades had a
marked improvement between the first and second summative. Formative grades also improved.
Scores did drop for students between the second and third summative however they were not an
overall bad grade for half the students as 80% of grades demonstrate mastery of the content. The
class average for formatives and summatives was 85%. Only 17% of the class has less than an
80% average on all assessments thus far.
Picture two is a larger class where the teacher is working with both general and special
education students. Reviewing the data shows similar fluctuations in the grades from summative
to summative though there is more of a drop from the first to second summative for that class.
Again, the class average is showing the students averaging 86%, with only 21% not earning
above 80%.
The final picture shows the one class the teacher had resistance to implementing the
project. This class did not allow Ms. Tran to implement as many styles of coteaching and has
historically refused to allow TAs in her classroom. When asked if she would be willing to allow
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 19
the teacher to use more strategies, she refused. Her grades demonstrate a mix of both some
grades holding stable but a few have major drops. There is not the same pattern throughout as in
the other two classes. The overall class average is also lower at 79%. Forty-five percent of the
class has not demonstrated mastery per their current grades. An average of 20% are receiving
grades below 70%. None of the classes that have implemented alternative coteaching styles have
seen this occur.
Picture
2
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 20
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 21
Conclusion
While this study provided some data to answer the question “will the
implementation of data-driven collaboration and communication techniques in a co-teaching
environment affect instruction and the overall growth of student knowledge of subject content?”,
it does have some limitations. First, the study is not long enough to see long-term changes.
During the average school quarter, only four summative and four formative assessments are
given. This project did not run for a full quarter. The data was not as significant as it could have
been should the study have been conducted over a longer period of time.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 22
The study also had a lot of variables. While it was impossible to effectively remove all
variables other than the implementation of collaboration, communication, and coteaching, there
could have been fewer variables in the study.
What was learned via the data available is that utilizing these data-driven tools does
increase student achievement. The data demonstrates less variability in the grades where classes
incorporated these items. There are also higher overall class average grades in the classes that
implemented them despite the fact they had more special education students in class.
Further research should change a few things. First, the study needs to be extended over a
longer period of time. Training should also be provided for the coteaching team to ensure they
are implementing communication, collaboration, and coteaching correctly. Lastly, utilizing one
class where data is tracked over multiple months, starting before the training to several months
after the training would provide more data.
Dispositions
Disposition How did you promote the disposition in your interactions with the novice teacher
and students?
Trust
Trust is an ongoing item between myself and the teacher. I worked last year as her
mentor. She assured this project would not affect her evaluation negatively. Trust was
created between the teacher and students before the project as she had been teaching
them for a month already. The teacher demonstrates her positivity and respect for
students in class and this was witnessed during observations.
Equity
Equity was promoted as the teacher is working to ensure all her students, general and
special education, are receiving the necessary teaching to ensure they are learning to the
best of their ability. She uses accommodations and modifications as required or needed
and is working towards implementing data-driven teaching styles. Meeting with her
teachers as needed, with some teachers more than others, was completed to help ensure
equity is reached here as well.
Fairness The teacher works to demonstrate fairness by listening to what her co-teachers are
comfortable with regarding trying new things, within what is legally allowable. All
legally required accommodations, specially designed instruction, and modifications are
completed at all times as well.
Fairness is also demonstrated by ensuring students get what items they need to be
successful in their learning of the content.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 23
Disposition How did you promote the disposition in your interactions with the novice teacher
and students?
Fairness between the researcher and teacher was shown by not pushing the teacher too
far past her comfort zone and working to support her when she did go outside it.
Respect
The teacher treated her co-teachers with respect by listening to them and working with
them in an attempt to get them accustomed to working as a team and using new
teaching styles. She does not argue with teachers in class but instead talks to them
privately which also demonstrates respect for both her co-teachers and students.
Respect between teacher and researcher was established last year. It continued this year
by the researcher supporting her teacher while she was going outside her comfort zone.
Brainstorming ways to help get past roadblocks with her co-teachers and ways to
implement data-driven collaboration, communication, and coteaching was done as well.
The researcher only used constructive criticism as well.
ACTION RESEARCH PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Teacher Name: Elizabeth Tran School Division Level: Middle School, Special Education
1. Summarize the final action research meeting: write what was decided in the form of a
proposed continuation plan.
During the meeting, it was determined that the teacher did well in implementing her plan.
The teacher was successfully able to implement a new coteaching method in two of her
classes. One teacher is still resistant to implementing more styles. A plan was discussed
and decided upon. The teacher will need to talk directly and openly with her co-teacher.
They should come up with an agreement. If they cannot, there may need to be an
involvement with administration as the resistance is affecting students in this class and
the teacher was unable to effectively administer the legally required specially designed
instruction. The teacher will attend a coteaching conference and the school admin has
agreed to implement a coteaching training for all core content staff at the school to help
all understand what it is and why it needs to occur. They will also learn ways to can be
successfully implemented.
2. Commendations (Two) from the teacher’s involvement in the action research.
The teacher was wonderful to work with. She was eager to work on improving in this
area of her career. She saw a gap and worked diligently to fill it properly. The teacher is
also eager to move forward with training and helping all the coteaching staff at her school
to improve their ability to provide this instruction.
3. What one improvement (recommendation) needs to take place? Write as a SMART goal.
One area of improvement is for the teacher to be willing to take the step and have a hard
conversation with her more resistant co-teachers.
Given supports from administration, Liz will communicate with her co-teachers about
whose responsibility it is to provide various parts of the lessons.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 24
4. Action Steps: provide 3-5 activities that the teacher must accomplish to meet the SMART
goal.
Action Steps
(Activities)
Due Date Who will assess
progress/completion?
Resources Needed
Attend
coteaching
conference
December 3, 2023 Teacher Approval from
administration to
attend (school will
pay for the
conference as it
has been
approved)
Provide articles
for co-teachers
on various
coteaching
styles.
October 21, 2022 Teacher Articles on
coteaching styles
Communicate
with co-teachers
concerns about
collaboration
and coteaching
October 21, 2022 Teacher None
5. Describe how the post-conference will be conducted for this plan – at the end of this plan.
The researcher will be conducting this meeting. It will occur after the coteaching
conference that the teacher has been approved to attend in December. It will take place at
the teacher’s school. We will first recap what the plan was. We will then discuss what
has been going on and have there has been any improvement in the collaboration,
communication, and coteaching styles used in classes. Any concerns will be discussed.
We will then talk about what was learned at the conference and what can be used from
there in the school-wide training that will be implemented.
6. Connection to National Standards: Standards that are used for the newly designed growth
plan:
The growth plan created by the researcher and teacher has three major elements for the
teacher: attending the coteaching conference to continue to advance in the understanding
of research-driven data, providing data to her co-teachers to assist in the understanding of
coteaching styles, and communicating concerns with co-teachers. This plan incorporates
the standards from the National Staff Development Council listed below. The teacher
will continue to gather resources and information to guide her improvement by way of
the conference and her research. She will apply the information and resources she has
learned and apply them in her classrooms as she communicates the roles in the classes
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 25
with her co-teachers. She will be disseminating her knowledge and skills to collaborate
during her discussion on roles as well.
a) Staff development that improves the learning of all students requires resources to
support adult learning and collaboration.
b) Staff development that improves the learning of all students uses multiple sources
of information to guide improvement and demonstrate its impact.
c) Staff development that improves the learning of all students prepares educators to
apply research to decision-making.
d) Staff development that improves the learning of all students uses learning
strategies appropriate to the intended goal.
e) Staff development that improves the learning of all students provides educators
with the knowledge and skills to collaborate.
Conclusion
Coteaching is not easy. It requires two individuals to work together as a cohesive unit
and while this may sound simple, the process is often wrought with pitfalls. Lack of training,
inability to communicate and/or collaborate effectively, and an unwillingness to work as a team
are just a few. This action research study explored how effective, and data-driven skills such as
communication, collaboration, and various coteaching methods helped encourage student
growth. This project allowed the teacher to explore these areas in her classroom and determine
what areas she needed to improve. She then implemented a plan to improve during the study
period and for a few months after.
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 26
References
Cramer, E., Liston, A., Nevin, A., & Thousand, J. (2010). Co-teaching in urban secondary school
districts to meet the needs of all teachers and learners: Implications for teacher education
reform. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 6(2), 59-76.
Coley, K. S. (2006). The Helmsman: Leading with courage and wisdom. Colorado Springs, CO:
Purposeful Design. ISBN: 9781583310731
Harvey, J., Cambron-McCabe, N., Cunningham, L. L., & Koff, R. H. (2013). The
superintendent’s fieldbook: A guide for leaders of learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin.
Montgomery, M. S., & Akerson, A. (2019). Facilitating Collaboration through a Co-Teaching
Field Experience. Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, 21(1).
Monteblanco, A. D. (2021). Power Dynamics, common pitfalls, and successful strategies
associated with co-teaching. College Teaching, 69(2), 63–68.
https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2020.1810610
Murawski, W. (2010). Collaborative teaching in elementary schools: Making the marriage work!
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Randall, R., & Marangell, J. (2021). Changing what we might have done on our own: Improving
classroom culture and learning through teacher collaboration. The Clearing House: A
Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 94(1), 38–46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2020.1828240
COLLABORATION AND COTEACHING 27
Ricci, L. A., & Fingon, J. C. (2017). Faculty modeling co-teaching and collaboration practices in
general education and special education courses in Teacher preparation programmes.
ATHENS JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 4(4), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.4-4-
4
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2017). Making inclusion work with co-teaching.
TEACHING Exceptional Children, 49, 284–293.
