The Impact of Number of Adults on Instruction: Implications for Co-Teaching

Common approaches to inclusive education (e.g., co-teaching or team teaching) are based in part on an assumption that when more than one adult or professional are present in a classroom, rates of effective instructional practices and appropriate (i.e., positive) feedback can improve for students who need them most. In this preliminary study, the authors examined teacher–student interactions in a matched set of classrooms in which either one adult or more than one adult were present. The authors present the results of their analyses of teachers’ rates of (a) positive and negative feedback, and (b) opportunities to respond, as well as their time spent one-on-one or in small groups with individual, target students. The authors also examine students’ percentage of time engaged and rates of disruption. In addition, the authors discuss limitations and implications for the increased use of co-teaching as a service delivery model.

[1]  William J. Hussar,et al.  The Condition of Education 2012. NCES 2012-045. , 2012 .

[2]  Justin T. Cooper,et al.  Teacher as Change Agent: Considering Instructional Practice to Prevent Student Failure , 2015 .

[3]  N. Zigmond,et al.  Coteaching Revisited: Redrawing the Blueprint , 2008 .

[4]  M. Friend,et al.  Co-Teaching: Guidelines for Creating Effective Practices. , 2017 .

[5]  John Hattie,et al.  The paradox of reducing class size and improving learning outcomes , 2005 .

[6]  Kimberly A. McDuffie,et al.  Co-Teaching and Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. , 2008 .

[7]  Jere Brophy,et al.  Teacher Praise: A Functional Analysis , 1981 .

[8]  Emanuel Schmider,et al.  Is It Really Robust , 2010 .

[9]  Regina G. Hirn,et al.  An Examination of Typical Classroom Context and Instruction for Students With and Without Behavioral Disorders , 2011 .

[10]  M. Reising,et al.  Co-Teaching: An Overview of the Past, a Glimpse at the Present, and Considerations for the Future , 1993 .

[11]  N. Rosman.  Effects of Varying the Special Educator's Role within an Algebra Class on Math Attitude and Achievement. , 1994 .

[12]  John Hattie,et al.  Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement , 2008 .

[13]  M. Friend,et al.  Interactions: Collaboration Skills for School Professionals , 1991 .

[14]  Thomas E. Scruggs,et al.  Co-Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms: A Metasynthesis of Qualitative Research , 2007 .

[15]  R. Trussell.  Classroom Universals to Prevent Problem Behaviors , 2008 .

[16]  K. Wheldall,et al.  Teachers' Use of Approval and Disapproval in the Classroom , 2000 .

[17]  M. White,et al.  Natural rates of teacher approval and disapproval in the classroom. , 1975, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[18]  Bryan G. Cook,et al.  Co-Teaching for Students with Disabilities , 2011 .

[19]  Jon Tapp,et al.  A multiple option observation system for experimental studies: MOOSES , 1995 .

[20]  Wendy W. Murawski.  Student Outcomes in Co-Taught Secondary English Classes: How Can We Improve? , 2006 .

[21]  James M. Kauffman,et al.  What Is Special About Special Education for Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disorders? , 2003 .

[22]  Regina M. Oliver,et al.  Using Teacher Praise and Opportunities to Respond to Promote Appropriate Student Behavior , 2009 .

[23]  J. Kauffman,et al.  Educational Service Interventions and Reforms , 2007 .

[24]  Wendy W. Murawski,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Co-Teaching Research , 2001 .

[25]  Michael D. Coyne,et al.  Quality Indicators for Group Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research in Special Education , 2005 .

[26]  S. Vaughn,et al.  What Is Special About Special Education for Students with Learning Disabilities? , 2003 .

[27]  David D. Kumar.  A Meta‐analysis of the Relationship between Science Instruction and Student Engagement , 1991 .