Madigan, Jennifer C

Scroth-Cavataio, G

English

San Jose State University

IDEA 2004: Building collaborative partnerships and effective communication between administrators, special and general educators, and multi-disciplinary professionals

SJSU ScholarWorks

San Jose State UniversitySJSU ScholarWorksFaculty Publications Secondary Education1-1-2011IDEA 2004: Building collaborative partnershipsand effective communication betweenadministrators, special and general educators, andmulti-disciplinary professionalsJennifer C. MadiganSan Jose State University, jennifer.madigan@sjsu.eduG Scroth-CavataioFollow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/second_ed_pubPart of the Special Education and Teaching CommonsThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Secondary Education at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in FacultyPublications by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact scholarworks@sjsu.edu.Recommended CitationJennifer C. Madigan and G Scroth-Cavataio. "IDEA 2004: Building collaborative partnerships and effective communication betweenadministrators, special and general educators, and multi-disciplinary professionals" Principal Leadership (2011): 26-30._ ___ r. . IProfessional development that focuses on colab6ratron·and coteaching Is supJ>orted by LIDEA~.. \...·----- .. '\ ) (""_,., ____.....  .., ··-· .l ICollaboration and coteaching are essential components of , special education services., t .......__...~' School leaders can facilit~e collaborative relationships and provide needed support for cbteaching teams. '-----------~---- ·--------~~ ommunication and professional dialogue are essential elements of a high-quality education environment in which all students can succeed. Such an environment is especially important for the success of students with special needs. Unfortunately, collaboration b etween special educators, general educators, and other professionals is often hindered by a lack of planning time (Bouck, 2007; Carpenter & Dyal, 2007; Paulsen, 2008), as well as lack of personnel, lack of preservice teacher training in working with other professionals, resistance to change, and a lack of training about teacher roles in collaborative partnerships (Paulsen, 2008) . The regulations in IDEA 2004 reduce paper­work and promote professional development and support for special education teachers, helping schools create effective teamwork for special ed­ucation teachers. It is important for principals to review the regulations that relate to the roles of various education professionals (e.g., administra­tors, school psychologists, and general and special education teachers) and plan ways to implement those regulations using best practices. Communication and Collaboration Principals, administrators, and special education teachers typically lead and direct IEP meetings (Martinet al., 2006). Because of time constraints, psychologists often perform their assessments in­dependently and do not communicate the results or recommendations with the administrator, the special education teacher, and the other team members until the IEP meeting. This can con­tribute to inconsistencies and misunderstandings l between the IEP team members. Other challeng­ '• es to effective collaboration include differences between the IEP team members in personality, Ivarying objectives for students, a lack of value 1 for another's professional status, and inadequate t resources and time (Hartas, 2004; Hemmingsson, ! Gustavsson, & Townsend, 2007). Given the IDEA 2004 mandate for reducing paperwork and using optional three-year educa­tion planning, principals and administrators are pivotal players in the development of a cohesive team culture within a school setting. Principals can help alleviate some of the barriers to effec­tive communication and collaboration between IEP team members by: 111 Systematically scheduling common times for the psychologist, the teachers, and the specialists to meet and collaborate 1!1 Facilitating meetings that foster the develop­ment of relationships among team members tl 	 Scheduling and facilitating pre-IEP meetings that address misunderstandings and ensure consistent approaches for students by all team members Discussion guide available at www.nassp.erg/pldlscuss1111 tlovEMBER 201 1 1 Principal Leadership 1 Zl The relationships cultivated between general educators and special educators are the foundation of the trust and rapport that will lead to effective coteaching. c 	 Developing common goals among team members. ROLE PLAY AND PROBLEM SOLVING A principal can present various scenarios that may occur in an actuallEP meeting and ask team members to role play different sides of an issue. This activity can facilitate and pro­mote positive communication among various IEP team members. Scenarios include: C 	 Disagreements between administrators and special or gene ral education teachers abo ut the placement of a student ti 	A request from a parent for services that may not be possible for teachers to deliver II 	A conflict between the special education teacher and another speciaiist, such as a transition counselor, about an upcoming placement of a student. The following ground rules or group norms can b e used to guide the process and help develop a collaborative culture: IJ Participate by taking a turn in a role play, observing, using active listening skills, and adding ideas to the discussion a Get focus by establishing common goals and staying on topic ll 	Maintain momentum by having each mem­ber monitor their frequency and quantity of speaking and by establishing an agenda, a time limit for each role play, an ending time fo r the m eet in g C 	 Reach closure through discussion and consensus. The discussions following each role play can lead to the development of constructive ways to deal with disagreements and conflicts that arise during the IEP team process. Talking points of th e discussion include opportunities to para­28 I Principal Leadership I NOVEMBER 20 11 phrase, clarify, question, and offer suggestions for improve­ment. Discussion is facilitated by the principal through such questions as, What would it lnok like if. .. ? What do you think would happen if .. ? How was it different (or like)...?What might you see happening if.. ?and What sort of an impact do you think it would make if.. ?The next steps for the team should be determined through team consensus. Coteaching Models Professional development activities that involve team teaching and collaboration are also funded under IDEA 2004. The relationships cultivated b etween general educa­t ors and special educators are the foundation of the trust and rapport that will lead to e ffective coteaching, and administrative leadership and mentoring support are key to th.~ successful implementation of coteaching. Principals must be cognizant of collab orative teaching models and provide required support for both the general and the special education t eachers so that they may build a positive team relationship. Fo r example, a coteaching team needs common released time and opportunities for col­laboration (Carpenter & Dyal, 2007). In addition, school districts should encourage professional developm ent that facilitates the selection of appropriate collaborative strate­gies (Carpenter & Dyal, 2007). Such technologies as online disCUssions (Greer & Hamill, 2003) an~ video conferencing (Rummel & Spada, 2005) can enable im~roved collabora­tion between general and special educators. Friend and Bursuck (2009) describe five coteaching models. Lead and support. One teacher leads and another offers assistance to individuals or small groups. Planning includes both teachers, but typically one teach er plans the lesson content, while the other does specific planning for students' individu.alle.arning or behavioral nee'ds. Station teaching. Students are divided into two hetero­geneous groups and work at a classroom station with one teacher. At a designated time, students switch to the oth er station to work with the other teacher. In t his model, both teachers individually develop the content of their stations, although they must coordinate with each other. Parallel teaching. Teachers jointly plan instruction and deliver it individually to half the class or t o small groups of students. This m odel requires joint planning time t o ensure that as teachers work with their separate groups, th ey are delivering content in the same way. Alternative teaching. One teacher works with a small group of students to preteach, reteach, supplement, or en­rich instruction, while the other teacher instructs the large group. Planning time is needed to ensure that the logistics of preteaching or reteaching can be completed. Team teaching. Both teachers share the responsibility for planning and instructing students. Teachers need similar knowledge of the content, shared education philosophy, and commitment to all students in the class. This model takes time t o develop and is most effective when teachers work together for a long time. Looking for Inspiration Principals can arrange site visits for teachers at schools that have implemented successful collaborative coteaching models. The teachers would then have a repertoire of ideas that they could share with colleagues and apply to their own teaching. Before visiting other school sites, however, teachers must establish desired outcomes of the visits and set some goals; after the visit, they should follow up their observations with questions and discussions that help them apply what they observed. OBSERVATION GUIDE Talking with visiting. teachers about site visits will help them clarify their thinking, their objectives, and the less~s they take away from the visit. D Before the site visit, determine the areas of focus and desired outcomes with the visiting t each er • 	 After the site visit, ask the visiting teacher what he or she noticed and the main ideas he or she learned m Discuss with the visiting t eacher how he or she will apply new ideas to the classroom Ill Find out if the teac her has any further questions. On a site visit, teachers should be reminded to look at: II The classroom environment ii Routines and procedures B Classroom management D Transitions, pacing, and use oftime B Teaching and instructional strategies 13 Teacher questioning techniques a Roles of collaborative team members a Student engagement. The discussion about collaboration on a school campus is cri~cal for the successful developme nt apd implementa­tion of an effective coteaching model. Principals can use the following activity as a guide to facilitate the conversa­tion with their staff members. A VISION FOR CoTEACHING Successful coteaching and collaboration require a common vision statem ent and spedfic go als. The school leader can fa­cilitate a discussion with teachers to formulate a shared vision of collaboration and coteaching using the following format: jl For each of the five elements list ed, discuss the current state, the desired state, and how to achieve the desired state: D Planning time for general and special edu­cation teachers D Similar levels of content knowledge for coteaching teams l3 A shared philosophy of collaboration a Common goals ll Trust and respect. Conclusion The importance of building collaborative partnerships among administrators, general educators, special educators, and other profes­sionals to assist a student with special needs is addressed extensively in IDEA 2004 . Profes­sional collaboration among IEP team members is an essential component for delivering the best possible IEP to a student. Furthermore, IDEA 2004 regulations specifically state that educational agencies should "carry out pro­grams that...provide team teaching, reduced class schedules and case loads, and intensive professional development." Principals and school administrators are indispensable in the successful implementation of those mandates. They play an essential role through their decision making and leadership in supporting educators in the development of collaborative rel ationships. Building a col­laborative culture results in school personnel worldng interdependently and takjng collective responsibility for the learning of all students (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008). PL Building a collaborative culture results in school personnel working interdependently and taking collective responsibility for the learning of all students. NOVEMBER 2011 I Principal Leadership I 29 REFERENCES a Bouck, E. C. (2007). Co-teaching...Notjust a textbook term: Implications for practice. Preventing School Failure, 51(2), 46-51. D Carpenter, L. B., & Dyal, A. (2007). Secondary in­clusion: Strategies for implementing the consultative teaching model. Education, 127(3), 344-350. ll DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. 12 Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (2009).lncluding stu­dents with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 1!1 Greer, C. H., & Hamii, L. B. (2003). Using tech­nology to enhance collaboration between special education and general education majors. TechTrends, 47(3), 26-29. a Hartas, D. (2004). Teacher and speech-language therapist collaboration: Being equal and achieving a common goal? Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 20(1), 33-54. Il H emmingsson, H., Gustavsson, A., & Townsend , E. (2007). Students with disabilities participating in mainstream schools: Policies that promote and limit teacher and therapist cooperation. Disability & Society, 22(4), 383-398. IQ Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. 20 U.S.C.§ 1400 (2004). Retrieved from http://idea.ed.gov/ download/statute.html D Martin, J. E., Va n Dycke, J. L., Greene, B. A., Gardner, J. E., Christensen, W. R., Woods, L. L., & Lovett, D. L. (2006). Direct o bservation of teacher-directed IEP meetings: Establishing the need for student IEP meeting instruction. Exceptional Children, 72(2), 187-200. a Paulsen, K. J. (2008). School-based collaboration: An introduc­tion to the collaboration column. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(5), 313-315. a Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201-241. Jennifer C. Madigan (jenmadigan@aol.com) Is an associate professor in the ~partment ofSpecial Education at San Jose State University. Georganne Schroth-Cavataio (gcavataio@comC<JSt.net) is a mentor teacher with Santa CrulfSilicon Valley New Teacher Project and an adjunct lecturer in the Department of Special Education at San Jose State University. They are coauthors of Mentorshlp of Special Educators (2011, Corwin). 30 I Principal Leadership I NOVEMBER 201 1 I 

https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&amp;context=second_ed_pub

IDEA 2004: Building collaborative partnerships and effective communication between administrators, special and general educators, and multi-disciplinary professionals

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

San Jose State University

SJSU ScholarWorks