Answer

Literature Review

Co-operative teaching has been noted to trigger a number of benefits such as the increased understanding of the students’ needs, increased acceptance of disabled students by their peers, and also a reduced burnout rate for the teachers among many others. To successfully implement this model of co-teaching, several common themes must be considered. They include a need for effective communication between the co-teachers, sufficient administrative support, the presence of similar philosophies, and also an effective time planning. Various scholars have considered the impact of co-operative teaching in inclusive classroom. This section will feature an analysis of some of the major arguments made by these professionals.

            Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie (2007) conducted a metasynthesis of qualitative research on the issue of co-teaching in inclusive classrooms. To prompt their research was the fact that recent trends and legislation was mainly leaning towards the promotion of better access to the general education curriculum, hence leading many schools to adopt the co-teaching approach. These schools chose this approach mainly because they felt that it encouraged effective instruction as the classrooms are inclusive. Basically, it would take the form of one special education teacher and one general education teacher (Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, 2007). Effectiveness is noted for both the teachers and students in such a classroom. Co-teaching improves professionalism for both teachers as they get to learn from each other through first hand experiences.

These authors note that the teachers get to show and teach each other what they know, hence improving their performance in the long run. On the other hand, the approach seemed effective for students without disability in the sense that it taught them how to interact and understand those with special needs. In addition, Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie (2007) note that through extra teacher attention, all students benefited more academically. The students with disability tend to be motivated to work even harder when they note that can still do well in an environment with those who do not have disability (Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, 2007).

            Pettit (2017) also agrees with the argument made by Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, (2007) that the teachers get to improve their professionalism. Pettit (2017) argues that when pre-service teachers spend more time with quality mentors in the classroom, they become better prepared and confident to start their 1^st year as teachers. This is mainly because they become more skilled to deal with all types of students. They get to acquire the required skill and knowledge on how to engage the students and trigger a needed response. In addition, this author notes that a quality co-operative teaching and the resulting professional learning are attained through co-planning and relationship building (Pettit, 2017).

Quality co-partnering and professional learning are reached through purposeful co-planning and relationship building. This is why it is suggested that it should begin even before the classroom teaching phase. When the teachers can work together effectively, they will be able to plan their lessons as required. Therefore, they will not disagree in front of the students or even showcase disunity. The presence of a strong team work is what encourages effectiveness of cooperative teaching in an inclusion classroom as the teachers know how to go about the process to compliment their weak areas (Pettit, 2017; Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, 2007).

            Isherwood & Barger-Anderson (2008) try to investigate the factors that may affect the adoption of cooperative teaching models into inclusive classrooms. One of the factors they noted which could make the approach ineffective is the presence of an incompatibility between the two teachers. By incompatibility, these authors mean in areas such as classroom management, the academic expectations each one of them has for the students, and even their level of ability in specific areas. Therefore, their argument supplements that of Pettit (2017) which need the two teachers to work as a team and engage in effective planning if at all the process is to be effective. Also, Isherwood & Barger-Anderson (2008) suggest that it would be an effective approach if the co-teaching models in schools can allow the teachers to be active in the planning and preparation process. This will enable them to determine the perfect partner for the process.

            Keefe & Moore (2004) also agree with the argument that co-operative teaching will only be effective when the teacher is adequately prepared for the demands by first enrolling to a teacher preparation program (Pettit, 2017; Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, 2007). This is because the teachers who have been successful in adopting this model are those who have deeper knowledge in content areas, as this makes it easier for both to collaborate and establish their individual roles and responsibility. This is one way through which an important relationship may be established hence leading to success and a willingness to continue co-teaching (Keefe & Moore, 2004; Pettit, 2017).

            These authors also have similar arguments with Isherwood & Barger-Anderson (2008) in relation to letting the teacher be involved in the planning process. They suggest that the schools needs to be thoughtful about how the teachers are paired up and how they will be supported over time as it will determine whether it will be an effective approach or not. The best option is to let them have input in selecting their co-teaching partners (Keefe & Moore, 2004). Therefore, it can be deduced that co-teaching is effective mostly in cases where the teachers have been involved in the preparation process and allowed to decide on their partners. The co-teachers who also have time set aside for planning and reviewing their activities and roles have been noted to be more effective (Keefe & Moore, 2004).

            Fenty, McDuffie-Landrum & Fisher (2012) argue that co-teaching is a particularly promising approach which enables the blending of expertise of the various stakeholders in an inclusive school. This is because it provides various opportunities such as the introduction of different instructional strategies which play an important role in targeting the diverse needs of students in the inclusive classroom. Since both teachers play an active role in the classroom, they get to supplement each other, hence offering a service that fully satisfies the needs of the students. This complements the argument by Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie (2007) which indicate that the teachers possess varying skills, and can learn from each other, hence promoting their practice in an inclusive setting. The students get to benefit as what one teacher may be unable to offer fully, the other one will step in and vice versa.

Jackson et al. (2017) also points out on higher effectiveness in cases where teachers engage in co-planning. The purpose of co-planning is to ensure that the special education teacher gets to share her knowledge of differentiation, accommodations, and even explain behavior support to enable more students to access the curriculum and learn effectively. Co-planning is a factor which has been identified by various scholars as a predecessor of effective co-teaching. Many have argued that it promotes team work and builds the require rapport for both teachers to engage in a productive practice alongside each other (Pettit, 2017; Isherwood & Barger-Anderson, 2008). Therefore, co-teaching is effective if the teachers can set aside time to plan for their lessons together.

The implementation of co-teaching is still on the rise with more institutions experiencing an increase in the number of special needs students joining the mainstream schools (Sweigart & Landrum, 2015). These authors argue that one of the reasons why co-teaching is considered an effective approach by schools is that it splits the student-teacher ratio by half. This is because there will be two adults who will be managing the same class that one teacher would have been assigned to. This is an obvious benefit as the students will have more attention from both teachers, compared to what would have been the case if only one was available. The students get more opportunities to respond, and the teachers get more opportunities to provide efficient feedback. As a result, the academic and social performance of the students improves drastically.

Sweigart & Landrum (2015) also note that co-teaching enables for small doses of instruction which will benefit the students who struggle with learning. In addition, it gives the teachers an opportunity to offer more positive reinforcement and even form individual targeted behavioral interventions. Fenty, McDuffie-Landrum & Fisher (2012) also agree with this statement as they also note that effective co-teaching results from action from both teachers. Therefore, in case there are slow learners in the class, the teachers will both take turns to assist the students. In addition, learning will not have to be disrupted as there will be another teacher who can take over. This is a good example of how co-teaching encourages the teachers to supplement for one another. Also, while the teachers take turn with the students, it increases the chance of improving their academic performance because where one may lack specific skills, the other one will step in.

Scruggs & Mastropieri (2017) argue that co-teaching becomes effective only when there is effective collaboration and explicit instruction. Effective collaboration has been discussed as an important element by majority of the scholars in this section. Scruggs & Mastropieri (2017), however, argue that it contributes to the effectiveness of implementation of the model mainly because it involves active listening, depersonalizing situations, finding goals that are common for both teachers, and also brainstorming on possible solutions to problems. This communication is what leads to the formation of a strong team, which is described by Pettit (2017). There can be no team work without effective communication. The teachers need to always present a unified front when performing their practice in classrooms. This is why, the next suggestion for effective collaboration by Scruggs & Mastropieri (2017) is also important.

These authors argue that these teachers should be able to plan together if at all they are to execute effective instruction in the inclusive classroom. Therefore, there must be common planning times which will enable the teachers to work together effectively. However, the teachers will need to maximize on any free time they have together as it may be quite a challenge to have common planning times. Isherwood & Barger-Anderson (2008) also discussed about the need for an effective planning. They argued that planning together enabled the teachers to have a uniform goal, rather than each individual having their own goals. This will lead to confusion and conflicts as the teachers will each pursue different paths, leading to poor performance in the students. The teachers will not work hand in hand, meaning that they will not supplement for each other’s weak areas.

According to Kohler-Evans (2006), co-teaching enables all students to feel equally valued, hence encouraging those with disabilities to develop into compassionate and caring individuals. This is because the presence of two teachers enables students from both sides to be given similar attention. This would not have been possible if only one teacher was present. This professional may lack the required skill to deal with special needs students hence making them feel excessively special and ruining their morale to perform effectively. On the other hand, if the teacher was skilled in offering special needs education, the mainstream students may be discriminated against as they may be treated as not needing the required attention. The importance of co-planning for lessons is also emphasized here (Kohler-Evans, 2006; Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2017).

Kohler-Evans (2006) also suggests that effective communication between the co-teaching partners is essential. They need to communicate, not only about the lesson plan, but also actions which bug them about their partner. This will prevent conflicts from erupting and enable them to solve any issues as soon as possible. When such an approach is taken, it is evident that the co-operative teaching model will be effectively implemented. This is because the teachers will constantly be in good terms, be able to learn from one another, and also save sufficient time planning for important lesions and reviewing their roles (Fenty, McDuffie-Landrum & Fisher, 2012). Thus, the students will benefit greatly from teachers who will work as a team. They will also have someone to offer assistance, unlike when only one teacher was present in the inclusive classroom.

According to yet another study, results indicate that majority of co-teachers believe that co-teaching leads to positive impacts on the academic performance of students (Austin, 2001). Several reasons have been provided for this argument, such as the fact that the student to teacher ratio is reduced, being in a position to benefit from the expertise of another teacher and get their viewpoint, being able to offer review for all students, and the fact that students without disability get to understand more about the student’s without disabilities. These points of argument are quite similar to those which have already been analyzed above. For example, Sweigart & Landrum (2015) also noted that co-teaching is effective due to the fact that student to teacher ratio is cut into half. In addition, the fact that the teachers will benefit from each other’s expertise is discussed by several other authors (Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie, 2007; Pettit, 2017; Keefe & Moore, 2004).

Austin (2001), notes that social development of students is promoted; hence, leading to improved overall performance and interaction. The social development resulting from co-teaching has been identified as an important indicator of effective co-teaching. With the assistance of their teachers, the students get the chance to learn and interact with each other. Basically, the teachers will attempt to show that there is really no big difference in performance. This in turn ends up motivating the special needs students to change their social behavior. Many will become friendlier, and their reactions will not be aggressive. They will improve their social skill since they will also learn from how the other students behave in specific situation. Managing the special needs students will also be easy as they will witness how response the normal students are, hence try to imitate.

However, this author notes that the same way students with special needs adapt the behavior of mainstream students, the latter also adopts the undesirable behaviors of the students with disability. Although most sources do not consider this aspect, it is important to note that it is a barrier which must first be overcome before the co-teaching model is effective (Austin, 2001). When the students start adapting each other’s behaviors, it may become impossible for the teachers to provide effective instruction, let alone encourage social development. However, by being keen on their behaviors, and discouraging anything that is negative. This barrier may be easily overcome, leaving room for social progress as both types of students will get to learn what is acceptable and what is not. By being strict and monitoring students keenly, the start of such a transition will not be missed.

The parents who take their children to inclusive schools tend to have worries that the child’s self esteem will be negatively impacted. The parents also assume that the general educators do not have the required understanding to teach special needs students. However, according to a research conducted, it was evident that after taking their children in inclusive schools with co-teaching models, the children exhibited increased self-esteem, social skills, and even academic achievement (Tichenor, Heins & Piechura-Couture, 2000). These parents, therefore, had more faith in the co-teaching which resulted in better performance compared to where the approach was not employed.

The co-teaching approach takes note of all the interests of the parents. It is a solution that ends up promoting self esteem as is discussed by Scruggs, Mastropieri & McDuffie (2007), who indicate that the model encourages interaction and shows the students that they can also perform well in such a setting. In relation to social skill, Austin (2001) discusses the point by stating that co-teaching enables for the monitoring and guidance of the students as they interact; hence, it helps in encouraging fast reaction whenever the students seem to be acquiring undesirable skills. In relation to academic achievement, the interaction of two teachers with varying skills and knowledge in the content fields helps to promote the desired outcome as is also suggested by Scruggs & Mastropieri (2017).

Kroeger et al. (2012) has also developed positive remarks regarding the use of co-teaching in the inclusive classroom. These authors suggest that co-teaching offers a great opportunity for the students to perform better both academically and socially. It exposes the students to what it is like living and learning as either disabled or normal. With the co-teaching approach, all students are taught at the same time, without segregating any of them. On the contrary, one of the teachers will move in to offer additional guidelines for a student who seems to be having trouble (Keefe & Moore, 2004; Pettit, 2017).

Saloviita & Takala (2010) also support the argument that co-teaching promotes inclusive education. This is why its popularity has increased. Many schools are now embracing this approach as it has been discovered to encourage academic performance for students. The students who tend to have behavioral problems also experience improvements as they get to interact with their peers and adopt positive behavior. The presence of co-teachers ensures that both have a chance of monitoring the students and offering support where needed to ensure they achieve positive outcomes.

Basically, the factors determining the effectiveness of co-operative teaching in an inclusive classroom are quite similar. This is noted by how almost all scholars identified in this section are touching on similar points. The fact that the researches were not conducted during the same, or within the same setting makes it reliable. Therefore, it is evident that effectiveness of co-operative teaching in inclusive classroom depends on effective communication, planning, inclusion in preparation process, and compatibility of the teaching partners among many others. Both partners need to be actively involved in the process as this is the only way for them to learn from each other and even to form an effective team. The reason why it is important to form a team is that the teachers need to form uniform goals and determine how they plan to achieve them. The model is noted to be effective when students showcase improvement in social skills, self esteem and even academic performance.