6.2 Co-Teaching Models and Interprofessional Teaming

The Six Co-Teaching Models (Friend & Cook)

Co-teaching is an instructional delivery model in which a general education teacher and a special education teacher (or related service provider) jointly deliver substantive instruction to a diverse group of students, including those with disabilities, within a single physical space. Based on the seminal research of Marilyn Friend and Lynn Cook, six distinct co-teaching structures are utilized based on instructional objectives, student needs, and lesson content.

1. One Teach, One Observe

• Structure: One teacher assumes primary responsibility for delivering whole-group instruction, while the second teacher purposefully collects specific academic, behavioral, or engagement data on individual students or the entire class.
• Best Used For: Baseline data collection, Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs), monitoring time-on-task, or evaluating the effectiveness of a new instructional accommodation.
• Limitations: If overused, the observing teacher is perceived by students as an assistant rather than an equal professional.

2. One Teach, One Assist

• Structure: One teacher leads whole-class instruction while the other teacher circulates around the room, providing subtle prompts, answering individual questions, managing behavior, or monitoring student work.
• Best Used For: Lessons requiring complex teacher-led demonstrations where individual students require immediate, low-profile scaffolding.
• Limitations: High risk of creating prompt dependency among students with disabilities; can undermine the secondary teacher's professional parity if used as the default model.

3. Parallel Teaching

• Structure: The class is divided into two equal, heterogeneous groups. Both teachers deliver the exact same instructional content simultaneously in different sections of the classroom.
• Best Used For: Drill-and-practice, test review, guided reading, or class discussions where reducing the student-to-teacher ratio doubles student opportunities to respond (OTR).
• Key Requirement: Requires careful noise management and synchronized timing between both co-teachers.

4. Station Teaching

• Structure: Instructional content is divided into non-sequential learning stations. Students rotate through stations managed by Teacher A, Teacher B, and potentially an independent work station.
• Best Used For: Small-group skill instruction, multi-sensory learning centers, or complex topics that can be taught in independent modules.
• Advantages: Maximizes active student participation, reduces group size, and leverages both teachers' instructional strengths.

5. Alternative Teaching

• Structure: One teacher manages the larger group (e.g., 80% of the class) conducting grade-level instruction, while the other teacher works with a smaller group (e.g., 20% of the class) for a specialized purpose.
• Best Used For: Pre-teaching key vocabulary, intensive remediation, re-teaching missed concepts, or delivering advanced enrichment.
• Critical Consideration: Group membership must remain fluid and non-stigmatizing so that the small group is not perceived as the 'slow group' or reserved exclusively for students with IEPs.

6. Team Teaching

• Structure: Both teachers simultaneously share whole-group instruction, engaging in conversational dialogue, modeling problem-solving, lecturing co-equally, and seamlessly building on each other's points.
• Best Used For: High-level conceptual discussions, debating multiple perspectives, modeling collaborative problem-solving, or demonstrating laboratory procedures.
• Prerequisites: Requires deep mutual trust, fluid communication, and extensive shared co-planning time.

Establishing Professional Parity and Shared Responsibility

For co-teaching to succeed, co-teachers must establish and maintain professional parity—the equal standing, authority, and respect of both educators in the classroom. When parity exists, students view both teachers as equal instructional leaders.

Key Components of Co-Teaching Parity

• Shared Physical Space & Ownership: Both teachers' names appear on the door, syllabus, and report cards. Both teachers have designated desk space and equal board writing presence.
• Shared Classroom Management: Both teachers establish classroom rules, enforce behavior expectations, communicate with parents, and handle discipline consistently.
• Shared Assessment & Grading: Both co-teachers contribute to designing assessments, grading student work, modifying rubrics, and participating in parent-teacher conferences.
• Shared Planning (Co-Planning): Co-teachers require dedicated, administrative-supported planning time (minimum 45–60 minutes weekly) to map out unit goals, select co-teaching models, and design differentiation strategies.

Collaborative Teaming Models and Conflict Resolution

Special education services depend on interprofessional collaboration among special educators, general educators, school administrators, and related service providers. Teaming structures fall into three primary organizational models:

1. Multidisciplinary Teaming

Professionals from different disciplines work independently, conducting separate evaluations, writing discipline-specific goals, and delivering isolated services with minimal ongoing communication. While legally compliant for initial evaluations, this siloed approach often leads to fragmented instruction and conflicting recommendations.

2. Interdisciplinary Teaming

Professionals conduct independent evaluations but meet formally to share findings, discuss student progress, and align their goals. Although communication is improved, service delivery often remains discipline-specific (e.g., pull-out speech therapy conducted entirely separate from classroom reading instruction).

3. Transdisciplinary Teaming

Professionals share information, cross-train one another, and engage in role release—a process where one team member (e.g., the special educator) is trained by a specialist (e.g., an occupational therapist or speech-language pathologist) to embed specialized therapeutic techniques directly into daily classroom routines. Transdisciplinary teaming represents the highest level of collaboration and supports fully integrated service delivery in inclusive environments.

Navigating Professional Conflict

Inevitably, co-teachers and team members experience disagreements regarding classroom management, grading accommodations, pace of instruction, or workload division. Special educators must employ interest-based conflict resolution strategies:

• Address Issues Proactively: Establish a 'co-teaching agreement' at the start of the school year specifying expectations for grading, discipline, noise tolerance, and communication.
• Focus on Student Outcomes: Frame disagreements around student data and learning needs rather than personal preferences or teaching styles.
• Practice Active Listening: Acknowledge the general educator's expertise in content standards while advocating for the special educator's expertise in pedagogical adaptation and IEP compliance.