Crippling School Curricula

• In the article Cripping School Curricula the author David Connor states that a child with a disability who is mainstreamed in the least restrictive environment, that the disability is associated with shame and stigmatized by a model casting the disability as a deficit in need of examination, diagnosis and treatment.  In recent years, I have taught in an inclusion then a co-teach model where students with varying degrees of learning disability were mainstreamed with regular students who were not identified.  In both types of programs, inclusion and co-teach the treatment of the students was basically the same.  I, the regular education teacher would be responsible for teaching the whole class, and planning the lessons.  The inclusion or co-teach would pull a small group and give modifications or make accommodations based on their disability, or as otherwise stated in the individual education plans.  This model is known as alternative teaching where one teacher takes responsibility for the larger group while the others work with a smaller group.  In these smaller groups the inclusion or co-teach teacher uses remediation.  With the support of the administrator, he instated common planning time for all of the co-teach teachers to be able to plan lessons together.  The initiative for this was to afford time to plan a lesson that met the needs of the students, but most importantly to try a different co-teaching approach. 
• This was helpful because it opened up lines of communication between my co-teach teacher and I to be on the same page.  I was able to use the time productively to express how the students should be supported and what that should look like.  We were able to reach an understanding and compromise a little.  I offered to open up and allow her the space to teach in the way she was most comfortable with and I in turn could feel supported in the classroom.  Co-teaching is challenging for several reasons.  As a generalist, I do not have the special training to work with the students individual needs.  I felt overwhelmed to make accommodations for such a wide range of abilities with the limited supports of only having the co-teach teacher for a fraction of the day, and with little time to plan made it a daunting task.  After the administrator had left, the new administrator did not see the benefit for common planning time for co-teach classrooms, and it was removed.  This luxury of common planning was short lived and only lasted about two semesters.  
• The other types of co-teaching approaches are one teach, one observe, station teaching, parallel teaching, teaming and one teach, one assist. In the one teach, one observe just as it sounds one teacher teaches while the other observes with a specific purpose that is decided on by both teachers.  Then together the data from the observation is analyzed and used to inform instruction.  The teachers take turn with the different roles of teaching and data gathering. In the station teaching both teachers divide the classroom evenly to teach the content to one group and subsequently repeat the instruction for the other group.  The teachers could be creative here adding a third station for independent work.  The parallel teaching model is where both teachers are teaching the same content simultaneously at different levels. Teaming is when both teachers share delivery of the same instruction to a whole group. Finally, one teach and one assist is when one teacher has the primary responsibility for teaching while the other professional circulated through the room providing unobtrusive assistance to students as needed. 
• Some of the co-teaching approaches mentioned above can lend itself to create more labels in the classroom when certain students are pulled away from the whole group to be given special instruction.  I can see how this type of treatment can stigmatize a child and give a sense of shame.  What type of model is conducive to the teaching and learning environment of students with a disability?