Co-teaching literacy strategies for the inclusion of second-language learners: possibilities for professional development

References

• Alcalà Arxé E, Comallonga L, Sala M, Galera M. 2020. Co-teaching to foster classroom interactional competence (CIC); how can co-teaching benefit classroom interactional competence? clil. 3(1):35–43. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.31.
   Google Scholar
• Aveling EL, Gillespie A, Cornish F. 2015. A qualitative method for analysing multivoicedness. Qual Res. 15(6):670–687. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114557991.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brendle J. 2017. A study of co-teaching identifying effective implementation strategies. Int J Spec Educ. 32(3):538–550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns E, Bell S. 2011. Narrative construction of professional teacher identity of teachers with dyslexia. Teach Teach Educ. 27(5):952–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.03.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clandinin DJ, Connelly FM. 1996. Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: teacher stories. Stories of teachers. School stories. Stories of schools. Educ Res. 25(3):24–30. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X025003024.
   Google Scholar
• Clandinin DJ, Connelly FM. 2000. Narrative inquiry: experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Connelly FM, Clandidin DJ. 1999. Shaping a professional identity: stories of educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cook L, Friend M. 2017. Co-teaching: guidelines for creating effective practices. Exceptional. 28(3):1–25. https://doi.org/10.17161/fec.v28i3.6852.
   Google Scholar
• Creese A. 2005. Is this content-based language teaching? Linguist Educ. 16(2):188–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.01.007.
   Google Scholar
• Cummins J, Early M. 2015. Big ideas for expanding minds: teaching English language learners across the curriculum. Oakville, ON: Rubicon Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Davison C. 2006. Collaboration between ESL and content teachers: how do we know when we are doing it right? Int J Biling Educ Biling. 9(4):454–475. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb339.0.
   Google Scholar
• Dove M, Honigsfeld A. 2012. ESL coteaching and collaboration: opportunities to develop teacher leadership and enhance student learning. TESOL J. 1(1):3–22. https://doi.org/10.5054/tj.2010.214879.
   Google Scholar
• Dove M, Honigsfeld A. 2014. Analysis of the implementation of an ESL co-teaching model in a suburban elementary school. NYS TESOL J. 1(1):62–67. http://journal.nystesol.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards SL. 2017. Reflecting differently. New dimensions: reflection-before-action and reflection-beyond-action. IPDJ. 7(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.19043/ipdj.71.002.
   Google Scholar
• Fang Z, Coatoam S. 2013. Disciplinary literacy: what you want to know about it. J Adolesc Adult Lit. 56(8):627–632. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finnish National Agency for Education. 2016. National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2017.1347489.
   Google Scholar
• Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. 2019/2023. http://www.tenk.fi/en.
   Google Scholar
• Gore J, Lloyd A, Smith M, Bowe J, Ellis H, Lubans D. 2017. Effects of professional development on the quality of teaching: results from a randomised controlled trial of Quality Teaching Rounds. Teach Teach Educ n Int J Res Stud. 68(1):99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.007.
   Google Scholar
• Gourvennec AF, Solheim OJ, Foldnes N, Uppstad PH, McTigue EM. 2022. Shared responsibility between teachers predicts student achievement: a mixed methods study in Norwegian co-taught literacy classes. J Educ Change. 25(1):71–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09472-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves A, O’Connor MT. 2018. Collaborative professionalism: when teaching together means learning for all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hollingsworth S, Dybdahl M. 2007. Talking to learn: the critical role of conversation in narrative inquiry. In Clandinin DJ, editor. Handbook of narrative inquiry: mapping a methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; p. 146–176. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452226552.
   Google Scholar
• Hord S. 2004. Professional learning communities: an overview. In Hord S, editor. Learning together, leading together: changing schools through professional learning communities. New York: Teachers College Press; p. 5–14.
   Google Scholar
• Hsieh H-F, Shannon S. 2018. Content analysis. In Frey B, editor. The SAGE encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; p. 393–394
   Google Scholar
• Jackson KM, Willis K, Giles L, Lastrapes RE, Mooney M. 2017. How to meaningfully incorporate co-teaching into programs for middle school students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Beyond Behavior. 26(1):11–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295617694408.
   Google Scholar
• Keene K, Keating K, Ahonen P. 2016. The power of stories: Enriching program research and reporting. OPRE Report# 2016-32a. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/opre/powerofstoriesreport_2016_compliant.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Krammer M, Gastager A, Lisa P, Gasteiger-Klicpera B, Rossmann P. 2018. Collective self-efficacy expectations in co-teaching teams – what are the influencing factors? Educ Stud. 44(1):99–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2017.1347489.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemi H. 2015. Teacher professional development in finland: towards a more holistic approach. PSYE. 7(3):279–294. https://doi.org/10.25115/psye.v7i3.519.
   Google Scholar
• Patrick LD. 2016. Found poetry: creating space for imaginative arts-based literary research writing. Lit Res Theory Method Pract. 65(1):384–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/23813369166615.
   Google Scholar
• Pesonen HV, Rytivaara A, Palmu I, Wallin A. 2020. Teachers’ stories on sense of belonging in co-teaching relationship. Scand J Educ Res. 65(3):425–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1705902.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polkinghorne DE. 1995. Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. Int J Qual Stud Educ. 8(1):5–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839950080103.
   Google Scholar
• Pratt S. 2014. Achieving symbiosis: working through challenges found in co-teaching to achieve effective co-teaching relationships. Teach Teach Educ. 41:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.02.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riessman CK. 2008. Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Rogan AI, de Kock DM. 2005. Chronicles from the classroom: making sense of the methodology and methods of narrative analysis. Qual Inq. 11(4):628–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405276777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rytivaara A, Kershner R. 2012. Co-teaching as a context for teachers’ professional learning and joint knowledge construction. Teach Teach Educ. 28(7):999–1008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.05.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rytivaara A, Pulkkinen J, Bruin CLd 2019. Committing, engaging and negotiating: teachers’ stories about creating shared spaces for co-teaching. Teach Teach Educ. 83:225–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.04.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saloviita T, Takala M. 2010. Frequency of co‐teaching in different teacher categories. Eur J Spec Needs Educ. 25(4):389–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2010.513546.
   Google Scholar
• Sarasa MC. 2015. Narrative research into the possibilities of classroom-generated stories in English teacher education. Profile. 17(1):13–24. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v17n1.43383.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz G. 2001. Using teacher narrative research in teacher development. Teach Educ. 37(1):37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730109555279.
   Google Scholar
• Shanahan T, Shanahan C. 2008. Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: rethinking content area literacy. Harv Educ Rev. 78(1):40–59. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.78.1.v62444321p602101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundqvist C, Björk-Åman C, Ström K. 2021. Special teachers and the use of co-teaching in Swedish-speaking schools in Finland. Educ Inq. 12(2):111–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2020.1793490.
   Google Scholar
• Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. 2013. Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci. 15(3):398–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar