The Lack of Collaboration of General Education and SPED Teachers by Madeleine Marie Denis A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION with an emphasis in CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, Utah April 26, 2024 Approved Shernavaz Vakil, Ed.D. Melina Alexander, Ph.D. Sara Gailey Sara Gailey (May 20, 2024 06:22 MDT) Sara Gailey, Ph.D. 2 Acknowledgements This journey, which I started two years ago, is now complete. I started this journey to obtain my master’s degree in education because of my biggest influence, my dad. My dad taught for 33 years and had two master’s degrees. Before my dad passed away, I made a promise to go back to school and make him proud. So, to my daddy, I miss you and I hope I am making you proud. I also need to thank my mom. Thank you for everything you have done and still do for me. I wouldn’t have started this journey without your unconditional love and support. To both my mother-in-law and father-in-law, thank you for cheering me on and letting me miss family dinners for homework. I am so lucky to have you in my life. Lastly, and most importantly, thank you to my husband. Thank you for pushing me, supporting me and never giving up on me. I love you. Cheers to the next journey, wherever that may lead me. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 3 Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 7 Collaboration ............................................................................................................................... 7 Benefits........................................................................................................................................ 9 Student Achievement ............................................................................................................... 9 Shared Learning ..................................................................................................................... 10 Relationships ......................................................................................................................... 11 Characteristics of Collaboration ................................................................................................ 12 Shared Goal ........................................................................................................................... 12 Parity ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Shared Participation, Resources & Accountability ............................................................... 13 Communication ......................................................................................................................... 14 Challenges ................................................................................................................................. 15 Location of Teachers ............................................................................................................. 15 Heavy Caseloads.................................................................................................................... 16 Ineffective communication .................................................................................................... 16 Inadequate preparation .......................................................................................................... 16 IDEA supporting collaboration ................................................................................................. 17 Following IEP ........................................................................................................................ 18 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................... 19 Method .......................................................................................................................................... 20 Participants .................................................................................................................................... 21 Procedure ...................................................................................................................................... 21 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 22 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................. 23 Results ................................................................................................................................... 23 Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 25 Limitations .................................................................................................................................... 26 4 Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 27 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 28 Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 29 Appendix A. .............................................................................................................................. 29 Teacher Surveys: ................................................................................................................... 29 Administration Surveys: ........................................................................................................ 31 Appendix B. ........................................................................................................................... 32 Appendix C. ........................................................................................................................... 32 References ..................................................................................................................................... 33 5 An increasing number of students with disabilities are being included in the general education classroom (Daane et al., 2000). Inclusion requires the collaboration between general and special education. According to Cook and Friend (1991), collaboration should be voluntary, focused on a common goal, be equal in amount of responsibility, and needs active communication and participation. In the general education classroom, the general education teacher delivers the tier one instruction in a specific subject area. The special education teacher works with children to provide specialized interventions including adaptations and modifications to the general education curriculum. Instruction and interventions can take place in either a “push in,” in a general education classroom, or “pull out," in the resource room, model (Dawson, 2014). These methods are used to provide students with disabilities a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) and promote inclusion. In order for these models to be successful there needs to be collaboration from both the general and special education teacher. General education teachers must be prepared to educate and accept students with a variety of diverse needs within their general education settings. All educators need to be well versed on how to best differentiate and modify for all students, as well as become comfortable with collaboratively working with special education teachers (Dawson, 2014). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that all educators are required by law to follow students' Individualized Education Programs. (IEP) “Public Law 94142 makes teachers responsible and accountable for ensuring that each handicapped child with a disability receives the required special education and related services outlined in the IEP” (Hayes & Higgins, 1978, p. 267). 6 “Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142), also known as the EHA, in 1975 to support states and localities in protecting the rights of, meeting the individual needs of, and improving the results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their families. This landmark law’s name changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, in a 1990 reauthorization” (U.S Department of Education, 2024). This specifically designed instruction must be provided regularly as listed in the IEP (Weishaar, 2001). IDEA requires teachers to collaborate with special educators, parents, administrators, and the multidisciplinary team to design instruction (Rotter, 2014). This includes accommodations and modifications to ensure that all students have equitable access to appropriate curricula, more engaging lessons, and supportive resources to help students be successful (Parrish, 2019). Instruction in a general classroom does not have a one size fits all approach. “Because any classroom with more than one student presents a range of learning needs, teachers struggle to provide all students access; what works for some students will not work for others” (Berliner & Biddle, as quoted in Brimijoin, 2005, p. 252). Students are provided with scaffolds and support by the general education teacher to allow for multiple means of understanding and representation, for example, manipulatives, number charts, audiobooks, visual aids, and graphic organizers. Differentiating instruction is altering the learning environment or process to be developmentally appropriate for each student. Differentiated instruction allows for variation in content without losing sight of the curriculum to which all children are entitled (Levy, 2008). The students are still learning the content and expressing their understanding of the content. This allows all students to feel confident in their work and makes their education equitable. 7 As both general and special education teachers are responsible for implementing the IEP, they need to collaborate closely to ensure all accommodations and modifications are met (Dawson, 2014). However, recently in my school I have observed that there have been several cases where students with disabilities are not receiving all accommodations and modifications discussed by the IEP team. The team needs to collaborate better. Collaboration is necessary for successful implementations of IEPs. Literature Review Collaboration Collaboration can be hard to define since it has many aspects. As defined by Cook and Friend (1993) collaboration is a style for interaction between at least two co-equal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision-making as they work toward a common goal. To have effective collaboration in schools the individuals involved need to have mutual goals, share resources, share accountability and participation. Professionals in the education system collaborate together to support students and their education. “In fact, this collaborative work between individuals in the educational setting is required by law for students with disabilities through the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004” (IDEIA, 2006). The main reason for why educators of both general and special education collaborate is because they are the ones responsible to make sure the student or students with disabilities are getting a fair equitable education that follows their IEP. Furthermore, “General educators bring content specialization, special education teachers bring assessment and adaptation specializations. Both bring training and experience in teaching techniques and learning processes. Their collaborative goal is that all students in their 8 class are provided with appropriate classroom and homework assignments so that each is learning, is challenged, and is participating in the classroom process” (Ripley, 1996, p.3). Collaboration cannot exist by itself. It can only occur when it is associated with some activities that are based on the shared goals of the individuals involved (Cook & Friend, 1993). This means the teachers who share students need to know the standards being taught, the curriculum being used, and how to implement the child’s accommodations. In order, for students with disabilities to have an effective education, the teachers need to collaborate to agree on the best teaching approaches. In addition, in the school setting, collaboration allows educators and parents to understand children across a variety of settings, as well as to communicate differences and avoid any disagreements (Griffiths et al. 2021 as stated in Cowan et al., 2004). This should result in parents and school staff working more effectively in creating and implementing student support plans. Everyone collaborating has one thing in common, which is supporting the student and their education. Teachers have a very important role when collaborating since they are the ones to implement the plans and have the same goal of improving student learning and achievement. "In collaborative working environments, teachers have the potential to create the collective capacity for initiating and sustaining ongoing improvement in their professional practice so each student they serve can receive the highest quality of education possible" (Pugach & Johnson, 2002, p. 6). In sum, teachers need to know their important role in collaborating and teaching students with disabilities to ensure the appropriate education. “No single educator should be responsible for holding the expertise in the infinite presentations of learner variability” (DeHartchuck, 2021). 9 Benefits There are many benefits from teachers collaborating. Some examples are student achievement, shared learning, continuous school improvement, and building relationships (Sparks, 2013). When the two educators collaborate effectively, they will allow for better student outcomes. Effective collaboration among teachers yields numerous additional benefits. For instance, it positively impacts student achievement by enhancing the overall learning experience. Through collaboration, teachers can share their knowledge and expertise, leading to shared learning opportunities for both educators involved. “Collaboration can bring together teachers with different perspectives and different knowledge to meet learner variability. For example, a general education teacher collaborating with a literacy specialist can efficiently identify strategies to support students with reading abilities that are above or below grade level” (DeHartchuck, 2021). Additionally, by working together and exchanging ideas, teachers can contribute to continuous school improvement initiatives and foster a culture of innovation within the educational community. Moreover, collaborative efforts among teachers help build strong professional relationships. By working closely with one another and engaging in open communication, educators develop a sense of solidarity and support that ultimately benefits their students. Student Achievement Teacher collaboration has strong and positive effects on student achievement, particularly when the collaboration is about assessment. “Teachers working in schools with better collaboration about students were better able to raise student math achievement” (Killion, 2015, p.64). When giving time to make sure both educators have time to collaborate both the student and teachers will grow. 10 The research conducted by Killion (2015) suggests that teacher collaboration, especially when focused on assessment, has a significant and favorable impact on student achievement. The study indicates that teachers who work in schools that prioritize collaboration regarding students' progress exhibit better results in enhancing their students' math skills. By allocating sufficient time for educators to collaborate, both the students and teachers can experience growth. This collaborative environment allows for the exchange of ideas, strategies, and insights between teachers. Subsequently, this enables them to develop effective instructional methods tailored to meet their students' individual needs. In sum, promoting teacher collaboration not only benefits student achievement but also fosters professional development for educators. By providing dedicated time for collaboration and encouraging open communication among teachers, schools can create an environment conducive to continuous improvement. Shared Learning Just like students, educators learn best from one another. A great benefit of teacher collaboration is they learn from one another and gain skills to best teach their shared students. Teacher collaboration is an invaluable tool for professional development and enhancing the learning experience for students. The exchange of knowledge and skills among educators fosters a supportive environment where they can learn from one another's diverse expertise and teaching methods. This collaborative approach enables teachers to gain new perspectives, refine their instructional techniques, and ultimately become more effective in meeting the needs of their shared students. “Oftentimes, when there is an identified area of growth for an individual teacher, there is someone else in the building who has developed the targeted skills this teacher is working on. Allowing teachers to observe each other and debrief together can help them learn 11 from each other in highly contextualized ways that are immediately applicable to their practice” (Henderson, 2021). By continuously learning from one another, educators can create a positive impact on the quality of education provided to students. Relationships “Even the best teachers can learn new things every day. When school districts encourage teachers to collaborate, they can share their challenges and struggles and get advice on how to get the best possible results for their students” (Torgerson, 2022). This allows the educators to build a strong relationship with each other as well as the students involved to let them know you are all on the same team of their success. “They can also learn new things about their students from other educators that impact their ability to connect with and support their students” (Henderson, 2021). By working together, educators can share their experiences, challenges, and strategies to improve their teaching practices. This not only fosters a strong sense of unity among the teachers but also allows them to gain insights into different perspectives and approaches. Through collaboration, teachers can learn from one another's successes and failures, effectively enhancing their own teaching skills. They can exchange ideas on how to engage students more effectively, address diverse learning needs, and create an inclusive classroom environment. Moreover, collaborating with other educators enables teachers to gain a better understanding of their students. By sharing information about individual students' strengths, weaknesses, interests, and backgrounds, they can tailor instruction more effectively and provide appropriate support. This collaborative approach benefits both the teachers themselves in terms of professional growth as well as the students who receive enhanced educational experiences. 12 Characteristics of Collaboration According to Cook and Friend (1990), there are six conditions which are needed for successful collaboration. These include shared mutual goal, parity, shared participation, shared resources, shared accountability, and voluntary. Teacher collaboration leads naturally to school improvement because it connects teachers with one another and allows them to share in the pursuit of school and district goals (Torgerson, 2022). These characteristics are the drivers of collaboration and will be explained below. Shared Goal First, for educators to have an effective collaboration model, they need to have a shared goal. Both educators need to set one goal that they agree on for the individual needs of the student (Ripley, 1997). Having one set goal allows for better focus on that one skill and can have a positive influence on improving student achievement. By aligning their efforts towards one specific skill, educators can allocate their resources and instructional strategies more effectively, resulting in improved outcomes for students. When educators have a clear and agreed-upon objective, their efforts can be more effectively directed towards the individual needs of the student. This focused approach allows for better allocation of resources and instructional strategies, ultimately leading to improved student achievement. It helps establish a framework within which decisions are made, creating consistency in instructional practices and reducing confusion among students. Parity In addition to having a shared goal, educators need to have parity for effective collaboration. This means that collaboration is not possible if its professionals do not sense the existence of parity, the equal value given to each person’s input (Cook & Friend, 1990 as stated 13 in Falck, 1977). Both members need to remember they are equals when collaborating with the shared goal of supporting their students and their educational needs. In sum, parity refers to the equal value given to each person's input during collaboration. It is crucial for professionals involved in collaboration to sense this equality. This allows teachers to contribute in meetings and feel that their input is valued. Both parties need to remember they are equals when collaborating to discuss a child’s education since they will both work and implement the plan discussed with their shared students. Shared Participation, Resources & Accountability Then, there is shared participation, shared resources, and shared accountability. These three are put under one umbrella, simply because they must be shared to be successful. Shared participation is simply both parties actively taking part in the collaboration. However, this does not mean it needs to be equal, it just means they are both actively participating. As well as participation, the teachers need to share resources. Sharing resources not only helps build a sense of community and collaboration, but it can also provide others with access to a wealth of information and resources they might not otherwise have access to or have thought of (Lynch, 2023). Teachers are giving students similar information and materials that will support their learning and academic success. Also, teachers will share the accountability. One will not take all the praise or criticism for things not working as planned. The participants must share responsibility for the outcomes, whether it is positive or negative (Cook & Friend, 1993). Finally, the participants must be voluntary for it to be successful. When teachers collaborate voluntarily, it makes it more authentic. “We cannot stress enough that school professionals must choose to carry out collaborativ e activities. Administrators or others with administrative authority may mandate that indi 14 viduals work in proximity to each other, but selecting collaboration as a style is the choic e of participants” (Cook & Friend, 1993). One could mandate the participants to collaborate, but when it is voluntary their trust will grow, which is another emergent characteristic. The participants need to trust one another to really make the outcome become successful. They need to put in their time and energy to collaborate and will build a strong sense of community. Communication “Regular collaboration and team planning sessions are extremely valuable. Engaging in these practices has a positive impact on teacher effectiveness” (Meador, 2020). Both general and special educators should be meeting frequently to best meet the needs of their shared students. “Effective collaboration depends on good communication practices. Examples of high-impact collaboration practices include: collaborative lesson planning across providers (particularly in a multi-tiered system of supports).” (DeHartchuck, 2021). Examples of effective communication amongst general and special educators is sharing lesson plans, discussing how to handle disciplinary problems and grading (McGhee, 2015). The two educators can learn a lot by effectively communicating with one another. General educators can learn how to modify lesson plans for students with special needs and share new content or material with the special education teacher. “In a collaborative model the general education and special education teachers each bring their skills, training, and perspectives to the team. Resources are combined to strengthen teaching and learning opportunities, methods, and effectiveness” (Ripley, 1997, p. 3). Collaboration cannot exist by itself. It can only occur when it is associated with some program or activity that is based on the shared goals of the individuals involved. An examination of applications in which teachers work collaboratively is appropriate. 15 Depending upon their shared programmatic goals, educators can work together in many diverse ways to deliver services to students (Cook & Friend, 1993, p.5). Only meeting and collaborating at the annual meeting is not effective and does not allow the students to have an appropriate educational experience. This results in students not having improved performances on state assessments, effective time in the general education classroom, and their scores on classroom assessments (La Salle, et al., 2013). Effective collaboration needs to happen frequently and be done purposefully amongst the general and special education educators. Challenges While there are many benefits to teacher collaboration, it has its challenges as well. Some of the challenges some educators might face are physical locations of teachers, heavy caseloads, inadequate meeting time, and Inadequate knowledge and skills about how to collaborate (Billingsley et al., 2009). To overcome these challenges, we need to acknowledge and address them so the collaboration between the educators becomes more effective. Location of Teachers The design and room assignments of the school’s room is a big factor when it comes to making collaboration challenging. Classrooms that are separate from general education teachers reduce special education teachers’ opportunities to interact with them or allow them to frequently check in or offer help. This creates a barrier for the two educators to collaborate and communicate frequently. This also can create marginalization if their room placement is not in the building. 16 Heavy Caseloads Collaboration can be slowed down and set back when special education teachers have many different students who are assigned to many different general education teachers. Unlike general education teachers, special educator teachers work with numerous grade levels at the same time. Depending on their school and districts, it can look different. This can create a challenge when trying to schedule times to communicate when they have many students and general education teachers to check in on. Ineffective communication Collaboration is hindered by inadequate meeting time and lack of shared professional development opportunities. Effective collaboration needs more than a quick 5-minute check in meeting. The two educators need to set a time that offers enough time to go over lesson plans, accommodations, and data from progress monitoring. The communication is more effective when both parties are offered useful professional development opportunities. “Professional development should involve not only skills necessary for implementing co-teaching effectively in the classroom, but also communication skills to avoid or mediate interpersonal conflicts” (Carter et al., 2009, Friend and Cook, 2010). Inadequate preparation Inadequate knowledge and skills about how to collaborate and include students with disabilities in general education classrooms can create difficulties. The two parties need to have background knowledge and skills to communicate properly. Otherwise, it can lead to delays, inefficiencies, and a lack of accountability among the team members. To solve this problem, it is important to first identify the root causes of the issue. 17 One common cause of inadequate team collaboration is a lack of clear communication and shared goals among team members. This can lead to confusion and misunderstandings and will most likely prevent the team members from working together effectively. Another common cause is a lack of trust and organization among the two educators. This can lead to a lack of willingness to share ideas and work together making collaboration difficult. It is important to create a clear and effective communication system among team members. This could include regular team meetings, regular check-ins, and an open-door policy for team members to share their ideas and concerns. This will allow teams to work together more effectively and achieve their objectives. IDEA supporting collaboration The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (hereafter IDEIA) was signed into law by President George W. Bush on December 3, 2004. This law reauthorized and made important changes to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Yell, et al. 2006). IDEA is a law that ensures students with a disability are provided with a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) that is personalized to their individual needs. This goes hand in hand with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA was previously known as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act and provided more flexibility to states and expectations for more transparency. Like NCLB, it required states to measure student performance in reading, math, and science (Department of Education, 2002). This law protects children with disabilities and ensures their proper education and holds school accountable. With both of these laws in place, for a child to receive their services and an equitable education, both general and special education teachers need to collaborate. Collaborating is taking a look at the specific student and their needs, what the standard is and addressing how to 18 best teach and support that child. The general and special education teachers come together to create that plan of instruction. The role of the general education teacher is to teach grade level material but follow the modifications. The special education teacher mostly provides guidance to the regular education teacher on how to modify instruction to meet the student's needs (Logsdon, 2020). Students with disabilities should receive grade level instruction with accommodations and modifications (USBE,2022). Modifying content for students provides the opportunity for all students to be successful and express their knowledge in multiple ways. Educators want all students to have the best and most equitable education possible. Students need to learn academic content in a developmentally appropriate way. Using their resources, students will be able to demonstrate their learning in various ways. This is only possible if teachers follow the legally binding document of the child’s IEP (Nuñez, 2021). Following IEP “Specially designed instruction, at no cost to the parent, to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability including instruction conducted in the classroom, homes, hospitals, institutions and any other setting. It includes services from related professionals and transportation “(Smith, 2006). According to the Utah State Board of Education (USBE), the parents of that child need to be notified and give their consent to the formal testing. The data from the formal and informal testing determined if they will qualify for special education services under one of the eligibility categories. Once they are qualified, there will be an initial IEP meeting that goes over the results of testing, the specific learning goals, the services the child will receive and accommodations that will be given by the general education teacher. “Accommodations are practices and 19 procedures that provide equitable access during instruction and assessments for students with disabilities or English language needs. Accommodations are intended to reduce or even eliminate the effects of a student’s disability but do not reduce learning expectations” (Utah Participation and Accommodations Policy, 2022, p.1). Once these accommodations are approved by the parents the IEP team will sign the IEP and it will become a legal binding document. This document mandates that any educator working with that child needs to follow their plan. This plan stays in effect until the child is 18 years of age. It will be reviewed annually (Utah State Board of Education [USBE], 2022). Purpose For students with disabilities to receive effective high-quality education there needs to be collaboration amongst the general and special education teachers. The purpose of this study is to improve the collaboration amongst the general and special – educators to ensure that the child is receiving appropriate support at my school, Lincoln Elementary. The goal is to have the teachers collaborating weekly in their grade level Professional Learning Committee (PLC) meetings to make sure accommodations are implemented as well as monitor progress and make adjustments as needed. I asked a two-part survey to the teaching staff members at Lincoln Elementary to help promote more effective and timely collaboration amongst the general and special education teachers. In addition, the two administrators were also asked to answer an open-ended survey which allowed them to take the time to answer the questions with their busy, limited schedule and share their expectations on collaboration. 20 The four research questions addressed: 1. Do general and special educators meet frequently to collaborate? 2. Do general educators share lesson plans ahead? 3. Do special education teachers give back lesson plans with accommodations in time? 4. How do administrators support collaboration between general and special education teachers? Method To address the purpose of this study, a survey approach was used for quantitative and qualitative data. The goal was to get very descriptive data from the participants to explain the why and how of how teachers are collaborating with one another at Lincoln Elementary. Survey research is defined as "the collection of information from a sample of individuals through their responses to questions" (Check & Schutt, 2012, p. 160). This style of research allows for a variety of methods to recruit participants, collect data, and utilize various methods of instrumentation. Surveys provide researchers with reliable and usable data to inform decisions. The data comes directly from the individuals that the researcher identified in their goal. In this study, the purpose is to improve the collaboration at Lincoln Elementary with both general education and special education teachers. To identify the strengths and weaknesses of the collaboration to make improvements, I gave a survey to the teaching staff at Lincoln as well as both the administrators. This survey approach allowed me to gather the data I needed from my targeted group. 21 Participants “The goal of sampling strategies in survey research is to obtain a sufficient sample that is representative of the population of interest” (Ponto, 2015). The participants asked in this survey were 28 general education teachers, the three special education teachers and the two administrators at Lincoln Elementary in Layton, Utah. There are two general traditional classrooms and two immersion classrooms in each grade level grades 1-6. Kindergarten is all general traditional education. The special education teachers are divided into two sets of different grades. The groups are split as K-2, 3-4, and 5-6. Each special education teacher has two grade levels to service daily. We have a vice principal and head principal of the school. 26 of the 28 teachers participated and both administrators participated. On average, the two sets of teachers have been teaching for at least six years and the administrators have been administrators for an average eight years. This demographic explains that the staff at Lincoln Elementary are mostly veteran teachers and administrators. Procedure The 26 teacher participants completed a two-part survey. These questions were split up quantitatively and qualitatively, to give a better picture of how the two types of educators collaborate in their school setting. The surveys were given in a small group setting. I administered the survey using Qualtrics during the grade team levels Professional Learning community (PLC) time. The PLC time was a great time to administer the survey so that participants understood the purpose and took it seriously while the data was recorded anonymously. I chose anonymous recording answers because in my opinion, anonymous surveys 22 are significantly more likely to provide full, honest answers. This gave me better data that made a real difference in my survey questions. The two administrators had their own survey asking if collaboration amongst their teachers is a priority and what their expectations are. The data showed if and what teachers are collaborating effectively or not and what adjustments should be made to better the collaboration. The survey questions in Appendix A. Data Analysis Survey research involves collecting data to examine research questions regarding a specific topic such as data use. The process of data analysis of these surveys is organizing and cleaning them up into each grade level and corresponding special education team to interpret the data. The survey analysis consisted of exporting data from Qualtrics Survey, I analyzed the data and imported it to an excel sheet and created graphs and charts for easier understanding. The survey was mixed with multiple choice and open-ended questions to have more descriptive and in-depth answers to better understand the collaboration at Lincoln Elementary as well as the expectations from the administration. Descriptive statistics, helps describe and understand the features of a specific data set. It is a summary of quantitative data that explains the content. Analyzing the mode helped me find the most common response occurring number in the data set. Analyzing the qualitative data, I used descriptive statistics. It best explained the features of my data set. Analyzing my data using the mode helped me find the most common response on my Likert scale. Below are the survey questions. 23 Results and Discussion Results One of the primary purposes of this research was to explore Lincoln Elementary staff’s perceptions of our collaboration amongst special education and general education teachers to guide improvements as necessary. Lincoln Elementary staff were given a survey to address the collaboration. Research Question 1: “Do general and special educators meet frequently to collaborate?” In reviewing the survey data, it was found that special education teachers and general education teachers do not attend formal PLCs together. Analyzing the survey data helps to validate the need for improvements between staff PLCs. The first research question was “Do general and special educators meet frequently to collaborate?” 13 of the 26 general education teachers shared that they frequently meet to collaborate with their coordinated special education teachers, but not in a formal PLC. Two of the three special education teachers shared that they meet with the teachers with whom they share the most students with to check in, but also not in a formal PLC manner. Research Question 2: “Do general educators share lesson plans ahead?” was clearly identified that only three of the 26 general education teachers share some form of lesson plan, standard or topic that they are doing, while the other 23 shared that they do not. One common explanation was that they have never been asked to. Research Question 3: “Do special education teachers give back lesson plans with accommodations in time?” The data showed that six of the general education teachers receive accommodations on lesson plans with them. Which only three general education teachers shared they gave the special education teachers lesson plans ahead of time. 24 Research Question 4: “How do administrators support collaboration between general and special education teachers?” The two administrators both shared how important collaboration means to them for their teachers. One administrator's response explained, “We have over 100 students to service in Special Education at our school. My expectation is that the general ed and SPED teachers meet to discuss their shared students. This is when they can also discuss accommodations needed.” The other administrator's response states, “Very important. If done appropriately, and SPED teachers provide their students with prior knowledge of upcoming lessons, their students are able to participate and be successful in the general classroom.” It is clear that the expectation is for the two teachers to be collaborating and discussing accommodations when the data clearly shows 90% of the participants do not share lesson plans ahead of time with the special education teacher. ( While the main focus was those four research questions, other key demographic questions were a great factor when analyzing the data. Appendix B states that 50% of the participants have 0-5 students with IEPs, while the remaining participants have 6-15 students in their room with IEPs. Amongst those participants, the average number of students in a classroom at Lincoln Elementary is over 25 as displayed in Appendix 3. While staff gave many reasons for not formally collaborating in PLCs, the data is showing that two sets of teachers do not have formal PLCs for their shared students, nor share lesson plans ahead of time. Moreover, referring to Graph 1, which addresses the survey question, “Does the special education teacher participate in your PLC meetings?” demonstrates a disconnect between classroom and special education teachers. The two administrator responses both explained that there is an expectation and importance for the two teachers to collaborate frequently. 25 Discussion The questionnaire highlighted a few flaws and needed improvements for Lincoln Elementary that are worth consideration. The amount of students with IEPS in each classroom should be evenly distributed, teachers should share lesson plans with accommodations ahead of time and general education and their coordinated special education teachers should meet once a week formally to collaborate. Having an even amount of students with IEPs spread amongst the grade level teachers would allow better grade level communication with the special education teacher, share resources and support differentiation in all classrooms. “In a collaborative model the general education and special education teachers each bring their skills, training, and perspectives to the team. Resources are combined to strengthen teaching and learning opportunities, methods, and effectiveness.” (Rippley, 1997, p.3). Two outstanding truths came out through the questionnaire: both teachers are not sharing lesson plans nor accommodations ahead of time, and the two are not participating in PLCs with one another. “Co-planning must take place at least once a week, according to studies. "Planning sessions were viewed as priorities by both teachers; they refused to let other competing responsibilities interfere with their planning sessions" (Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996, p. 260). The planning must be ongoing to allow teachers to review progress on a regular basis, make adjustments, evaluate students, and develop strategies to address problems either in discipline or learning.” (Rippley, 1997, p. 4) It would benefit the two sets of teachers at Lincoln Elementary, but more importantly the over 100 students with IEPs and their families. Only meeting and collaborating at the annual meeting is not effective and does not allow the students to have an appropriate educational experience. 26 This results in students not having improved performances on state assessments, effective time in the general education classroom, and their scores on classroom assessments (La Salle, et al., 2013). The graphs show the disconnect between the two sets of teachers and their collaboration as well as the expectations of the administrators. The administrators shared that their expectation is that the two teachers have a set time during the week to discuss their students, data, and accommodations. One administrator explicitly mentioned that their expectation is for the general education teacher to provide the lesson/content ahead of time and that the special education teachers will provide their students with prior knowledge of upcoming lessons, so their students are able to participate and be successful in the general classroom. Though the initial purpose of the survey was to focus on collaboration amongst the teachers, findings state there are a few teachers who have more students with IEPs than their colleagues. This can have a huge impact on the teachers having formal PLC meetings with their grade-level SPED teachers. As the literature review mentioned, both general and special education teachers are responsible for implementing the IEP, and need to collaborate closely to ensure all accommodations and modifications are met (Dawson, 2014). As we can now see, my observation of several cases where students with disabilities are not receiving all accommodations and modifications discussed by the IEP team are true. The findings show that the collaboration needs improvement. Limitations One limitation of the study was that only 26 of the 31 participants asked completed the survey. If all staff participated, a complete data collection of the collaboration happening at Lincoln Elementary would provide more insights and validity. Another limitation to consider, is 27 Lincoln Elementary is a Spanish immersion school. The majority of the students classified as “special education” are in the traditional general education classrooms. In the immersion setting at Lincoln Elementary, half of the day is taught in Spanish and the second half is taught in English. There are two teachers in this setting. The immersion teachers have fewer students than the traditional general education teachers. Lastly, an additional limitation is that this survey was conducted at only one school, and not others in the district. It would be beneficial to see the PLC expectations and the “reality” of other schools' collaboration perceptions. Recommendations Recommendations resulting from this study include the general education and special education teachers need to collaborate minimally once a week. For this to be effective, administration needs to allot time for members of the PLC team to meet. Davis School District has Fridays set for elementary school to be early out days, so teachers have time to meet for PLCs. Assistant Superintendent Dr. Logan Toone said, “As the district looked at how it could help teachers, feedback was solicited from district administrators, school administrators and key teachers from each academic level. The extra time is a balancing act because teachers do their best work when they are in the classroom with their students. However, the district also has an obligation to offer high quality training, assessments and collaborative opportunities for teachers” (Davis School District) This does not need to be formal, but that will be the time to share lessons ahead of time. This will help one of the administrators' expectations of special education teachers teaching the topic ahead of time to help those students with IEPs succeed. It is clear from the data that the two sets 28 of teachers need to be collaborating more. In addition, another recommendation would be that administration has a record or is invited or is given notes of that meeting. The data shared that the administrators were under the impression that the teachers were collaborating frequently and purposefully and it is clear that they are not. Lastly, there needs to be one scheduled biweekly or monthly PLC meeting with administrators, grade level teachers and special education teachers where there are norms, goals, and time to share resources. As stated previously, “To have effective collaboration in schools the individuals involved need to have mutual goals, share resources, share accountability and participation. Professionals in the education system collaborate together to support students and their education” (Cook & Friend, 1993). Conclusion This current study gave great insight to the staff at Lincoln Elementary in order to have more effective PLCs. Lincoln Elementary has now moved all PLC meetings to Fridays with an assigned time and location to ensure that administrators, academic coaches, and grade-level teachers can have meaningful meetings. The new PLC standard is to go over our norms, goals, and dive into the data. This created a more purposeful meeting for all teachers. The current expectation for the special education teachers is now to join one Friday PLC once a month. The schedule is now designated as the following: the first Friday of the month is designated for grade level PLC’s and the third Friday is for the whole school to come together to analyze the specific data; making plans to provide the best support for the teachers and students at Lincoln Elementary. In addition to the Friday scheduled meetings, Lincoln Elementary has a new committee called, “guided coalition.” This committee has a teacher from every grade level 29 to discuss their PLCs, the data, how to help all students who attend our school and create action plans. Appendix Appendix A. Teacher Surveys: Part 1: Demographic Information How many years have you been teaching? 0-3, 3-5, 5-8, 9+ On an average how many students do you have in your classroom? 10-12, 12-18, 18-24, 25+ On average, how many students with IEPs do you have in your classroom? 0-5, 5-8, 8-9, 10+ Part 2: For general Educators Only: Does the special education teacher participate in your PLC meetings? Yes, how or in what way? No, why not or why do you think they are not participating? Do you collaborate with the SPED teacher outside of the PLC meetings? Yes, how? No, why not? On average how many hours a week do you collaborate with the SPED teacher? 0, 1-2, 2-3, 4+ Do you share lesson plans with the special education teacher ahead of the lesson? 30 Yes, what does this look like? No, why don’t you? If yes, how many days earlier? Not at all, On that day, 1-2, 2-3, 4-5, earlier than a week Does the special educator share accommodations to the lesson plans with you? Yes or no If yes, how many days earlier? Not at all, On that day, 1-2, 2-3, 4-5, earlier than a week Part 2: For Special Educators Only Do you participate in grade level PLC meetings? Yes, how? No, why not? Do you collaborate with the general education teacher outside of the PLC meetings? Yes, how? No, why not? On average how many hours a week do you collaborate with the general education teacher? 0, 1-2, 2-3, 4+ Does the general education teacher share lesson plans with you ahead of the lesson? Yes, what does it look like? No, why do you think this doesn’t happen? If yes, how many days earlier? Not at all, On that day, 1-2, 2-3, 4-5, earlier than a week Do you share accommodations to the lesson plans with the general education teacher? 31 Yes or no If yes, how many days earlier? Not at all, On that day, 1-2, 2-3, 4-5, earlier than a week Administration Surveys: Part 1: Demographic Information How many years have you been an admin for? 0-3, 3-5, 5-8, 8-9, 10+ How many years at Lincoln Elementary? 0-3, 3-5, 5-8, 8-9, 10+ On average, how many IEP meetings do you have a year that you need to attend? 10-15, 15-20, 20-25, 25-29, 30+ If over 30, how many would you estimate? Part 2: School dynamics How important is collaboration between general ed and special ed teachers to you? Why? What are your expectations of their collaboration? 32 Appendix B. Appendix C. 33 References Billingsley, B. S., Griffin, C. C., Smith, S. J., Kamman, M., & Israel, M. (2009). A review of teacher induction in special education: Research, practice, and technology solutions (NCIPP Doc. No. RS-1). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, National Center to Inform Policy and Practice in Special Education Professional Development (NCIPP). Brimijoin, K. (2005). Differentiation and high-stakes testing: An oxymoron? Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 254-261. Carter, Nari & Prater, Mary & Jackson, Aaron & Marchant, Michelle. (2009). Educators' Perceptions of Collaborative Planning Processes for Students With Disabilities. Preventing School Failure. 54. 60-70. 10.3200/PSFL.54.1.60-70. Check J., Schutt R. K. Survey research. In: J. Check, R. K. Schutt., editors. Research methods in education. Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage Publications; 2012. pp. 159– 185. [Google Scholar] Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1993). Educational Leadership for Teacher Collaboration, 421–446. https://doi.org/EC 303 164 Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1991). Principles for the practice of collaboration in schools. Preventing School Failure, 35(4), 6. https://doi-org.hal.weber.edu/10.1080/1045988X.1991.9944251 Cunningham, B. (2021, June 8). Teacher not following the IEP? here's what to do. Understood. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from https://www.understood.org/en/articles/theteacher-isnt-following-my-childs-iep-what-can-i-do 34 Daane, C. J., Beirne-Smith, M., & Latham, D. (2000). Administrators’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of the Collaborative Efforts of Inclusion in the Elementary Grades. Education, 121(2), 331. Davis School District. (n.d.). Early-out days added to Calendar. District News. https://www.davis.k12.ut.us/district/district-news/~board/news-stories-2022-2023/post/ea rly-out-days-added-to-calendar Dawson, Stacey M.L., "Pull-Out or Push-in Service Delivery Model: Conducive to Students or Teachers?" (2014). Education Masters. Paper 296. https://fisherpub.sjf.edu/education_ETD_masters/296 DeHartchuck, L. (2021, August 26). Collaboration: Partnering with colleagues, families, and caregivers to promote student success. NCLD. https://www.ncld.org/reportsstudies/forward-together-2021/collaboration/ Department Of Education. (2020, October 28). What is the Every Student Succeeds Act?. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. https://oese.ed.gov/families/essa/#:~:text=ESSA%20was%20signed%20into%20law,read ing%2C%20math%2C%20and%20science. Griffiths, A. J., Alsip, J., Hart, S. R., Round, R. L., & Brady, J. (2021). Together we can do so much: A systematic review and conceptual framework of collaboration in schools. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 36(1), 59-85. Hayes, J., & Higgins, S. T. (1978). Issues regarding the IEP: Teachers on the front line. Exceptional Children, 44(4), 267-273. Henderson, K. (2021, June 23). Benefits of and Strategies for Teacher Collaboration in MTSS 35 [web log]. Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.branchingminds.com/blog/teachercollaboration-mtss. KILLION, J. (2015). High-quality collaboration benefits teachers and students. Journal of Staff Development, 36(5), 62–64. La Salle, T. P., Roach, A. T., & McGrath, D. (2013). The Relationship of IEP Quality to Curricular Access and Academic Achievement for Students with Disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 28(1), 135-144. Levy, H. M. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas, 81(4), 161-164. Logsdon, A. (2020, May 18). Models of collaborative teaching for special education students. Verywell Family. https://www.verywellfamily.com/special-education-in-collaborativeclassrooms-2162691 Lynch , M. (2023, June 5). Sharing Resources with your school community and beyond. The Edvocate. https://www.theedadvocate.org/sharing-resources-with-your-schoolcommunity-and-beyond/ Meador, Derrick. (2020, August 27). The Importance of Effective Communication Between Teachers. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/the-importance-of-effectiveteacher-to-teacher-communication-3194691 McGhee, S. (2015, June 19). How to Effectively Collaborate with Fellow Educators [web log]. Retrieved July 17, 2023, from https://www.gpb.org/blogs/educationmatters/2015/06/19/how-effectively-collaborate-fellow-educators. Nuñez , M. (2021, March 31). Special Education Law. Retrieved June 10, 2023, from 36 https://www.sdspecialattorney.com/blog/2021/03/remember-ieps-are-legal-documents/. Parrish, N. (2019, May 15). Ensuring that instruction is inclusive for diverse learners. Edutopia. Retrieved January 11, 2023, from https://www.edutopia.org/article/ensuringinstruction inclusive-diverse-learners/ Ponto J. (2015). Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology, 6(2), 168–171. Pugach, M. C, & Johnson, L. J. (2002). Collaborative practitioners, collaborative schools (2nd ed.). Denver: Love Publishing. Ripley, S. (1997). Collaboration between General and Special Education Teachers. ERIC Digest. Rotter, K. (2014). IEP use by general and special education teachers. Sage Open, 4(2), 2158244014530410. Deborah Deutsch Smith. (2006). Introduction to special education : teaching in an age of opportunity. Pearson/A And B. Sparks, D. (2013). Strong Teams, Strong Schools. Journal of Staff Development, 34(2), 28–30. Torgerson, D. (2022, June 17). 5 Benefits Of Teacher Collaboration In Education W/ Examples On How To Promote It. Retrieved from https://blog.alludolearning.com/benefits-ofteacher-collaboration. U.S Department of Education. (2024, February 16). A history of the individuals with disabilities education act. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEAHistory#:~:text=Congress%20enacted%20the%20Education%20for,with%20disabilities %20and%20their%20families. 37 Weishaar, M. K. (2001). The regular educator's role in the individual education plan process. The Clearing House, 75(2), 96-98. Master Project Denis Final Audit Report Created: 2024-04-29 By: Ellynn Raynor (ellynnraynor@weber.edu) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAJs1Ex_A3C-PVU5_UiZcT3MLPaj3K78-W 2024-05-20 "Master Project Denis" History Document created by Ellynn Raynor (ellynnraynor@weber.edu) 2024-04-29 - 3:53:43 PM GMT- IP address: 137.190.70.233 Document emailed to Shernavaz Vakil (svakil@weber.edu) for signature 2024-04-29 - 3:54:33 PM GMT Email viewed by Shernavaz Vakil (svakil@weber.edu) 2024-04-29 - 4:03:06 PM GMT- IP address: 104.28.48.215 Document e-signed by Shernavaz Vakil (svakil@weber.edu) Signature Date: 2024-04-29 - 4:37:36 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 67.182.211.8 Document emailed to Melina Alexander (melinaalexander@weber.edu) for signature 2024-04-29 - 4:37:38 PM GMT Email viewed by Melina Alexander (melinaalexander@weber.edu) 2024-05-13 - 4:36:46 PM GMT- IP address: 66.102.6.232 Document e-signed by Melina Alexander (melinaalexander@weber.edu) Signature Date: 2024-05-13 - 4:37:00 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 137.190.84.73 Document emailed to saragailey@weber.edu for signature 2024-05-13 - 4:37:02 PM GMT Email viewed by saragailey@weber.edu 2024-05-13 - 10:39:21 PM GMT- IP address: 146.75.181.25 Signer saragailey@weber.edu entered name at signing as Sara Gailey 2024-05-20 - 12:22:51 PM GMT- IP address: 162.210.20.40 Document e-signed by Sara Gailey (saragailey@weber.edu) Signature Date: 2024-05-20 - 12:22:53 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 162.210.20.40 Agreement completed. 2024-05-20 - 12:22:53 PM GMT