Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Success factors: Inclusion model / teacher skills

What teacher-specific traits, and institutional attitudes/policies, drove the successes and failures you've seen [ETA: with inclusion programming], aeh?

A lot of water ran under the bridge in this thread between the asking and the answering of this question! But I did want to offer some response, even if not comprehensive. The examples I describe will naturally be slanted toward differentiating downward, given the nature of inclusion at this point, but many of the approaches could be extended in either direction. Also, I apologize in advance for the length of this slight diversion from the nominal topic of the thread. (I haven't quite mastered "cursory." wink )

Teacher-specific traits

1. Content expertise: Of multiple kinds. Most of these teams have had a formal content specialist (English, math, etc.) and an instructional specialist (usually in special education). The content specialists who were best able to reach both extremes were usually those with the deepest grasp of their content. One of the best math teachers I know has a proven track record with both students with severe impairments in math, and with students documented at +2SD in math (I happen to have been the one documenting both the -2SD and the +2SD, which is why I know the degree with certainty). I postulate that deep content knowledge allows teachers to hone in on core concepts when differentiating downward, and, of course, enables them to have a high enough ceiling themselves to have somewhere to take advanced students. My observation is that content expertise also is correlated with teachers who are less tied to procedural conventions (although they can and will teach them when that's the route needed--but then often multiple options for procedures), which often means they are willing to accept creative solutions, and to reduce unnecessary repetition.

Good instructional specialists have an extensive repertoire of pedagogical methods, tools for scaffolding and experience individualizing instruction which, while conventionally applied in the context of reaching down to make grade-level content accessible, can equally be applied to make above-grade-level content accessible to asynchronously advanced students. And of course, it doesn't hurt if the instructional specialist also has content expertise.

2. Authentic appreciation for a wide range of learners: An attitude free of either condescension for lower-functioning learners or resentment toward higher-functioning learners is critical not only to effective teaching, but also to an inclusive classroom environment, where it is safe to make and learn from one's mistakes.

3. Collaborative team-teaching: THe exact model of collaboration doesn't appear to matter as much--I've seen teams where the students cannot tell which teacher is the content specialist, because both teachers fill all roles on a day-to-day basis, and I've also seen teams where the content specialist clearly does the heavy lifting when it comes to presenting new content, and the instructional specialist is responsible for additional explanations, examples, and re-teaching, either on a group or individual basis. Regardless, the most effective teams trust and respect each other, and operate as equals. They have equal familiarity with the curriculum and the objectives for each day, shared goals for their students, and can transition seamlessly from one partner to the other at any point. (On a side note, administrators also find this convenient, as it makes it much easier to cover teacher absences.)

Institutional qualities

1. Investment in staffing: It takes more teachers to adequately staff inclusion than when all of the exceptionalities are pulled out. If you want it to work, those teachers have to be highly skilled. And even with multiple teachers in a classroom, smaller class sizes are much more conducive. Our high school has an average class size (in a non-pandemic year) of under 20, and typically closer to 15.

2. Investment in staff development: Even skilled teachers benefit from periodic refreshers in strategies for reaching diverse learners, and for working collaboratively with their colleagues. It also helps to affirm institutional commitment to the model and the values on which it is based.

3. Co-planning/release time for teacher teams: the collaborative teaming listed above, under teacher traits, requires a fair amount of time to develop, which should include time outside of class, both engaged in lesson prep together, and in other activities that build effective working relationships. Assigning instructional specialists mainly to specific departments seems to be a plus (with participation in departmental trainings, plannings, and community-building activities).

Notice my institutional list and my teacher-specific list are essentially the same.