Collaboration in Education Power Point

1. By:
Elizabeth Bove , Joy Holbrook, Darby Koteff, Jessica
Moreman, & Valerie Powell

2. “In research, in medicine, in
manufacturing, and even in
technology, collaboration is becoming
the norm.”

3.  Click the link below to see how collaboration can make
a large task seem very small.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF8oc5n
P6jI

4. We will discuss four different ways
educators can utilize collaboration:
 Grade Level Collaboration
 Co-Teaching
 Cross-Curricular Collaboration
 Student Collaboration

5. Grade Level Collaboration
Grade level Collaboration involves working with the
other teachers in your grade level to develop and
implement instruction.

6. Teachers should work with other teachers to make
connections between and among disciplines (Kentucky
Department of Education, 2011).

7. Teachers utilize one another when
effectively using grade level
collaboration.

8. If we are closed-minded and not willing to work across
our boundaries to discover what the highly skilled
teacher next door is teaching, we could potentially be
shortchanging our students.

9. Co-Teaching
 Collaborative teaching is defined as “the preferred
umbrella term for the joint efforts of two certified
teachers with different areas of expertise….partnering
to share responsibility for
designing, delivering, monitoring and evaluating
instruction for a diverse group of learners in general
education classes” Kentucky Department of Education (KDE): Collaborative Teaching Practices
for Exceptional Children, June 2011.

10. Co-Teaching Models
 There are five defined co-teaching models, University of Kansas
Center for Research on Learning: Content Enhancement, Fall 2004.
 One teach, One assist
 Station Teaching
 Parallel Teaching
 Alternative Teaching
 Team Teaching

11. One Teach, One Assist

12. Station Teaching

13. Parallel Teaching

14. Alternative Teaching

15. Team Teaching

16. Benefits of Co-Teaching
1. Brings together teachers’ expertise to meet the needs of all
the students in the classroom (Austin, 2001).
2. Allows for more instructional options in the classroom and
reduces the student-teacher ratio, therefore potentially
improves classroom management (Magiera & Zigmond, 2005).
3. Disabled students felt a greater sense of pride and
capability. Walther-Thomas (1997)
4. Creates high expectations and a positive climate for all of
the students in the classroom. Dieker (2001)

17.  “Planning instructional strategies and activities that
facilitate multiple levels of learning”
 “Identifying students whose learning could be
enhanced by collaboration”
 “Designing a plan to enhance student learning that
includes all parties in the collaborative effort.”

18. Cross-Curricular Collaboration
Cross curricular learning helps develop meta-cognitive
learners able to adapt their learning to new situations.

19. Since we do not practice basic skills in isolation in daily
life, doing so in our educational practice would be
disruptive to the learning process.

20. According to the National Assessment of Educational
Progress, while students are learning the basic
information in core subject areas, they are not learning
to apply their knowledge effectively in thinking and
reasoning (Applebee, Langer, & Mullis, 1989).

21. Making Connections
Interdisciplinary/cross-curricular teaching provides a
meaningful way in which students can use knowledge
they have learned in one context as a knowledge base
in other contexts in and out of school (Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1989).

22. Increase Student Motivation
Interdisciplinary/cross-curricular teaching can also
increase students' motivation for learning and their
level of engagement. (Resnick, 1989).

23. Time Management
Curriculum integration maximizes the utilization of
learning time by “borrowing” from one area to support
another. (Timmons,2012)

24. Student Collaboration
It is our responsibility to give our students opportunities
to collaborate in teams, small groups or in pairs on
assignments

25. How
 There are many ways this can be done ranging from
basic things such as the arrangement of desks in a
classroom to more intentional things such as
providing academic opportunities throughout the year
to provide practice for students to work together
collaboratively.

26. According to Wagner, “[o]ne of the lessons we learned
quickly was that the hardest thing to change was the
behavior of employees” (2008, p. 23).

27. In order to equip our students for the future that awaits
them. We need to take advantage of collaboration in
all areas of teaching; within the classroom and among
the professionals in our schools. The future for our
students is unknown, but we can be certain that
collaboration is a skill that they will need to possess in
order to have a fighting chance to adapt to the world
that is waiting for them.

28. References
 Applebee, A.N., Langer, J.A., & Mullis, I.V. (1989). Crossroads in American education: A summary of findings: Educational Testing Service. Princeton, NJ.
 Austin, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs about co-teaching. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 245-255.
 Barton, K.C. & Smith, L.A. (September 2000). Themes or motifs? Aiming for coherence through interdisciplinary outlines. The Reading Teacher, 54(1), 54 – 63.
 Brophy, J. & Alleman, J. (October 1991). A caveat: Curriculum integration isn’t always a good idea. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 66
 Ciccorico, E. W. 1970. Integration in the curriculum. Main Currents in Modern Thought 27 (November/December):60–62.
 Collins, A., Brown, J.S., & Newman, S.E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowledge, learning and
instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
 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, 14-23.
 Gatewood, T. (March 1998). How valid is integrated curriculum in today’s middle school? Middle School Journal, 29(4), 38 - 41.
 Georgetown College Conceptual Framework Outcomes, Standards, and Indicators (2011).
 Kentucky Department of Education, Division of Learning Services, Collaborative Teaching Practices for Exceptional Children, Question and Answer Document (June 2011).
 Kentucky Department of Education. (2011). HETL common characteristics. Retrieved from http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Instructional Resources/Highly Effective
Teaching and Learning/HETL Common Characteristics.tm.
 Magiera, K., & Zigmond, N. (2005). Co-teaching in middle school classrooms under routine conditions: Does the instructional experiences differ for students with disabilities in
co-taught and solo-taught classes? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 79-85.
 Resnick, L.B. (Ed.) (1989). Introduction. In Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (1-24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
 Timmons, Jess “What’s the Big Deal?- Why Cross-Curricular Collaboration is so Darn Good For Kids. Retrieved June 3, 2012 from
http://pricetimmons.blogspot.com/2007/07/so-whats-big-deal-anyways.html
 University of Kansas, Center for Research on Learning: Content Enhancement-Concept Comparison Routine (Fall, 2004).
 Wagner, T. (2008). The Global Achievement Gap. New York, NY: Basic Books.
 Walther-Thomas, C. S. (1997). Co-teaching experiences: The benefits and problems that teachers and principals report over time. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 395-408.