This document summarizes the experiences of two instructors, Kimberly Hilton and Danielle Marshall, who co-taught developmental and college-level English courses at Ivy Tech Community College using a co-requisite model. It discusses their backgrounds, the origins and goals of co-teaching corequisite courses, how their partnership worked in practice, challenges they faced, and recommendations for effective co-teaching partnerships. Research on co-teaching styles and relationship types is presented, along with results of a survey of Ivy Tech instructors on their co-teaching experiences and needs. Suggestions from students on the corequisite model are also shared.

1. Co-Teaching the Co-Req
Stories, Successes & Strategies
Kimberly Hilton & Danielle Marshall
INADE & NADE 2015

2. Who are we?
 Kimberly Hilton
 Associate Professor with 15
years of experience
 B.A. English
 M.S. Adult Education and M.A.
English (May 2015)
 Teaching Writing and Teaching
Literature Certificates
 Danielle Marshall
 Adjunct Instructor with two
years of experience
 B.S. Psychology and B.A.
English
 M.A. English
 Teaching Writing Certificate
We taught together at Ivy Tech Community College
in Indianapolis, IN during Fall 2013 and Spring 2014

3. Origins of Co-Teaching
 Chapman and Hyatt define this practice:
“Co-teaching is an effective, evidence-
based instructional strategy in which two
or more caring professionals share
responsibility for a group of students and
work collaboratively to add instructional
value to enhance their efforts.”
 Typically co-teaching is found in
elementary/middle/high schools and in
special education classrooms.
(Chapman & Hyatt 2011)

4. Co-Teaching the Co-What??
 A co-requisite enrolls students into a
developmental class along with the
corresponding college level class
 At Ivy Tech, students take English 093 along
with English 111, optimally with one
instructor
 Our initiative is based on the Accelerated
Learning Project (ALP) from the Community
College of Baltimore County in Maryland
 According to the ALP website, Indiana,
Michigan, Virginia, Colorado, and West
Virginia have adopted the model statewide

5. Ivy Tech’s Version of ALP
 English 093 is limited to 10 developmental
students in a computer lab classroom
 Those students join 10 English 111 students to
make up the college class
 Assignments in 093 are designed to support
the essays in English 111 (Backward design)
 In 093 time and attention is given to non-
academic/affective issues such as student
work status, parenting, and finances

6. How it Works
•Enrolls in
093
•Companion
111
Student
places
below
English
111
Half the class
tested into
English 111
Attends
class with
same
teacher
•Satisfies
093 prereq
•Receives
credit for
English 111
Student
passes
English
111

7. Why teach CoReqs?
To increase retention
To increase graduation rates
093 supports the assignments in 111
Students see 093 in a positive light
instead of a negative/punishment
Mandated statewide for Ivy Tech

8. Indiana Mandates Co-Reqs
Former Governor Mitch Daniels won a $1
million grant in 2011 “Smarter Choices, Faster
Completion”
Redesign the delivery of remedial coursework at
Ivy Tech
For reading, writing and math at Ivy Tech =
Co-requisite component that places students into
college level courses with supplemental support
(ALP model chosen)
(Indiana Commission for Higher Education 2013)

9. Why Co-Teaching?
 Ivy Tech Increased
co-reqs to 75% of all
composition courses
offered
 One teacher for 093
 Same books for both
classes
 Students receive a
grade in each course
 Shortage of
credentialed teachers
for both levels
 One teacher for 111
 Same 111 syllabus as
non co-reqs
 Students must earn at
least a D in 111 and a
C in 093

10. Our Co-Teaching Experience
 Since Danielle had recently graduated and had
no teaching experience, we decided to create our
own mentoring strategy
 During fall semester, Kim taught English 111
Composition and Danielle taught 093
Developmental Writing
 In spring, Danielle taught 111 and Kim taught a
pilot of 095 (Integrated Reading/Writing)
 In both scenarios we planned the courses
together in person, and communicated regularly
via email and text

11. Relevant Research
 We could not find any specific research on
co-teaching a co-requisite class
 We searched for best practices for co-
teachers in other settings; for example,
middle school/high school teachers
 There are guidelines for new co-teachers in
other settings that can be applied to the co-
req teaching partnerships
 Allessandra’s Platinum Rule and Eisen &
Tisdell’s Relationship Styles
 Survey of Ivy Tech Indianapolis Co-
Teachers Fall 2014

12. The Platinum Rule
 Allesandra’s “The Platinum Rule” offers
four possible styles of co-teachers:
 1. Directors
 2. Socializers
 3. Relaters
 4. Thinkers
 All teachers can exhibit aspects of more than
one style, but one will be predominant
(2014)

13. Platinum Rule Styles
Positives Negatives Needs
Director Task-oriented, work
quickly and alone
Dominating,
stubborn and
impatient
To control and
achieve
Socializer Enthusiasm,
persuasiveness and
ideas
Short attention
span, aversion to
working alone
To be with
others and in
the action
Thinker Detail-oriented,
persistent problem
solvers
Over-critical,
perfectionists
Proof, caution in
making
decisions
Relater People-oriented, good
listeners, loyal
employees
Risk-aversive,
prefer status quo
Consistency,
agreement

14. Adapting to the Styles
 With Directors, be efficient and competent. Be
organized and get to the point
 With Socializers, be interested in them. They are
people-oriented, so give them time to socialize
 With Thinkers, be well-prepared, detail-oriented,
business-like, and patient. They need details, so
give them data
 With Relaters, be non-threatening and sincere. Talk
in terms of feelings, not facts. Take things slow,
earn their trust, support their feelings, and show
sincere interest
(Allesandra 2014)

15. Using the Platinum Rule
 Know yourself &
your primary style
 Identify your what
your needs are
 Kim-Director 1st and
Socializer 2nd
 Get to know your Co-
Teacher’s style
 Ask your partner what
he/she needs
 Danielle—Socializer 1st
and Director 2nd

16. Types of Relationships
Committed Marriage:
Team members select
each other voluntarily &
commit to working
closely over time.
Extended Family:
Individual teachers
exchange ideas, observe
each other &
commiserate.
Cohabitant: Each teacher
does own thing with own
class; classes share guest
speakers or watch videos
together.
Blind Date: Strangers are
matched by a 3rd party
(administrator). This
could lead to a committed
marriage OR a one-night
stand!
Joint Custody: Two
instructors share one
section, teach alternating
classes or share sessions,
use blended
presentations.
The Village (Non-
Traditional Family): The
team is composed of
learners and teachers
who seek to foster a
broad-based learning
community.
(Eisen & Tisdell 2000)

17. The Survey
 We asked full and part-time faculty about their co-
teaching experiences at Ivy Tech
 A survey was presented via Survey Monkey and all
responses were anonymous
 Number of respondents was 16
 While 37% reported having 2 to 5 years experience
teaching at Ivy Tech, 25% were first year teachers
 Only 25% had over 10 years of experience
 Seventy-five percent of respondents had no previous
experience co-teaching, while 19% said they had
previous experience at the college level
 Only 6% had previous experience at the K-12 level

18. How Did They Communicate?
14
15
0
2
5
2
0 5 10 15 20
In Person
Email
Blackboard IM
Texting
Phone
Attending
class
Method of Communication

19. Instructor Comments on
Challenges
 My first challenge was not understanding what I was
supposed to teach the 093 students
 My co-teacher was a brand new adjunct so she had to
learn all the ins and outs of the College, Blackboard,
the courses and the Co-Req all at once
 Scheduling convenient times to communicate face-to-
face and/or via phone was challenging
 I was partnered with someone who was not engaged in
the class and ended up leaving mid-semester. This
caused real issues since I didn’t know what was
happening in 111 other than what the students told me
after I took over her class

20. Benefits of Co-Teaching
 The students liked having two different perspectives.
It helped them see their work in a different light
 Working together, we could re-emphasize core
concepts and reinforce each other’s messages
 Students liked having another teacher to ask
questions, especially if they find one teacher less
approachable
 I learned new techniques and ideas from my co-
teacher
 In sharing information, we were both able to get to
know the students much better

21. Suggestions from the Co-Teachers
 Get together with your partner early and often;
trade notes about student work and share
perspectives
 Meet prior to the course beginning to plan
 Sit in on each other’s classes now and then. I
think having an experienced teacher paired
with a less experienced one is definitely
helpful as a mentoring aspect
 If you are the 093/095 instructor, be willing to
make changes to help reinforce the 111
learning

22.  Working together with personal contact makes
all the difference in maximizing the benefits of
the Co-Req experience for students and for
teachers
 The stipend helps, but it really isn’t enough
when you factor in all the work that is done
 Place more emphasis on professional
development for co-teachers. The co-teaching
relationship is overlooked because there is so
much focus on the classes themselves
 Communicate, communicate, communicate!

23. Let’s Hear from the Students!
 The (co-req) helped me tremendously,
not to mention I had two great English
instructors that helped me through my
semester. I was never lost or confused.
 I was able to ask questions without
feeling dumb or a bother to the
instructors. I also enjoyed having two
teachers because it made me separate
the two courses from each other
 I would recommend that advisors and
counselors be more aware of the classes
and how they work

24.  The best thing about taking 093/111 is the
fact that you get them both done in one
semester and get credit for both
 The two teachers worked well together and
they were both helpful whether it was 093
or 111. The work we did in the 093 class
helped with the papers we wrote
 It would be better if both classes were
scheduled in one room so we don’t have to
move.
 The 093 part was too long and could be
shorter.

25. Getting Started
 Jane Sileo writes that, “Teachers must first
know the meaning of co-teaching, as well
as logistics involved with the process.”
 Also important is whether the instructor
chose to co-teach or if it was chosen for
them. A majority of Ivy Tech Indianapolis
instructors are matched by an
administrator based on availability
 Parity, or equal status, requires that all
responsibilities are shared equally. (In our
case, planning the curriculum was the
primary focus
(Sileo 2011)

26. Get to Know Each Other
 What are our styles? (Platinum Rule)
 What out of school responsibilities do we
each have? Child care, full time job, family
issues, other classes?
 What do we have in common? How are we
different from each other?
 How often and where will we meet to
plan?
 How will we communicate?
 How will we resolve differences?

27. Co-Create Your Courses
 Who has experience with teaching either or
both courses and/or coreqs?
 How will the 093 class support the 111
assignments?
 What are the major papers in 111?
 What teaching strategies will we use?
(Lecture, discussion, group activities)
 What forms of assessment will we use?
(Rubrics, quizzes, informal writing)
 How will we use technology? (Learning
Management System, e.g. Blackboard)

28. Reflect and Assess
 Solicit feedback from your students via
journals or surveys
 Exchange feedback with your co-teacher
 Assess what worked well and what flopped
 Decide if you would/could/should co-teach
together again
 If so, make a proactive plan to let your chair
know you would like to be assigned together
the next semester
 Begin to make any changes in the courses
ahead of time to ensure co-teaching and
student success

29. Recommendations
 New instructors, even if qualified to teach both
courses, should only teach one class first with an
experienced co-teacher
 Mentoring program/handbook
 Get acquainted with your co-teacher before
classes start
 Create a habit of constant communication
 Stipend for co-req team teachers to compensate
for their extra time ($680 in 2014)
 Maintain teams that work. A committed
marriage is better for the students than a one
night stand!

31. For copies of this
presentation, please take a
business card and we will
email it to you.
Thank You!

32. Works Cited
 Allesandra, Tony. "The Platinum Rule." Alessandra.com.
Allesandra & Associates, Inc., 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 1 Sept. 2014.
<http://www.alessandra.com/abouttony/aboutpr.asp>.
 Chapman, Carrie, and Cate Hart Hyatt. Critical Conversations
in Co-teaching: A Problem-solving Approach. Bloomington, IN:
Solution Tree, 2011. 1-165. Print.
 “Co-Teaching the Co-Req.” Survey Monkey results from
faculty. Sep 2014.
 Eisen, Mary-Jane, and Elizabeth J. Tisdell, eds. Team Teaching
and Learning in Adult Education. Fall 2000 ed. Vol. 87. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2000. 1-94. Print.
 “Reaching Higher, Achieving More." State of Indiana. Indiana
Commission for Higher Education, n.d. Web. 10 Apr 2013.
<http://www.in.gov/che/2713.htm>.
 Sileo, Jane. "Co-Teaching: Getting to Know Your Partner."
Teaching Exceptional Children 43.5 (2011): 32-38. Print.