
Susan and Frank Gately in their article “Understanding Coteaching Components” state the importance of “identify the developmental level for each component may help teachers set goals that will let them move more quickly from one developmental level to the next”. (2001, p40) After reading and analyzing their ideas, I shall say that even though the authors provide information about coteaching to support their thesis, the definition of each of these levels does not explain how to move from one level to another.
They start their argument by giving importance to the collaborative work between general and special educators. They define their thesis and state that the article is compound of descriptions and examples about each level of the developmental stage needed to acquire a collaborative classroom. Also at the end of the article, they include an instrument called the coteaching rating scale (CtRS) which has been created to examine teachers’ coteaching work and focus on those areas which need improvement.
What seems disconnected of the argument is the way they present the CrRS and the ways the authors believe should be used. First of all, they present scales for each teacher separated and it is evidently seen that both are the same. This is something that may confuse the reader in terms of using different instruments to measure the same job in the classroom. Secondly, the authors suggest some ways in which teachers can use this scale focusing only in the agreement between the teachers’ answers more than in the way this work can be improved. Finally, they conclude the article by stating the use of the scale as an instrument without referring to any of the levels previously presented.
This article states there are uneven ways of development in the components of coteaching, and it has been said that there is some information missing in order to improve their coteaching work in the classroom. What should be included in this article is a way of applying this scale where teachers not only get together, but work on a way to use the components in the classes and acquire those levels faster. There should be more research on the topic to find out more ideas of how to improve coteaching work in every type of classroom. Also, it is important to follow an organized form of presenting the elements, avoiding the lack of conclusion. Reflecting not only in the presentation of the scale but also on the input these levels of developing can bring to the discussion about coteaching work.
In the end, it is fundamental to say that if the authors pretend to identify the developmental levels of the components to improve the time in which they move from one to another, they should have to include not only the levels. Moreover, they need to include some more information about coteaching and the appropriate use of the scale to find the applicability of this one in the classroom. Exposing ideas and information is not enough to produce a possibility in the teachers’ ways of working within their classrooms.
Gately, Susan E. and Frank J. Gately. “Understanding Coteaching Components.” Teaching Exceptional Children 33.4 (2001) : 40-47.