1. Comparative Analysis of Co-Teacher Relationships between General and Special Educators
Ida M. Malian, Arizona State University
Ann I. Nevin, Florida International University
Teacher Education Division of CEC Annual Conference
Charlotte NC
Friday October 13, :30-5:00 Poster Session

2. Acknowledgments
Heather Hall Heidi Hillebrand Erin McRae Alicia Martinez Candice Miracle Candice Perry

3. Introduction

4. Introduction Purpose of the study is to:
Determine whether there is a relationship between general and special educators’ ratings of their compatibility on a Co-Teacher Relationship Scale,
Replicate studies conducted in Hawaii and Florida,
Provide state-wide data on effective co-teaching components to Arizona school districts.

5. Literature Review 46 peer reviewed articles - 17 selected
Categories of literature review
Models, Roles and Responsibilities
Effective Co-teaching
The Benefits of Co-teaching
Barriers
K-12
Common Definitions

6. Definition
Co-teaching is defined as “the collaboration between general and special education teachers for all of the teaching responsibilities of all students assigned to a classroom” (Gately & Gately, 2001).

7. Methods

8. Methods Preliminary inquiry Survey selection
Co-Teacher Relationship Scale (Noonan, 2003)
Replication, permission
Human subjects review approval
On-line survey
Collaborated with ADE
Data was aggregated into SPSS

9. Components of the Survey
Approaches to teaching
Personal characteristics

10. On-line Survey

11. Demographics

12. Demographics Schools Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Elementary
High School
Junior High
Middle School
Total 1
160 50 9 70
290 .3
55.2
17.2
3.1
24.1
100.0
55.5
72.8
75.9
100.00

13. Demographics School Type Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Charter
Public
Total 1 15
274
290 .3
5.2
94.5
100.0
5.5

14. Demographics Role Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
General Educator
Special Educator
Total 4
154
132
290
1.4
53.1
45.5
100.0
54.5

15. Demographics
Representative Percentages of Respondent Formal Training and Age

16. Demographics
Representative Percentages of Respondent Years of Experience and Formal Training

17. Other Demographics Other types of formal training
From para-professional training to Doctorate
Number of years as a co-teacher
45% had one to three years of experience in co-teaching
Over 50% were in the first year with their current co-teacher

18. Results

19. Null Hypothesis
No reported difference between general and special educators on beliefs and approaches to teaching and personal characteristics

20. Null Hypothesis
No significant difference between general and special educators in their respective beliefs about approaches to teaching regarding:
Physical arrangement of the classroom (.671)
Classroom scheduling (.671)
Structured activities (.139)
Curriculum (.118)
How students learn (.031)
Inclusion (.021)
Adaptation and individualization (.03)
Behavior management (.90)
Teacher roles and responsibilities (.31)
Parent involvement (.274)

21. Null Hypothesis
No significant difference between general and special educators in their respective beliefs about co-teacher personal characteristics regarding:
Desire to try new things (.909)
Confidence (.428)
Collegiality (.794)
Educational planning (.689)
Flexibility in dealing with unforeseen events (.853)
Humor (.825)
Ability to be supportive to colleagues and staff (.249)
Learning new things (.379)
Dedication (.377)
Effectiveness of co-teaching

22. Overall Results

23. Overall Effectiveness
Effectiveness of Co-teaching
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid Extremely Effective
Fairly Effective
Effective
Somewhat Effective
Not Effective
Total
Missing System 86 80 64 41 17
288 2
290
29.7
27.6
22.1
14.1
5.9
99.3 .7
100.0
29.9
27.8
22.2
14.2
57.6
79.9
94.1

24. Discussion

25. Approaches to Teaching
Parental Involvement
Structured Activities
Behavior Management
Inclusion
Adaptation & Individualization
Teacher Roles & Responsibilities

26. Personal Characteristics
Dedication
Learning new things
Confidence
Collegiality
Educational Planning
Ability to be supportive to colleagues and staff

27. Implications and Conclusions

28. Implications Significance is that there were no differences
Positive change towards collaborating with special education by general education
Positive catalyst for promoting co-teaching
High reports of mutual confidence
Differences may compliment co-teaching effectiveness
25% were first year co-teachers
Relationship between dedication and effectiveness

29. Conclusions from the Study
Overwhelming positive response to co-teaching may be a result of:
an entry level belief
co-teaching experience
Refutes other empirical studies regarding co-teaching

30. Challenges and Future Research

31. Challenges of the Study
Over-estimation/under-estimation
Lacked a paired research design
No control over how it was filled out (not face-to-face)
Principal may have misinterpreted definition
Not sent it to appropriate people
May have rushed through survey and not taken time on questions
Duplication

32. Future Research Qualitative study (face-to-face) Individuals Pairs
Open-ended questions
Longitudinal study
A more consistent definition
Study is skewed because samples chosen were in existing co-teaching relationships
Demographics - differentiate between urban and rural
Study to determine the extent to which co-teaching impacts achievement

33. Implementation Strategies
Administrative support
Willing participants
Longevity
Logistics
Data based evaluation
Co-teacher’s scale
Achievement
Dual teacher training program

34. Your Strategies
Open discussion

35. Bibliography
Apple, D. J., Troha, C., & Rowell, J. (2001). Reflections of a first-year team: The growth of a collaborative partnership. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(3), 4-8.
Austin, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs about co-teaching. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4),
Bauwens, J., & Hourcade, J. J. (1991). Making co-teaching a mainstreaming strategy, Preventing School Failure, 35(4),
Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1995). Co-teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28(3), 1-16.
Cramer, E., & Nevin, A. (2006). A mixed methodology analysis of co-teacher assessments: Implications for teacher education. Teacher Education and Special Education.

36. Bibliography
Cramer, E., Nevin, A., Thousand, J., & Liston, A. (2006). Co-teaching in urban school districts to meet the needs of all teachers and learners: Implications for teacher education reform. Paper presented at American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, San Diego, CA.
Dieker, L. A. (2001). What are the characteristics of “effective” middle and high school co-taught teams for students with disabilities? Preventing School Failure, 46(1),
Duchardt, B., Marlow, L., Inman, D., Christensen, P., & Reeves, M. (1999). Collaboration and co-teaching: General and special education faculty. Clearing House, 72(3),
Fennick, E., & Liddy, D. (2001). Responsibilities and preparation for collaborative teaching: Co-teachers' perspectives. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3),

37. Bibliography
Gately, S. E., & Gately, F. J. ( 2001). Understanding coteaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(4),
Keefe, E. B., & Moore, V. (2004). The challenge of co-teaching in inclusive classrooms at the high school level: What the teachers told us. American Secondary Education, 32(3),
Magiera, K., Smith, C., Zigmond, N., & Gabauer, K. (2005). Benefits of co-teaching in secondary mathematics classes. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(3),
Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., Graetz, J., Norland, J., Gardizi, W., & McDuffie, K. (2005). Case studies in co-teaching in the content areas: Successes, failures, and challenges. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(5),

38. Bibliography
Murawski, W. W., & Swanson, H. L. (2001). A meta-analysis of co-teaching research: Where are the data? Remedial and Special Education, 22(5),
Thousand, J. S., Villa, R. A., & Nevin, A. I. (2006). The many faces of collaborative planning and teaching. Theory into Practice,
themed issue, Inclusive Schooling Practices.
Walther-Thomas, C., Bryant, M., & Land, S. (1996). Planning for
effective co-teaching: The key to successful inclusion. Remedial
and Special Education, 17(4),
Zigmond, N. (2001). Special education at a crossroads. Preventing
School Failure, 45(2),
Zigmond, N., & Magiera, K. (2001). A focus on co-teaching.
Current Practice Alerts, Issue 6. Retrieved April 2006 from