• School of Education
• Centers, Institutes & Projects
• T/TAC
• Resources
• Newsletter Articles
• Consult Collaboration

Remove the Barriers of Time and Space:
Strategies for Effective Co-Planning

By Butler Knight, Ed.S., and Lee Anne Sulzberger, M.Ed.

 

November/December 2013

A search for the term “collaboration” in the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) database reveals nearly 25,000 articles – more than 5,000 of them were published since 2009. It is clear that professional collaboration is a major way in which schools strive to meet the needs of all students, including those with disabilities (Friend & Cook, 2010; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2010). 

Collaborative teaching (i.e., co-teaching) is an approach to teacher collaboration that is designed to meet student needs. Co-teaching consists of a partnership between two or more professionals who share instructional responsibility for a diverse group of students in a shared classroom space. As such, it is considered “a service delivery option for providing special education or related services to students with disabilities or other special needs while they remain in their general education classes” (Friend & Cook, 2010, p. 109).

Instructional collaboration requires comprehensive instructional planning that takes into consideration (a) standards, (b) assessment, (c) accommodations/modifications, (d) instructional strategies, and (e) logistics (Howard &. Potts, 2009).

Co-teachers can use the checklist in Table 1, adapted from Howard and Potts (2009), to reflect on the planning process. “Yes” answers to the questions indicate that a given planning component has been addressed.

Table 1

Checklist for Instructional Planning Components 

Planning Area	Guiding Questions	Yes		No
Standards	Did we use standards as the focus of   the lesson?
	Did we relate to IEP goals?
Assessment	Did   we start with the end in mind?
	Did we include formative assessment?
	Did we include summative assessment?
	Will we assess in a variety of   formats?  Paper and pencil  Project-based  Oral  Presentations
	Did we agree on grading procedures?  Person responsible  Differentiating grading based on student needs  Use of rubrics
	Did we talk about homework?  How much to assign  How often to assign  Procedures for submitting  How to grade  Accepting late work
Accommodations/Modifications	Did we address any appropriate   content-related IEP goals?
	Did we address any   non-content-related IEP goals?
	Did we consider needs of individual   students for assignments?
	Did we discuss how to provide   accommodations/modifications inclusively?
Instructional Strategies	Did we consider mnemonics?
	Did we consider graphic organizers?
	Did we consider cooperative learning   strategies?
	Did we consider progress monitoring?
	Did we consider peer-assisted   learning strategies?
Logistics	Did we decide who will prepare   tests?
	Did we decide who will prepare   materials?
	Did we plan for roles and arrangements?  Seating  Classroom movement patterns  Student grouping  Roles in instruction  Roles in discipline

Adapted from Howard and Potts (2009).

Another co-planning process is BASE, a four-step process that consists of:

1. Defining the big ideas,
2. Analyzing areas of difficulty,
3. Creating strategies and supports, and
4. Evaluating the process (Hawbaker, Balong, Buckwalter, & Runyon, 2001).

The steps of BASE and corresponding actions to consider are presented in Table 2.

Table 2

 BASE Planning Process

Steps	Possible Actions
1.  Define the big ideas	Use curriculum resources aligned with state assessments to identify the essential concepts and skills every student needs to master.
2.  Analyze areas of difficulty	Discuss the areas students have previously found   difficult, the complexity of concepts, and the skills needed to access the content.
3.  Create strategies and supports	Select strategies to improve instruction and assessment strategies that enable students to demonstrate their learning. Address individual student needs as outlined in IEPs or 504 plans.
4.  Evaluate the process	At the end of the unit, evaluate the selection of big ideas, the accuracy of predicted areas of difficulty, and the effectiveness of instructional strategies by answering the following questions: Did we clearly identify the big ideas? What areas of difficulty occurred for students? Did these areas match what we anticipated? How well did the strategies work? Do we need to include others?

Both the checklist and the BASE steps for planning can help ensure that co-teachers are designing effective instruction. However, insufficient planning time is repeatedly cited as a barrier to effective co-teaching (Scruggs, Mastropieri, & McDuffie, 2007). One solution to this perennial obstacle is for co-teaching partners to use technology to collaborate and communicate when shared planning time is limited.

The free tools listed in Table 3 represent technology solutions that allow co-teaching partners to collaborate in real time or to create lesson plans and instructional materials at different times.

Table 3

Online Collaboration Tools

Resource	Purpose
Dropbox and Google Drive	Share files in the cloud so several people can access and work on the same document at different times.
Edmodo	This online site is for both teachers and students. It is a tool for that allows teachers to communicate with students, parents, and each other. Key features include posting digital resources and messaging.
Google Hangout	This tool uses video or chat in real time. Participants can also see a shared document via screen share.
PB Works	Co-teachers can share documents and post videos or images using this online collaboration site.
Vocaroo	This no-cost recording site is in the field-testing stage. It allows users to send brief voice messages to others through the Internet.
Wikispaces	Wikis allow people to contribute content to an online site that looks similar to a website.
Zoho	A collection of online collaboration tools including chat, shared documents, and online meeting spaces.

Collaborative planning is essential if co-teachers are to “capture each other’s fund of collective intelligence” (Schmoker, 1999, p. 100) in order to support all students in a co-taught classroom. Using a structured planning process along with technology tools can help make co-planning and co-teaching more effective and less stressful. 

Additional Resources

For a comprehensive resource from the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) on collaborating for student success, refer to Stepping Stones to Success II Collaboration: Working Together for All Students.

For an overview of collaboration between general and special educators, read General & Special Educators Collaborating: Essential for Student Success.

Additional information on co-planning may be found at http://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/school_improvement/training/index.shtml.

For more information on co-teaching, read Co-Teaching: An Effective Approach for Inclusive Education  or Co-Teaching: Tips for Enhancing Practice.

References