Title I & Co-teaching: The Nuts and Bolts of Scheduling

An experienced teacher will tell you that the most valuable resource we have is time.  This is especially true in the co-teaching model of instruction.  In theory the students should get twice as much instruction, right?  Well, not quite.  You have to account for the times when the class is being instructed as an entire group, etc.  It is in one-on-one conferencing that co-teaching really stands out as an exemplary model of instruction.

How do you go about scheduling conferencing with a class of, say, twenty-six students with a two teachers?  One of my co-teachers and I sat down the other day to hash out a schedule for how we could meet the needs not only of the six struggling Title I students (two of which are Tier 3), but the more skilled readers as well.

We hypothesized that in addition to the six Title I students there would probably be at least four students "at-risk" or "borderline" that will need more support to be successful with reading.

The goal was to confer and set reading goals (great for student lead conferencing) for every student.  However, we wanted to ensure that the six Title I students were conferenced with at least every week with a teacher, in addition to the conferencing they will be a part of when they are pulled out to be in the Title I classroom.  (Students usually miss a special such as art or music.)  Additionally, we wanted to confer with our estimated four "borderline" students every week to bring them up to grade level as fast as possible.  Finally, we didn't want the at or above grade level students to feel left out and wanted to meet with and set instructional goals with them as well.

So we began to ask ourselves: how we could make this a possibility?  We have roughly one hour of time for reading divided up into two mini-lessons at ten minutes a segment and two "choice times" from the Daily 5 for twenty minute segments (Boushey & Moser, 2014).  This leaves us a little under forty minutes to confer with students, assuming that the Daily 5 procedures have been carefully instilled in our sixth-graders.

This sounds like a huge chunk of time for conferring, but I have found when conferring with struggling readers, or any student initially, it takes more time than one thinks.  This schedule can often be interrupted from everything from holidays, to half-days, to institutes, etc.  Regardless, we decided to plan for the best case scenario and divide the confer-weekly students from the confer bi-weekly students.  See the diagram below for an illustration.

This system of checks and balances allows for every student to be seen by a teacher at least every two weeks, if just for a short conference on evaluating where a student is at with their reading goal, or a more in depth extensive meeting discussing CAFE' or other reading strategies.  This time can also be used to explore concepts in the reading curriculum that are challenging for some students.

Moreover, every other week, one teacher team confers with the other teachers' at risk/Title I students to ensure that every angle is being explored when offering instruction to these students who need it most.  A similar system could be adopted for co-taught special education classrooms.  It keeps the instruction "fresh" and is also a system of accountability to these students.

The remaining students are seen exclusively by one teacher and guided in the goals and strategies that they need.  Of course, unforeseen issues keep communication open between both teachers concerning these students.  Something as simple as meeting with an at or above level grade student to monitor the volume of reading they are doing can be beneficial.  After all, without voracious reading, there is little literacy learning going on in the classroom.

The benefits of this approach are that every student is seen by either the classroom teacher or the specialist to set personal reading goals and receive coaching in reading.  Students who are challenged by reading, receive weekly one-on-one instruction twice as frequently.  In addition to this, students are engaged in a rich teacher-generated reading curriculum for a third of the time to prepare them for PARCC and other standardized assessments, while two-thirds of the time students are busy reading or engaged in other literary pursuits.

We have discussed the possibility of adding small groups and/or literature circles into the mix for the second semester, but this is still in development.

I feel the goal of any co-teaching program should be to maximize the effectiveness of instruction using two certified teachers to provide quality curricular content, differentiate and individualize instruction when necessary, and meet the needs of the diverse personalities and preferred learning modalities of the students.  As long as you keep these three elements in mind when preparing your own schedule to confer with students, you are sure to meet with success!

I wish calm seas for you while you implement the Daily 5 and CAFE' in your own classroom and smooth sailing as you begin to explore the dynamics a co-teacher can bring to your ship!

Changing Course: Rethinking Title I Reading - Co-Teaching

Stephen Covey once said, “The key is not to prioritize what's on your schedule, but to schedule your priorities.”

I think all teachers start to think in terms of, "What works best and is the easiest for me as a teacher?"  However, this doesn't always result in what is best for our students, unfortunately.

When I stopped to think about how I could prioritize my students' needs over my own, I realized that this would mean that I could no longer sit back in my Title I reading room and coach from the sidelines.  This means that I needed to go "into the fray" with my students — into their very classrooms to lead them in the charge.

But how did I get there?

In my fifth- and sixth-grade building, my Title I reading program began as many others do.  When I began the position four years ago, it was a set up as traditional pullout model, where students would come to my classroom for 70 minutes a week instead of their Art or Music class.  Title I students were selected from those in the school who had weak fluency-based progress monitoring scores on AIMS Web, and I offered coaching in my separate classroom to help them improve on their reading fluency.  For those with serious challenges, we placed these students in Tier 3 and I saw them during the afternoon daily.  But as I began to grow as a teacher of reading, I began to realize that there were some serious flaws and incongruences in my program that needed to be remedied.

One issue was the focus on fluency.  Fluency is extremely important, but like accuracy and vocabulary, in my mind, they take a back seat to comprehension.  The entire purpose of reading is to understand what another has written and add what is meaningful from that information into their minds.  Thus, I decided to focus on comprehension and understanding of text as my primary teaching focus and put fluency - though important - on the back burner.  Through a readers’ workshop model I was able to encourage students to read more, while providing them useful reading strategies that would benefit the entire group.  Fortunately, our progress monitoring moved to STAR Reading, which includes assessment of students' comprehension.  Though not perfect, I believe it gives a more holistic view of a child’s comprehension than many other assessments I have seen.

And still the students did not make the gains I had hoped for.

So the journey continued.  I had the good fortune to attend a Daily 5 and CAFÉ conference with “the sisters,” Gail Boushey and Joan Moser.  This modernized my thinking about reading instruction.   Instead of teaching to whole groups or small groups, I could teach specific CAFÉ strategies one-on-one to my students.  I was so excited from what I had learned, I dropped everything I had done in my program previously and focused squarely on CAFÉ.

And yet my students were still not making the gains I had hoped for.

What was missing?

The final ingredient to my program, the one that had eluded me for three years, was the power of parallel instruction with the classroom teacher.  Instruction that was consistent between what was happening in Title I and in the reading classroom.

I asked my administrator if I could co-teach in a classroom both at the fifth- and sixth-grade levels that contained all of my Tier 3 students at those grades.  That way, I would be exposed to exactly what they were learning, and be able to offer co-taught tailored instruction for my most at-risk students.  Fortunately, he appreciated the idea and so a new journey began.  Here is a peek at what my current schedule looks like:

This past year, I have had the privilege of co-teaching in a fifth- and sixth-grade classroom and I have seen the tremendous benefits of this model of instruction, not just for Tier 3 students, but for all students in those classrooms. 

Co-teaching is a challenging but highly beneficial form of instruction that essentially marries two teachers’ teaching styles together into one fluid instructional time.  One teacher is not “on” while the other grades papers.  Instead it is a continuity of thought and instruction presented by two qualified teachers for the benefit of the students.  What makes this approach challenging for some is that one must develop a positive relationship with one another and be able to work closely with each other.  This requires weekly planning, daily discussions, and weekend texts and phone calls about students, planning, and grading.  It really can be an honor and joyful experience to be working so closely with another teacher.  I found that co-teachers often “get each other,” like no one else, as they are going through the same challenges, frustrations, joys, and triumphs as the other.  It is an awesome experience to be a co-teacher and when your teaching styles start to slowly meld together, it is totally to the benefit of the students in your care!

Although I have had experience in previous settings with co-teaching, and though I have had some continuing education opportunities, it is still a work in progress.  Next year, as a part of a schedule change, I will be able to co-teach writing twice a weak as a part of my co-teaching responsibilities.  The opportunities for students under this model are many, and I am looking forward to continued success in co-teaching!

Setting Sail on the Seas of Reading

I suppose the end of a school year is a bad time to start journaling my experiences at a Title I Reading teacher, but I am not sure that the beginning of the year would be the perfect timing either.  To be a Title I Reading teacher is to be in the moment, every moment possible, with one’s students, nurturing their love of literacy, forging connections between text and self, and finding value in the written word.  For me this is the essence of reading instruction, an underlying drive to find one’s place in the world through the medium of text.  As C.S. Lewis once wrote, “We read to know we are not alone.”

My purpose in documenting my ongoing odyssey is to allow others a rare glimpse into the classroom and heart of a teacher who works with fifth- and sixth-grade students who for the most part arrive at school having had little success with reading.  I am afraid that these students have been failed by natural selection in the cookie-cutter model of education that America is so fond of perpetuating.  Alas, every child is unique as a tree, and rarely do they develop at the same rate or even in the same way.

By natural selection, I am referring not to evolution per se, but to the level of a child’s brain development in regards to reading stamina, amount of vocabulary effortlessly absorbed from their environment, and the inquisitiveness of their mind.  Sometimes the greatest single barrier to a student becoming a fluent, captivated, and lifelong reader is their ability to focus on information for a set period of time.  The diagnosis is poor stamina.  About seventy-five percent of my Title I Reading students have either received a medical diagnosis that defines their challenges with attention, or have exhibited very similar behaviors.  Other students come to me, simply not knowing an adequate amount of words for their age.  Yet others lack the essential curiosity to motivate them to seek out knowledge actively for themselves.  In summary, some students arrive in the kindergarten classroom with a developmental advantage or disadvantage that has nothing to do with the quality of their educators.  This deficiency is often not mediated by the fifth- and sixth-grades, which I serve.

Naturally there is a socioeconomic element to preparedness for reading, but at this is a variable that is exceedingly difficult (and in some cases impossible) for the school system to remedy, thus I won’t speak of it in great detail here.  We must take our students as they come.

Unfortunately with class sizes growing in number in districts across the nation, the ability of the teacher, regardless of experience or skill, to offer the quality of reading education that is needed for some of these challenged readers is limited by the most valuable resource in learning, time.

Ability in reading is paralleled closely with the social and economic structure of our nation in that historically the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer.  Known collectively as the “Matthew Effect” in reading, those students who possess strong reading skill are more likely to read, and thus flourish.  While those students who struggle with reading, will naturally read less, leading to a disparity in reading skill in our nation.

To define my role as a reading educator and Title I teacher, students come to me having had poor experiences in reading.  Reading has simply become detestable and frustrating for these students and as such they enter my classroom with trepidation at what another year of Title I Reading will hold for them.  For many of these students they will graduate from the sixth-grade perhaps not quite at grade level in reading, but having a positive attitude toward literacy and with the skills needed to survive their future career in academics.  However, for every student I work tirelessly to save from a grim fate, a world with no reading, one or two students will always seem to slip through my fingers despite my best efforts to orient them in the seas of reading.

As such, I will caution you that I am not a reading wizard and cannot conjure magical solutions to every struggling reader’s problems.  In my experience there is no such thing as a magic cure.  However, my successes and often failures have served to bring me wisdom when it comes to teaching students to be successful with reading.  Instead of a wizard, I think of myself more as a captain, a guide for students who are just learning to set sail on the tempestuous seas of reading.

I invite you too, to set sail with my students and I as we navigate these troubled waters together, and further welcome you to share wisdom from your experiences as well.  Collaboration between captains is crucial, and only together will we successfully chart a course for our students to follow.