Co-Planning among Science and Special Education Teachers: How Do Different Conceptual Lenses Help to Make Sense of the Process?

Autor/inn/en	Swanson, Lauren H.; Bianchini, Julie A.
Titel	Co-Planning among Science and Special Education Teachers: How Do Different Conceptual Lenses Help to Make Sense of the Process?
Quelle	In: Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10 (2015) 4, S.1123-1153 (31 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1871-1502
DOI	10.1007/s11422-014-9582-3
Schlagwörter	Secondary School Teachers; Special Education Teachers; Regular and Special Education Relationship; Science Teachers; Teacher Collaboration; Educational Planning; Inclusion; Professional Development; Decision Making; Lesson Plans; Units of Study; Science Instruction; Group Dynamics; Qualitative Research + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Special education; Teacher; Teachers; Sonderpädagoge; Sonderpädagogik; Sonderschulwesen; Lehrer; Lehrerin; Lehrende; Science; Science teacher; Wissenschaft; Lehrerkooperation; Bildungsplanung; Inklusion; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Lesson planning; Unterrichtsplanung; Lerneinheit; Teaching of science; Science education; Natural sciences Lessons; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; Gruppendynamik; Qualitative Forschung
Abstract	In this study, we investigated the process of teacher co-planning. We examined two teams of high school science and special education teachers brought together to co-plan inclusive, inquiry-oriented science units as part of a professional development effort. We used three conceptual lenses to help make sense of this process: (1) characteristics of collaboration, (2) small group interactions, and (3) community discourse. Using these lenses individually and collectively, we identified strengths and limitations in teachers' co-planning efforts. A strength was that all teachers, irrespective of discipline, shared ideas and helped make decisions about the content and activities included in unit and lesson plans. A limitation was that teachers, again irrespective of discipline, discussed science education topics in their teams more often than special education ones. We found this latter finding of note as it spoke to issues of parity among teachers during the professional development. In our discussion, we argue that each conceptual lens yielded both unique and common findings on co-planning. We also provide recommendations for professional developers and educational scholars intent on organizing and/or researching co-planning among science and special education teachers. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01