Want to make creations as awesome as this one?

No description

More creations to inspire you

BLENDED LEARNING

Presentation

PROJECT ETWINNING PRESENTATION

Presentation

LE "LEARN IT SMART": ETWINNING LEARNING EVENT

Presentation

ETWINNING PRESENTATION

Presentation

THE WIND AND THE SUN STORYJUMPER BOOK

Presentation

INTRO INNOVATE

Presentation

ESL: DISCOVERING NEW YORK CITY

Presentation

Transcript

Benefits of co-teaching,Results,Co-teaching scenarios,CO-TEACHING,Students' feedback,Teacher roles,1,Some students admitted to being confused by seeing as many as three teachers for the same course,Areas of improvement,,Advantages,mcustodio@comillas.edulrbuckingham@comillas.edualhernandez@comillas.edu,3me students admitted to being confused by seeing as many as three teachers for the same course,COLLABORATIVE COMPETENCE IN PRE-SERVICE TEACHER TRAINING: ,A Team Teaching Experience,Magdalena CustodioAlfonso LópezLyndsay Buckingham,Our presentation,Increases student participation and improves program intensity and continuity (Cook & Friend, 1995) Studies show that teachers focus more on student learning (Murphy & Martin, 2015),02,Fosters collaborative skills and student communication skills (Bacharach, et al, 2008; McDuffie et al, 2009) Co-teaching as ZPD (Murphy et al, 2015),Improves classroom instruction and professional growth among teachers (Bacharach et al, 2008; McDuffie et al, 2009) Possibility for teaching practice- Can lessen gap between theory and practice (Murphy et al., 2015),01,03,04,Opportunity to vary presentation, individualize instruction, scaffold learning, monitor Ss' understanding (Graziano & Navarrete, 2012) Reduces stigma for SEN students by avoiding pull-out situations (Cook & Friend, 1995),(Qvortrup, 2008: 2),"the most important single factor for the quality of education and thus for the efficiency and quality of the pupils’ learning is the quality of the teachers’ training",(Cook & Friend, 1995),RationaleAdvantages and disadvantagesOur experienceConclusions,Student performance,They liked...,Infant students' feedback,Primary students' feedback,They liked...,Thank you!,Teachers need admin support, planning and release time, and training (McDuffie et al, 2009; Graziano & Navarrete, 2012) ,3,Teacher relationship,Student expectations,Relationship between coteachers most common criticism (Murphy et al, 2015) Trust, respect and being accountable are critical (Graziano & Navarrete, 2012),Need support,2,Students initially express mistrust of process: insecure, concerned and anxious (Waters & Burcroff, 2007) ,1,Potential difficulties,,Recorded data suggest that the experience has been successful, in terms of(a) Student performance(b) Student feedback,Context of the experience,Qualitative feedback (Primary)*,Positive:“Classes were very dynamic, thanks to the effort of the three of you”“Feedback was abundant, both in class and through Moodle”“The three of you are highly committed to the classes”To improve:“Sometimes we have felt a lack of coordination”“Sometimes we have felt that three teachers for a single course were too many”“The class Powerpoint presentations should include more information and be available at the start of the class”.* Obtained during the end-of-semester Juntas de Evaluación,Course title: Content and Language Integrated Learning5 ECTS: 6 hrs/week during 2.5 monthsTwo groups (normally 4 sub-groups): Primary Education / Infant Education trainees in their 4th yearOur choice: instead of (a) one teacher - one group all semester; or (b) each teacher teaches her module, in turn, to all the groups, we opted for...Co-teaching: two teachers in class at the same time with the full groups, with only ad-hoc divisions,Conclusions,,This first year of co-teaching experience suggests a number of positive effects, but also some shortcomingsBoth need to be confirmed by more systematic research,,Investigate the aspects of co-teaching that have a greater effect on student performanceAnalyze which co-teaching formats are most effective for different learning goals Analyze to what extent learning in a co-teaching context might influence students' teaching style and planning decisions in their future professional practice,Co-teaching and ,The students seemed to have understood this dynamic as a possible model for their own classroom practice in the future.,The teachers are enriched by being exposed to other teacher’s materials’ design, classroom management and, generally, teaching style (Bacharach et al, 2008; McDuffie et al, 2009; Murphy et al, 2015),01,02,03,Teachers feel more secure having another expert in the room,04,Results suggest that the co-teaching approach helps create more inclusive classrooms: teacher guidance reaches more students in a more effective way. A second teacher is "built-in" scaffolding (Graziano & Navarrete, 2012),,Student expectations,Need support,2,Linguistically weaker students get less student talking time than if the group had been split upSometimes a teacher could have difficulty understanding the materials or tasks (and assessment criteria) prepared by another oneChallenge of developing self-control when another teacher is present (issues of leadership),SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH,initial teacher training,Teacher roles - in practice,Module designer: design of tasks, selection of materials, planningMain session teacherAssistant session teacherProvider of feedback (on the spot and delayed)Grader of exams / other assessment activitiesTeacher collaboration, especially as regards planning, was supported by an online calendar,Qualitative feedback (Infant)*,Positive:“The coordination between the three of you has been incredible”“Most of the students have been able to follow the classes without any problem, thanks to you.”To improve:No comment* Obtained during the end-of-semester Juntas de Evaluación,Bacharach, N., Washut Heck, T., & Dahlberg, K. (2008). Co-teaching in higher education. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 5(3), 9-16.Banegas, D. L. (2012). CLIL teacher development: Challenges and experiences. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 5 (1), 46–56. doi: https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2012.5.1.4Bertaux, P., Coonan, C. M., Frigols-Martín, M. J. y Mehisto, P. (2010). The CLIL teacher’s competences grid. Common Constitution and Language Learning (CCLL) Comenius Network.Cook, L. & Friend, M. (1995). Co-teaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28(3), 1-16.Coyle, D., Hood, P. y Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL – Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: CUP.Escobar, C. (2011). Colaboración interdisciplinar, partenariado y centros de formación docente: tres ejes para sustentar la colaboración del profesorado AICLE 1. In C. Escobar Urmeneta and L. Nussbaum (Eds.), Learning through another language. Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Graziano, K. J., & Navarrete, L. A. (2012). Co-Teaching in a Teacher Education Classroom: Collaboration, Compromise, and Creativity. Issues In Teacher Education, 21(1), 109-126. Jover, G., Fleta, T., & González, R. (2016). La Formación Inicial de los Maestros de Educación Primaria en el Contexto de la Enseñanza Bilingüe en Lengua Extranjera, Bordón, Revista de Pedagogía, 68(2), 121-135.Lancaster, N. K. (2016). Stakeholder Perspectives on CLIL in a Monolingual Context. English Language Teaching, 9(2), 148-177.,01,The paradox of CLIL teacher education,Bibliography,Madrid, D., & Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL Teacher Training. In J. de D. Martínez Agudo (Ed.), Teaching and Learning English through Bilingual Education. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars. McDuffie, K. A., Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2009). Differential effects of peer tutoring in co-taught and non-co-taught classes: Results for content learning and student-teacher interactions. Exceptional Children 75(4), 493-510.Murphy, C., & Martin, S. N. (2015). Coteaching in teacher education: research and practice. Asia-Pacific Journal Of Teacher Education, 43(4), 277-280. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2015.1060927 Murphy, C., Scantlebury, K., & Milne, C. (2015). Using Vygotsky's zone of proximal development to propose and test an explanatory model for conceptualising coteaching in pre-service science teacher education. Asia-Pacific Journal Of Teacher Education, 43(4), 281-295. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2015.1060291 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2014). Teacher training needs for bilingual education: in-service teacher perceptions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19 (3), 266–295.Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2017). CLIL teacher education: Where do we stand and where do we need to go? En Educación Bilingüe: tendencias educativas y conceptos claves (pp. 129–144). Ministerio de Educación Cultura y Deporte. Qvortrup, L. (2008, August). The first global education forum. Teacher Education Quarterly, 01, 2. Waters, F. H., & Burcroff, T. L. (2007). Collaborative teaching at the university level: Practicing what is preached. The Teacher Educator, 42(4), 304-315.,Bibliography,Student performance