Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Team teaching practices in selected elementary schools of british columbia and the united states Kallus, I. Barbara 1971

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1971_A8 K34.pdf [ 24.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093319.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093319-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093319-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093319-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093319-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093319-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093319-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093319-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093319.ris

Full Text

TEAM TEACHING PRACTICES IN SELECTED SCHOOLS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA THE  ELEMENTARY AND  UNITED STATES  by  I.  BARBARA KALLUS  B.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y  of British  C o l u m b i a , 1968  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE  REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER  OF E&Ue-A-T-JQN ^-&~^>  i n the Faculty of Education  We a c c e p t required  THE  this  thesis  as conforming  to the  standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH A u g u s t , 1971  COLUMBIA  In  presenting  an  advanced  the I  Library  further  for  this  thesis  degree shall  agree  scholarly  at the University make  that  purposes  of  this  It  o f the requirements  of British  Columbia,  for extensive  gain  copying  by t h e Head  i s understood  f o r financial  f o r reference  shall  that  I agree  of  y^A^s^^aAk,  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a  ^ A 4 ^ « ^ ° ?  7  ;  Columbia  that  of this  thesis  o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r  copying  n o t be a l l o w e d  /d&A^ilu^ ^  f o r  and study.  or  publication  w i t h o u t my  permission.  Department  Date  fulfilment  avlilable  may b e g r a n t e d  h i s representatives.  written  it freely  permission  by  thesis  in partial  j£»l<^^tu-*^  ABSTRACT The related  i s t o review the  literature  t o team t e a c h i n g d e v e l o p m e n t s i n Canada and  the United  S t a t e s , and British (i)  purpose  of t h i s  study  t o examine c u r r e n t team t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s i n  Columbia  elementary  schools i n order to:  a s c e r t a i n the e x t e n t , d e f i n i t i o n , methods, p r o b l e m s and at the elementary  (ii)  attempt  school  generalizations  the p r a c t i c e s  assess the p o t e n t i a l  o f team t e a c h i n g  level;  t o draw w a r r a n t e d  f i n d i n g s about (iii)  difficulties  objectives, various  The limited  v a l u e o f team t e a c h i n g w i t h  thesis  rests  on b o t h  secondary The  on  British  Columbia  a survey conducted  district  elemen-  primary  by t h e a u t h o r . that  The  basic  s c h o o l s was  taken  Initial 45  sources  reviewed i n -  newspapers.  elementary  superintendents indicated  and  literature  c l u d e d b o o k s , j o u r n a l s , m a g a z i n e s and  from  of  education.  t o t h e y e a r s 1960-1971.  information  these  o f team t e a c h i n g ; and  r e f e r e n c e t o commonly a c c e p t e d p r i n c i p l e s tary  from  response  districts  had  from some  s c h o o l s t h a t were u s i n g t h e team t e a c h i n g a p p r o a c h ,  the  total  number o f s c h o o l s b e i n g 110.  the  study  was  g i v e n by a l l d i s t r i c t s .  buted 110  in April,  schools.  1971,  P e r m i s s i o n t o conduct Survey  to principals  R e t u r n s were r e c e i v e d  i n s t r u m e n t s were and from  distri-  t e a c h i n g teams i n a l l 85  principals  and  301  teachers  i n 85  The  principals  and  returned  and  s c h o o l s , 77.73 p e r c e n t teachers  represented  between them 228  (85  of the  142  + 143)  teaching  other  All  team t e a c h i n g  the  teaching  were v i s i t e d The attempts t o  and  found  clarify  t o be:  Lower M a i n l a n d  The  i s divided into the  and  c a r r y out  specific  ranks designated  teachers  exchanging  the  instructional  on  and  The  programme w i t h  an  a rotating  basis.  The  with  skills,  and  study;  interests;  maximum u s e  p r o f e s s i o n a l and  staff;  some c u r r i c u l u m a l t e r a t i o n s ;  visual  and  to  other  a team, n o t  considered  flexible  The tional  second  chapter  patterns, teacher  and  strengths,  para-professional  extensive  i n s t r u c t i o n a l m e d i a ; and,  to a p a r t i c u l a r  basis;  planning,  scheduling;  of teachers'  teachers  leader-  generally  included: cooperative  evaluation; flexible  were  or. more  informal voluntary peers  of  no  arrangements p r o v i d i n g f o r l a r g e group, s m a l l group, individualized  first  definitions  t o s t a f f members; two  c l a s s e s on  characteristics  instruction,  district  s t r u c t u r e i n which s e v e r a l  a formalized structure of teaching  important  school  characteristics  most commonly a c c e p t e d  a cooperative  ship designated  from  obtained.  four chapters.  definitions  p l a n and  and,  plans  interviewed.  study  team t e a c h i n g .  floor  e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s were a l s o  teams i n one  teams  questionnaires.  A n n u a l r e p o r t s , t i m e t a b l e s , e v a l u a t i o n s and 8  sample.  use  of  students  audioassigned  teacher.  o u t l i n e s the  r o l e s , groupings  different and  organiza-  facilities  associated with identified structure bility  team t e a c h i n g .  i n c l u d e : a simple or assumption  specific  with  voluntary collaboration  o f permanence; d i v i s i o n  an  grouping  experiences;  purposes;  and,  an  structure with rotating  structure  peer  a i d e s on on  teacher  working  a temporary b a s i s .  on  a continuing  or assisted  a c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s ; a f o r m a l i z e d team  and,  several levels  Concepts of the  of classes  s t a t u s emphasized; t e a c h e r s  a hierarchical  a permanent r o l e ;  on  of  i n c l u d e : a f o r m a l i z e d team  leadership designated  b a s i s and  teacher  with  without  of r e s p o n s i -  combination  experienced  a p p r e n t i c e or younger t e a c h e r  Formal o r g a n i z a t i o n i d e n t i f i e d  by  organizations  t o s i m p l i f y workload p r e p a r a t i o n ; interchange  pupils for specific for  Informal  b a s i s , with  l e a d e r assuming  a formalized hierarchical structure  of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  roles  the  above t h a t o f  o f team members v a r y  somewhat  teacher. from  s c h o o l t o s c h o o l but g e n e r a l l y i n c l u d e a team l e a d e r , professional teachers, regular teachers, teacher teacher and  specialists,  support  personnel.  s m a l l g r o u p s o f 12 pupils,  and  central  aspect  on  V a r y i n g group s i z e s  t o 15  d i s c u s s i n g the and  ranging  resource from  p u p i l s , working groups of 3 t o  o f most t e a m s .  75,  100  Joint  team's a c t i v i t i e s  on making o v e r a l l  assessing  aides, teacher aides,  l a r g e g r o u p s o f 40,  around which the focus  clerical  interns,  o r 150  planning  p u p i l s are  g e n e r a l l y centre, tend  progress.  to  scheduling,  p r o b l e m s o f s t u d e n t s , and  r e p o r t i n g student  a  sessions,  c u r r i c u l u m d e c i s i o n s , on  special  8  on  Detailed planning  of i n d i v i d u a l who  lessons  specialize  teams a r e teachers operate sized  i n each a r e a .  very by  i s u s u a l l y done by Planning  t i m e c o n s u m i n g and  the  schools.  A few  o r l a r g e c l a s s r o o m s and  traditional  schools.  group a c t i v i t i e s group or  On  are  individual  the  sessions  i n most  Most o f t h e  teams  are housed i n double-  whole, the  function in  facilities  many teams f i n d  facilities  members  overwhelm  a small minority  adequate but study  o r two  frequently  i n c r e a s e d work l o a d .  i n open a r e a  one  are  poor or  f o r large that  small  non-  existent . The studies  third  chapter  gives  completed to date i n the  team t e a c h i n g .  poor q u a l i t y .  The  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  Almost without  Findings  on  other  exception,  f a r as  student  plan  hold  only a crude s t a r t  of  adjustment are  shown  about the  team a p p r o a c h .  l e s s e n the  on  same i n  classrooms.  a l l highly similar  o f o r g a n i z a t i o n , seems t o and  in gain-  i t s validity.  i n self-contained  with  Team t e a c h i n g , improve the  adjustment  of  majority  a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d team t e a c h i n g .  of  as  adjust-  others.  concerned, research  show t h a t a c o n s i d e r a b l e  favourable  and  been f o u n d t o be  p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s are  consistently  school  done i s g e n e r a l l y  p u p i l achievement, as  programmes a s  ment o f some s t u d e n t s As  research  of elementary  research  o f team t e a c h i n g  most p u p i l s f a v o r i n g t h e any  any  represents  t e s t s , has  team t e a c h i n g  of  summary o f f i n d i n g s i s , t h e r e f o r e , some-  what h y p o t h e t i c a l and  standardized  area  results  Most s t u d i e s , h o w e v e r , h a v e been d e s c r i p t i v e  r a t h e r t h a n e v a l u a t i v e and  ing  the  studies  parents The  findings  a r e , however, g e n e r a l l y n o t to  most a r e  volunteers,  adjusting  t o the  schools  the  majority  field  chiefly  surprisingly,  of teachers  attitudes.  who  demands team t e a c h i n g  period  of time, there  from t h i s  type  o f team t e a c h i n g  because  h a v e worked  These t e a c h e r s  undergo a r a t h e r s t r e s s f u l  i n d i c a t e that greater teacher  results  Not  were  or d e t a i l e d  period  makes on  i s no  efficiency  Writers  give  attention to  in  the team  planning.  Most r e p o r t s a g r e e t h a t t h i s  problems.  There i s u s u a l l y a l a c k of time f o r p l a n n i n g  it  takes  planning  much l o n g e r sessions  t o make p l a n s  are  hampered by  disagreements over ideas however, g e n e r a l l y f e e l up  with  that  w i t h i n team o r g a n i z a t i o n s  group i n s t r u c t i o n , study. that  the  the  i s limited  to the  relative  the  competence o f t h o s e  merit  doing  the  and  d e t e r m i n e d by being  teaching.  grouping  of  large  independent  b u i l d i n g up,  of those  putting  when a v a i l a b l e  small group a c t i v i t i e s  ability  and  Teachers,  flexible  and  and  Frequently  r e s u l t s are worth  R e s e a r c h on  of group i s best  what i s t a u g h t ,  a team.  personality conflicts  C o n v i c t i o n does seem t o be size  p o s e s many  or basic philosophy.  such d i f f i c u l t i e s .  remains i n c o n c l u s i v e as  as  area  Even  evidence  of o r g a n i z a t i o n . considerable  in  for a  conclusive  competency o r  also,  them.  t h a t h a v e been engaged i n team t e a c h i n g  considerable to  attitudes.  teams e x p r e s s f a v o u r a b l e  however, a p p a r e n t l y  in  specific  i n d i c a t e what f e a t u r e s o f team t e a c h i n g  r e s p o n s i b l e f o r these  on  sufficiently  however,  the  taught  nature and  Claims f o r  of  the  enormously i n c r e a s e d teacher  assignment  restraints pupils,  are  and  i n teams a r e  the  the  flexibility  of p u p i l grouping often exaggerated.  amount o f s c h o o l t i m e , t h e  number o f t e a c h e r s .  school  arrangements.  t e r n s o f team t e a c h i n g outlay of funds, creased  nor  c o s t s may  e q u i p m e n t and  arise  they  teaching,  i s that  changes.  Installing  tional  and  has  division  considerably ing  space.  The  continued,  by  these  needed  is initiated,  i s apt  one  better  findings.  the  f o r needed needs instruc-  instructional  education.  Frequently, class  size  curriculum and  a r c h i t e c t u r e appears t o demand f o r f l e x i b l e  and  d e c i s i o n a s t o w h e t h e r team t e a c h i n g  discontinued  of team  t o expose  practices, basic  the  but  self-contained class-  f r e s h t h i n k i n g about  School  i n f l u e n c e d by  be  In-  o f t h e w o r k l o a d among t e a c h e r s ,  bases of p u p i l w e l f a r e .  patgreater  savings.  i s a catalyst  i n - s e r v i c e teacher  o r g a n i z a t i o n , grouping  decisions,  require  believe that  f o r developing  stimulated  of  new  curriculum m a t e r i a l s , f o r purchasing  through  team t e a c h i n g  the  purchase of  same as  team t e a c h i n g  basic  with  d e r i v e s from i n t r o d u c i n g  such a p l a n  e q u i p m e n t , and  techniques  great  Many e d u c a t o r s  benefits a school  improving  not  m a t e r i a l s when team t e a c h i n g  room o r g a n i z a t i o n s .  for  effect  the  number  compared  In g e n e r a l ,  through the  once e s t a b l i s h e d c o s t s a r e  greatest  as  i n t h e m s e l v e s do  do  The  These f a c t o r s u s u a l l y  r e m a i n u n c h a n g e d i n team o r g a n i z a t i o n s traditional  and  or even p r o p a g a t e d  i s not  the be vary-  should dictated  The one  f o r the  be  teaching  achieved  structure.  portunities itself, aging,  As  an  be  with  t h a t team t e a c h i n g  ways o f o r g a n i z i n g I f team t e a c h i n g the  full  instruction  instructional  but  a l s o the  schools  facilities,  to accomplish  and  and  of i t .  grouping. attempt  of in  opin  I t i s encour-  i n v o l v e d i n team They a r e  pioneering with  c h a n g e s i n an  for instruction  agent.  approval  which are  scheduling  inherent  does n o t ,  outcomes.  however, t o n o t e t h a t most s c h o o l s  per-  understanding  what s h o r t c o m i n g s a r e  is  projects  organizational plan, i t offers  have e x p r e s s e d  the  f o r new  f o r conducting  g u a r a n t e e any  out  function.  and  teaching  tions  points  search  undertaken, i t should  what c a n the  chapter  approach t o the  sonnel are  final  the  generally  problems  If a catalyst to provide  i s needed  better  l e a r n i n g , team t e a c h i n g  of  condi-  could  be  CHAPTER I.  PAGE  DEFINITIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF TEAM TEACHING  1  D e f i n i t i o n o f Team Teaching  2  Emergence o f Team Teaching  7  T h e o r e t i c a l R a t i o n a l o f Team Teaching II.  TEACHING TEAMS Organizational  III.  11 17  Patterns  17  Team Teaching R o l e s  52  Grouping and F l e x i b l e S c h e d u l i n g  63  Team P l a n n i n g  88  S c h o o l F a c i l i t i e s and Equipment  95  RESEARCH ON TEAM TEACHING  133  Examples o f Research S t u d i e s  137  Student Achievement  142  Student Adjustment  149  Parental Attitudes  158  Teacher A t t i t u d e s  162  Teacher Competence and E f f i c i e n c y  .  170  Team P l a n n i n g  178  P u p i l Redeployment  185  Team C o s t s  192  Team Teaching as a C a t a l y s t f o r Change  196  Team Teaching I m p l e m e n t a t i o n  199  CHAPTER IV.  PAGE 20S  IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  217  BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX A.'  SELECTED S T A T I S T I C S FROM THE SURVEY BRITISH COLUMBIA  ELEMENTARY  OF  TEAM 234  TEACHING SCHOOLS APPENDIX B.  ADDITIONAL FLOOR  PLANS OF ELEMENTARY  TEAM  TEACHING SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES AND BRITISH COLUMBIA  291  APPENDIX C.  QUESTIONNAIRE A  321  APPENDIX D.  QUESTIONNAIRE B  327  LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1.  PAGE  The Growth o f Team Teaching  i n 85 B r i t i s h  Columbia Elementary Schools, 1965-1971  12  2.  Team S t r u c t u r e with V o l u n t a r y Membership  18  3.  Formalized  Team S t r u c t u r e with Leadership  on a  Rotating Basis 4.  Formalized  19  Team S t r u c t u r e on a H i e r a r c h i c a l  Basis  19  5.  Coordinate  Team Type o f O r g a n i z a t i o n  21  6.  H i e r a r c h i c a l Team S t r u c t u r e  22  7.  Cooperative  22  8.  Team Teaching  Team S t r u c t u r e with V a r i o u s C a t e g o r i e s o f  Personnel 9.  24  O r g a n i z a t i o n o f Team Teaching School, 1959-1960  10.  i n the F r a n k l i n  . . . . . . .  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team Teaching  27  i n the F r a n k l i n  School, 1963-1964 11.  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team Teaching  28 i n the Norwalk  P l a n , 1960-1961 12.  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team Teaching  29 i n the Dundee  School, 1962-1963 13.  Team Teaching  30  Plan f o r a T h i r d Grade C l a s s o f 144  P u p i l s i n the P i t t s b u r g h Schools, 1960-1961 14*  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team Teaching 1960-1961  . .  31  . . . . .  33  i n Wisconsin,  15.  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g Summer E l e m e n t a r y  16.  i n the Baldwin  S c h o o l , 1964-1965  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g  34  i n the Wisconsin  E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l s , 1967-1968 17.  The Number o f Teams p e r S c h o o l School  18.  37 According t o 40  Population  The Number o f Teams A c c o r d i n g  t o Range o f S c h o o l 42  Years 19.  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g Elementary  20.  i n J o h n Tod 44  School  Team T e a c h i n g  O r g a n i z a t i o n i n Gordon Park  School,  1969-1970 21.  45  Team T e a c h i n g  Organization.in  MacCorkindale  S c h o o l , 1970-1971 . . . . 22.  Social  47  S t u d i e s and Language A r t s Teams a t  48  H i g h l a n d s S c h o o l , 1969-1970 23.  Team R o l e s  24.  A d m i n i s t r a t i v e and I n s t r u c t i o n a l  25.  The D i r e c t  55  i n a Hierarchy of Personnel  Instructional  Cabinet  59  Team and R e s o u r c e 60  Centres 26.  Flexible  Grouping  as a C e n t r a l Aspect  o f Team 65  Teaching Various Groupings  28.  V a r i o u s Group A s s i g n m e n t s f o r One S t u d e n t  29.  The P i t t s b u r g h P l a n o f T y p e s o f M a t e r i a l s and Activities  for Specific  67  27.  Appropriate Either  Small Groups  Purposes . . . . . .  69  f o r Large o r 71  30.  Variety  and  Subjects  Flexibility at the  of Grouping  Baldwin  for  Elementary  Various  Summer 74  School 31.  A Team S c h e d u l e  32.  The  Percentage  at Estabrook  o f Time D e v o t e d t o  Groupings at Eagle 33-  Team T i m e t a b l e  34*  Timetable  Flexible  36.  Area  at Cleveland School,  Teaching  f o r Large  Flowing  Harbour School  79 1967-1968  96  Areas  99  Group I n s t r u c t i o n a t West  School,  Wells  Farmington, Connecticut  Elementary  School,  . . .  101  C h a r t w e l l Elementary  S c h o o l , West  Vancouver,  102  F l o o r P l a n o f Naramake E l e m e n t a r y Norwalk, C o n n e c t i c u t  40.  Instructional School,  41.  Floor  Floor  School, 103  N  C l u s t e r s a t Naramake  Elementary  Norwalk, C o n n e c t i c u t  Plan of Joseph Estabrook  School, 42.  100  Tucson,  B.C 39.  81  Elementary  Arizona 38.  .  1970-1971  District 37.  75  Various  f o r Team E a t G o r d o n P a r k  School, 35.  School  Lexington,  104 Elementary  Massachusettes  P l a n o f Dundee E l e m e n t a r y  Greenwich, Connecticut  106  School, 107  43.  F l o o r Plan o f Dilworth Elementary San  44.  Jose,  California  109  The N u c l e u s and F l o o r P l a n o f Parkway Elementary  45.  School,  S c h o o l , Parkway, Montana  F l o o r P l a n o f West D i s t r i c t  Elementary  110 School,  Farmington, Connecticut 46.  Eagle  Harbour Elementary  I l l S c h o o l , West  V a n c o u v e r , B.C., F l o o r P l a n A 47.  Eagle  Harbour Elementary  115  S c h o o l , West  V a n c o u v e r , B.C., F l o o r P l a n B 48.  Floor Plan  of MacCorkindale  116  Elementary  School,  V a n c o u v e r , B.C 49.  F l o o r P l a n o f t h e Open A r e a Elementary  50.  118  School, North  F l o o r P l a n o f t h e Open A r e a  at Cleveland V a n c o u v e r , B.C.  . . .  a t F r a s e r Lake  S c h o o l , F r a s e r L a k e , B.C 51.  F l o o r P l a n o f Kent E l e m e n t a r y  122 School,  Agassiz,  123  B.C 52.  Brooksbank Elementary  School, North  Vancouver,  B.C. , F l o o r P l a n A 53.  Brooksbank Elementary B.C., F l o o r P l a n  54.  Open A r e a  121  125 School,  B.C  Vancouver,  B  at Parksville  Parksville,  North  126 Elementary  School, 127  55.  Open Area at Lord Selkirk Annex B, Vancouver, 128  B.C 56.  A Comparison of Costs at Walnut H i l l  Elementary 195  School and a Conventional School 57.  Urban and Rural School D i s t r i c t s i n B r i t i s h 236  Columbia by Regions 58.  Bushey Drive Elementary  School, Montgomery 292  County, Maryland 59«  Floor Plan of Bushey Drive Elementary  School, 293  Second Floor 60.  Floor Plan of Bushey Drive Elementary  School, 294  Third Floor 61.  Queens College Elementary  School, New York  62.  Floor Plan of Lessinger Elementary  . . .  School, 296  Lemphere, Michigan 63.  Floor Plan of Victorine Klein Elementary  School,  Mountain View, C a l i f o r n i a  298  64.  Floor Plan of Carson City Open Cluster  65.  Floor Plan of Cupertino Elementary  299  School, 300  Cupertino, C a l i f o r n i a 66.  295  Large Group Instruction Area at Estabrook Elementary  .  3©1  School at Findlay . .  302  School, Lexington, Massachusettes  67.  Floor Plan of an Elementary  68.  Floor Plan of Sylvania Whiteford School, Sylvania, Ohio  Elementary 303  69.  F l o o r Plan  of C r e s t l i n e Middle  70.  Floor Plan  of Chalmers Elementary  Delta, 71.  F l o o r Plan  Portage  George P a r k e s e  Elementary  M o u n t a i n , B.C  306  F l o o r P l a n o f Cormorant Elementary  School,  B.C  F l o o r Plan School,  74.  School, 305  of General  Kitimat, 73.  304  B.C  School, 72.  School  307  o f Open A r e a Coquitlam,  at Rochester  Elementary  B.C  F l o o r Plan of Puntledge  308 Park Elementary  School,  C o u r t e n a y B.C 75.  F l o o r P l a n o f M a r y - J a n e Shannon School,  76.  Surrey,  Elementary  B.C  F l o o r P l a n o f Walnut Smithers,  77.  309  310 Park Elementary  School,  B.C  311  F l o o r Plan of Sidney  Elementary  School,  Sidney,  312  B.C 78.  F l o o r P l a n o f Godson E l e m e n t a r y Abbotsford,  79.  School,  B.C  313  F l o o r P l a n o f C h i e f Maquinna Elementary  School,  V a n c o u v e r , B.C 80.  F l o o r Plan  of the  314 Open A r e a  Sternersen Elementary 81.  Open A r e a  at  School,  at Quigley Elementary  K e l o w n a , B.C  Margaret Abbotsford,  B.C..  315  School, 316  82.  Open A r e a a t O l i v e r  Elementary School, O l i v e r ,  317  B.C 83.  Open A r e a a t W i n l a w E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , N e l s o n ,  316  B.C. 84.  Open A r e a a t Hans H e l g e s e n E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , 319  S o o k e , B.C 85.  Open A r e a a t R o y s t o n Courtenay,  B.C.  Elementary School, 320  L I S T OF TABLES TABLE I.  PAGE Frequency  and P e r c e n t  Elementary of  o f Team  S c h o o l s by S i z e ,  Teams, G e n e r a l F a c i l i t i e s  Teaching Grades,  Number  and Y e a r s o f 237  Team T e a c h i n g II.  Frequency  and P e r c e n t  o f Elementary  Teams A c c o r d i n g t o T y p e , S i z e ,  School  School 239  P o p u l a t i o n and Range o f G r a d e L e v e l III.  Frequency  and P e r c e n t  of Principals  Responding t o D e f i n i t i o n s  and O b j e c t i v e s o f 241  Team T e a c h i n g IV.  Frequency  and P e r c e n t  of Principals  Responding t o E v a l u a t i o n V.  Frequency  and P e r c e n t  of Principals  Responding t o P h y s i c a l Scheduling, Staff  Facilities,  C h a n g e s , Money  I n n o v a t i o n s and I m p l e m e n t a t i o n VI.  Frequency and  VII.  Frequency in  VIII.  of Principals  Worst  Grants,  Items  of Principals  Items  . .  251  253  o f Team  Responding t o D e f i n i t i o n s Items  249  Responding t o Success  Items  and P e r c e n t  Team T e a c h i n g  . . . .  Responding t o Best  F e a t u r e s o f Team T e a c h i n g  Team T e a c h i n g  Frequency  246  Items  Teachers  and O b j e c t i v e s o f 254  TABLE IX.  PAGE F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding  X.  Items  . . . .  262  t o P r o c e d u r e Items  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s 264  R e s p o n d i n g t o Methods Items XII.  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding t o S c h e d u l i n g  XIII.  . . .  276  to Facility  279  Items  t o Adjustment  and A t t i t u d e  Items  .  282  F r e q u e n c y o f Team T e a c h e r s R e s p o n d i n g t o Advantages  XIX.  Items  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding  XVIII.  t o I n s t r u c t i o n a l Media  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding  XVII.  273  t o G r o u p i n g Items  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding  XVI.  268  Items  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding  XV.  266  Items  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding t o Planning  XIV.  259  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f Team T e a c h e r s Responding  XI.  t o Team O r g a n i z a t i o n  F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t o f P r i n c i p a l s Teachers Responding Objectives  284  o f Team T e a c h i n g Items  Items  and Team  t o D e f i n i t i o n and 285  TABLE XX.  PAGE F r e q u e n c y and P e r c e n t Teachers Responding Attitudes  Items  of Principals  and Team  t o A d j u s t m e n t and 290  The dents, time Dr.  principals,  i n this  wishes t o thank t h e d i s t r i c t and t e a c h e r s  endeavour.  who g e n e r o u s l y  superinten-  afforded  F o r t h e wise and f r i e n d l y  their  advice of  F.H. J o h n s o n and D r . R. G r a y , members o f t h e t h e s i s com-  mittee, and  author  the w r i t e r i s deeply  appreciative.  P r o f e s s o r G. P e n n i n g t o n f o r t h e i r  tical  research  experiences,  past  To D r . J . K a t z guidance i n prac-  thanks a r e extended.  Acknowledg-  ment i s a l s o g i v e n t o my f a m i l y f o r t h e i r h e l p  and under-  standing.  this  Without t h e support  w o u l d h a v e been i m p o s s i b l e  of these  to write.  people  study  DEFINITION AND CHARACTERISTICS OF TEAM TEACHING In r e c e n t been e x p e r i m e n t i n g function.  years with  an i n c r e a s i n g number o f s c h o o l s organizing personnel  of teaching  teams.  t h i s m o d i f i c a t i o n a p p e a r t o be v a r i e d . seriously schools sures  concerned with  are forced into  launch  into  Some s c h o o l s a r e  of instruction,  1  tional  concept  circles  presand  still  relations  At a n y r a t e , t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e has caused  considerable  i n Canada and t h e U n i t e d  p i c k up a n e d u c a t i o n a l  r e f e r e n c e t o team t e a c h i n g . make up s u f f i c i e n t  other  changes because o f e n r o l l m e n t  p r o j e c t s because o f t h e p u b l i c  o f innovation." "  team t e a c h i n g  one  improvement  has  The s t i m u l i f o r  o r f o r t h e sake o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n v e n i e n c e ,  others value  f o r the teaching  Much o f t h e i n n o v a t i o n i n t h e u s e o f p e r s o n n e l  been i n t h e f o r m a t i o n  have  stir  States.  R a r e l y can  j o u r n a l today without The w r i t i n g s a b o u t  i n educa-  finding this  some  concept  c a t e g o r i e s t o c r e a t e a volume d e a l i n g  exclusively with i t . Team t e a c h i n g uncritically  by a number o f s c h o o l s  a b a n d o n e d by many.  Stand?"  a p p e a r s t o have been a c c e p t e d  In B r i t i s h  and h a s a l r e a d y  C o l u m b i a , however,  rather been  because  "'"Luvern L. Cunningham, "Team T e a c h i n g . Where Do We A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s N o t e b o o k , V I I . ( A p r i l , I960), 1.  team t e a c h i n g enterprising to  organize  teaching this  seems t o have a c q u i r e d w i d e s p r e a d a p p e a l , manya d m i n i s t r a t o r s are  themselves i n t o teaching  elementary schools  study,  open a r e a  pushing  22  teams.  in British  Team t e a c h i n g was  by  the  principal  as  requesting  in  speaking  or the  of the  team t e a c h i n g  board.  t o f o r m teams i n 30 increasing  outside the  prior  i n 25  85  team  States  i n and  of  knowledge  other  Robert  in  a result  T e a c h e r s were  schools.  interest  United  the  began a s  their  initiated  school  Of  schools  Columbia surveyed  s t a t e d t h a t team t e a c h i n g  c o n s t r u c t i o n , often without  or consent.  t o persuade  schools reported  Anderson  adoption  of  says:  One r e g a r d s s u c h d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h m i x e d e m o t i o n s , h o w e v e r , s i n c e t h e A m e r i c a n e x p e r i e n c e w i t h team t e a c h i n g has t h u s f a r s u f f e r e d f r o m i n a d e q u a t e d e s i g n , imp e r f e c t and i n c o m p l e t e d e v e l o p m e n t , i n s u f f i c i e n t r e s e a r c h , and an a l m o s t t o t a l n e g l e c t o f t h e optimum procedures f o r dissemination.  DEFINITION OF  As w i t h general their  other  conceptions  agreement as t o t h e  eagerness to get  TEAM TEACHING  on t h e  team t e a c h i n g  are  ventional  s c h o o l p a t t e r n under the  educator  lumping v i r t u a l l y  recently  there  is  meaning o f team t e a c h i n g .  educators  One  i n education  suggested  any  In  bandwagon many  departure t e r m "team  that there  no  are  from the  con-  teaching." as  many  2 (New  R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , T e a c h i n g Y o r k : H a r c o u r t , 1 9 6 6 ) , 96.  i n a World  of  Change  definitions  f o r team t e a c h i n g  as t h e r e  a r e people  writing  3 about  i t .  The f o l l o w i n g a r e s e v e n d e f i n i t i o n s  i n current  use: Team t e a c h i n g i s a t y p e o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , i n v o l v i n g t e a c h i n g p e r s o n n e l and s t u d e n t s a s s i g n e d t o them, i n w h i c h two o r more t e a c h e r s a r e g i v e n r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , working t o g e t h e r , f o r a l l or a s i g n i f i c a n t p a r t o f t h e i n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e same g r o u p o f s t u d e n t s . ^ " Team t e a c h i n g i s a method o f o r g a n i z i n g t e a c h e r s , c h i l d r e n , space and c u r r i c u l u m which r e q u i r e s s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s , a s a g r o u p , t o p l a n , conduct, and e v a l u a t e t h e e d u c a t i o n a l programme f o r a l l t h e c h i l d r e n a s s i g n e d t o them.5 Team t e a c h i n g , a l s o c a l l e d c o - o p e r a t i v e t e a c h i n g , o c c u r s when two o r more t e a c h e r s s h a r e i n p l a n n i n g and conducting i n s t r u c t i o n f o r a group o f s t u d e n t s . 6 I p r e f e r a r e l a t i v e l y b r o a d d e f i n i t i o n o f team t e a c h ing. The t e r m m i g h t a p p l y t o an a r r a n g e m e n t whereby two o r more t e a c h e r s a n d t h e i r a i d e s , i n o r d e r t o t a k e advantage o f t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e competencies, p l a n , i n s t r u c t , a n d e v a l u a t e , i n one o r more s u b j e c t a r e a s , a group o f elementary o r secondary students e q u i v a l e n t i n s i z e t o two o r more c o n v e n t i o n a l c l a s s e s , making use o f a v a r i e t y o f t e c h n i c a l a i d s t o t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g i n large-group i n s t r u c t i o n , small-group disc u s s i o n , and independent s t u d y . '  3  Teaching  Ibid., 83.  ^"Judson J . S h a p l i n a n d Henry F. O l d s ( e d s . ) , Team (New Y o r k : H a r p e r a n d Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1 9 6 4 ) , 1 5 .  ^ L e s l i e J . C h a m b e r l i n , Team T e a c h i n g : O r g a n i z a t i o n and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (Columbus, O h i o : C h a r l e s E . M e r r i l l Publ i s h i n g Co., 1 9 0 9 ) , 1 6 .  Research  ^Robert L e b e l ( e d . ) , E n c y c l o p e d i a o f E d u c a t i o n a l ( T o r o n t o : C o l l i e r - M a c m i l l a n Canada L t d . , 1 9 6 9 ) , 5 6 3 . 7  tion  ' J . L l o y d Trump, "What I s Team T e a c h i n g ? " , LXXXV ( F e b r u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 3 2 7  Educa-  Team t e a c h i n g i s a f o r m a l t y p e o f c o - o p e r a t i v e s t a f f o r g a n i z a t i o n i n which a group o f t e a c h e r s accepts t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p l a n n i n g , c a r r y i n g o u t , and e v a l u a t i n g an e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m , o r some m a j o r p o r t i o n o f a p r o g r a m , f o r an a g g r e g a t e o f p u p i l s . A team r e l a t i o n s h i p o c c u r s when a g r o u p o f t e a c h e r s and s t u d e n t s , a s a n o r g a n i z e d u n i t , a c c e p t a n d c a r r y out d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a s e t o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s such as t i m e , space, group s i z e , group c o m p o s i t i o n , t e a c h e r a s s i g n m e n t , and r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n . Team more cent will  t e a c h i n g i m p l i e s an o r g a n i z a t i o n i n w h i c h two o r t e a c h e r s a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r more t h a n f i f t y p e r o f the i n s t r u c t i o n that a g i v e n group o f p u p i l s r e c e i v e d u r i n g t h e course o f a s c h o o l day. u  Critics lack  of specific  applied  definition  has r e s u l t e d  r a t h e r l o o s e l y t o a wide v a r i e t y  involving Carl  o f team t e a c h i n g have p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e  c o - o p e r a t i o n and c o l l a b o r a t i o n  Olson  i n the term  being  o f arrangements among  teachers.  states:  The l a b e l "team t e a c h i n g " i s b e i n g i m p r o p e r l y a n d i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y a p p l i e d t o a w i d e v a r i e t y o f p r a c t i c e s , few o f w h i c h a r e a c t u a l l y team t e a c h i n g . This mislabeling, i f a l l o w e d t o c o n t i n u e , c o u l d u l t i m a t e l y undermine t h e team t e a c h i n g movement and d e p r i v e s o c i e t y o f i t s potential benefits.!! Of t h e 228 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e t u r n e d team t e a c h e r s  116 o r 51 p e r c e n t  felt  by p r i n c i p a l s a n d  t h a t t h e i r ' s was a c o -  o p e r a t i v e team s t r u c t u r e i n w h i c h s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s  p l a n and  A n d e r s o n , op. c i t .  9 R o b e r t E. Ohm, "Toward a R a t i o n a l e f o r Team T e a c h A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s N o t e b o o k , IX ( M a r c h , 1 9 6 1 ) , 1. 7  ing,"  A b r a h a m S. F i s c h l e r , the Elementary School," School ( A p r i l , 1 9 6 1 ) , 281. 1 0  C a r l 0. O l s o n , "We C a l l I t Team T e a c h i n g — B u t Is R e a l l y T h a t ? " G r a d e T e a c h e r , L X X X I I I ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 5 ) , 8. i : L  It  "The Use o f Team T e a c h i n g i n S c i e n c e and Mathematics, LXII  carry  o u t t h e team's i n s t r u c t i o n a l  ranks  d e s i g n a t e d t o s t a f f members.  changing  accepted  peers, with  b a s i s was t h e b e s t  said  leadership designated  definition  simple  The  remainder  indicated  organization with  and s e v e r a l l e v e l s  a  o f p r o f e s s i o n a l s and non-  T h i s shows t h a t most  s c h o o l teams i n B r i t i s h  of the  Columbia a r e r e l a t i v e l y  i n s t r u c t u r e and i n f o r m a l . Goodlad has suggested  ized  rotating  18 o r 8 p e r c e n t ,  p r o f e s s i o n a l s working w i t h him. elementary  respondents.  on a  f o r t h e i r team.  t h e i r team was a h i e r a r c h i c a l i n charge  of the  a f o r m a l i z e d team s t r u c t u r e o f  o f t h e t e a c h e r s and p r i n c i p a l s ,  teacher  Two o r more t e a c h e r s ex-  by 6 4 o r 28 p e r c e n t  Twenty-one o r 9 p e r c e n t  that  specific  c l a s s e s on an i n f o r m a l v o l u n t a r y b a s i s , was t h e  definition  teaching  programme w i t h no  t h a t team t e a c h i n g i s c h a r a c t e r -  by t h r e e t h i n g s : a h i e r a r c h y o f p e r s o n n e l ,  differential 12  staff agrees  f u n c t i o n s , and f l e x i b l e that a hierarchical  kinds of grouping.  structuring  Anderson  of personnel  i s essen-  t i a l a n d a d d s , t h a t a minimum o f t h r e e o r more t e a c h e r s i s r e q u i r e d t o d e v e l o p a team w i t h s u f f i c i e n t m a n e o u v e r a b i l i t y 13 t o make a d i f f e r e n c e .  B a i r a n d Woodward a l s o  question  w h e t h e r two t e a c h e r s , w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r c a n be c a l l e d  a team.'14  12 J o h n I . G o o d l a d , P l a n n i n g and O r g a n i z i n g f o r T e a c h i n g ( W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.: N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n , 1 9 6 3 ) , 81-6*2. 13 R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , "Team T e a c h i n g " N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , L ( M a r c h , 1 9 6 1 ) , 52. ing  ^ M e d i l l B a i r a n d R i c h a r d G. Woodward, Team T e a c h i n A c t i o n ( B o s t o n : Houghton M i f f l i n Company, 1 9 6 4 ) , 22.  Witherspoon which s t r e s s e s : the e s s e n t i a l s p i r i t of cooperative planning, constant c o l l a b o r a t i o n , c l o s e u n i t y , u n r e s t r a i n e d communication and s i n c e r e s h a r i n g . . . ( r a t h e r t h a n ) d e t a i l s o f s t r u c t u r e and o r g a n i z a t i o n . 1 5 Woodring suggests t h a t , s i n c e t h e term ambiguous, a b e t t e r t e r m might planning" by  "team t e a c h i n g " i s  be "team o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d  because t h e t e a c h i n g ,  a t any g i v e n  an i n d i v i d u a l r a t h e r t h a n a team."^  The terra  t e a c h i n g " was s u g g e s t e d by some a s a g e n e r a l e n c e w i t h i n w h i c h team t e a c h i n g structured  alternative.  characteristics  moment, i s done  frame o f r e f e r -  i s p e r h a p s t h e most  The g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d  o f team t e a c h i n g  "cooperative  formally important  a r e summarized by C h a m b e r l i n  17 as  follows: - Cooperative - Extensive a l media  planning,  instruction,  and e v a l u a t i o n  use o f a u d i o - v i s u a l and o t h e r  - F l e x i b l e scheduling and s t u d y  instruction-  p r o v i d i n g time f o r group  planning  - Grouping: f l e x i b l e arrangements p r o v i d i n g f o r l a r g e group, s m a l l group, and i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n . G r o u p i n g i s b a s e d on t e a c h e r s ' p u r p o s e s and a l l o w s c h i l d r e n t o work a c r o s s g r a d e l i n e s  1 5  Ibid.  R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , " O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r E d u c a t i o n : S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n a n d D e p l o y m e n t , " Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , XXXIV ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 9 ) , kW. Chamberlin,  op. c i t . , 20.  of  - O r g a n i z a t i o n : H i e r a r c h y — t h e team may i n c l u d e a team l e a d e r , s e v e r a l s p e c i a l i s t s , r e g u l a r t e a c h e r s and a i d e s both c l e r i c a l and t e c h n i c a l . Cooperative—a group o f s p e c i a l o r c o o p e r a t i n g t e a c h e r s . Cooperative c o o r d i n a t i o n o f team member a c t i v i t i e s - Some c u r r i c u l u m  alterations  - Maximum u s e o f i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r and i n t e r e s t s - Staff:  strengths,  skills,  p r o f e s s i o n a l and n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l  - Students assigned  t o a team, n o t  to a particular  teacher.  EMERGENCE OF TEAM TEACHING Team t e a c h i n g , tion.  as d e f i n e d above, i s a r e c e n t  However, f o r a t l e a s t  a quarter  of a century  innova-  teachers  h a v e been e n g a g i n g i n a v a r i e t y o f e f f o r t s a t f o r m a l a n d informal  collaboration.  of c l a s s e s f o r s p e c i f i c among t e a c h e r s w i t h  These e f f o r t s  i n c l u d e d t h e combining  p u r p o s e s , t h e exchange o f f u n c t i o n s  different  i n t e r e s t s and s t r e n g t h s ,  various  means o f s u b d i v i d i n g t h e t o t a l work l o a d , a n d p o o l i n g p r i o r t o temporary regrouping teaching nursery  p r a c t i c e s , of course, school teaching  f o r some p u r p o s e .  bodied  Cooperative  h a v e l o n g been f a m i l i a r i n  and k i n d e r g a r t e n  programmes.  L a n c a s t e r i a n o r M o n i t o r i a l System, t h e B a t a v i a Platoon  i n g now e m p l o y s .  Plan  a n d p r o c e d u r e s t h a t team  i n t h e 1930's by J . F .  Hosic.  Group  This plan  em-  teach-  The p l a n t h a t was, p e r h a p s , t h e r e a l  r u n n e r o f team t e a c h i n g was t h e C o o p e r a t i v e formulated  The  P l a n , t h e Gary  P l a n , and t h e Winnetka P l a n and t h e D a l t o n many o f t h e c o n c e p t s  classes  fore-  Plan called  f o r groups of t h r e e t o s i x t e a c h e r s t o organize together work f o r a g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n w i t h i n a r a n g e o f n o t more three grades. served  E a c h g r o u p o r "team" had  t e a m t e a c h i n g may and  h a v e had  doubt t h a t w h a t e v e r  ideas f o r i t s implementation  originated  late  the Education  I n d e x 1957-1959 v o l u m e .  professional  1950's w i t h t h e t e r m  educators, the  quality  first  of the  and  textbooks,  came u n d e r a t t a c k .  this  time  and  i n the  United  s u p p l y and the  in  prepara-  content  the major g o a l s o f  development  in  that period  Many c h a n g e s t h a t t o o k  i n f l u e n c e d the  interest  appearing  During  o f t e a c h e r s , methods o f i n s t r u c t i o n ,  curriculum all  also  predecessors  i n Canada, t h e p r e s e n t  States i n the  tion  than  i n a supervisory c a p a c i t y . ^ T h e r e seems l i t t l e  it  a c h a i r m a n who  the  of  the  education  place  during  o f team t e a c h i n g .  J.  19 Shaplin  identifies  the f o l l o w i n g i n f l u e n c e :  recruitment, training (specialization, tion  new  u n d e r new new  groupings  Life,  XLIV  (large  (packaged  Progress  methods  of the  courses, f i l m s ,  of  teachers  staff,  of students f o r i n s t r u c t i o n  Plan, Continuous  -id  larger units  of  new  internships);  space); fundamental r e v i s i o n s  auspices  advances i n  career prospects  job d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n ,  of schools i n t o  pupils,  and  7  organiza-  groups  of  curriculum  laboratories);  (Dual  Progress  P l a n , L e v e l s S y s t e m ) ; and  dramatic  technology. S t u a r t E . Dean, "Team T e a c h i n g : ( S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 6 1 ) , 5-  • ^ S h a p l i n and O l d s , op. c i t . ,  A Review,"  27-54.  School  The  years  collaboration  1955-1957 were a t i m e o f s h a r p l y i n c r e a s e d  between p u b l i c  s c h o o l s y s t e m s and  universities  engaged i n t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n .  1955  U n i v e r s i t y launched  Harvard  called  f o r f o u r or f i v e  under a g i f t e d  master t e a c h e r .  team t e a c h i n g p r o j e c t s .  all  Teaching  The  The  Maine and  the  plan that  from  team t e a c h i n g  Superintendent  Wisconsin  School  o f J o h n Guy  Harry  Becker  Improvement  Fowekes and  of  Chicago,  Some o f t h e s e  School  experimentadeveloped  i n Norwalk, C o n n e c t i c u t ;  Philip  Lambert; t h e  Claremont  Gradu-  in  by H a r r i s T a y l o r and  Englewood  h i s a s s o c i a t e s ; and  Programme i n S a r a s o t a C o u n t y , F l o r i d a  t h e nongraded J. Experimental powerful and with  the  to develop elementary  contributions. Fund f o r t h e  the  California School  i n which John I .  team t e a c h i n g i n t h e  context  of  school.  L l o y d Trump, d i r e c t o r Study o f the  the  Programme, u n d e r t h e l e a d e r s h i p  a t e S c h o o l t e a c h i n g t e a m programme d e v e l o p e d  Goodlad helped  con-  f o r several other  t i o n s w i t h team o r g a n i z a t i o n were t h e N o r w a l k P l a n by  the  Claremont Graduate  b e g a n team t e a c h i n g p r o j e c t s .  of  Team P r o j e c t i n  prototype  universities  summer  simultaneously  Insight gained  t h e r e , became t h e  Stanford, Wisconsin,  internship  1957-1964.  Lexington, Massachusetts developed  In the  a p p r e n t i c e s t o work  programme l e d e v e n t u a l l y t o t h e  cept  an  c o l l e g e s and  of the  Utilization With funds  C o m m i s s i o n on  of S t a f f ,  from  a l s o made  the Ford  Advancement o f E d u c a t i o n ,  the  Foundation  experiments  d i f f e r i n g ways o f a s s i g n i n g t e a c h e r s t o s t u d e n t  groups  were conducted. a t t e n t i o n was  One  of the experiments t h a t a t t r a c t e d  team t e a c h i n g .  and the Y a l e - F a i r f i e l d , New ing  The  Bay  C i t y , Michigan  Haven, Connecticut Study i n v o l v -  the use of teachers' a i d e s were important.  the way but time and new  Study  t o a f r e s h understanding  They opened  of the m u l t i t u d e of r o u t i n e  consuming t a s k s f o r which a t e a c h e r i s r e s p o n s i b l e i n s i g h t s i n t o ways p u p i l s can be grouped f o r  instruction. Although  t h i s o u t l i n e does not i n c l u d e a l l the  p i o n e e r p r o j e c t s i n team t e a c h i n g , i t suggests the  fairly  broad g e o g r a p h i c a l base and d i v e r s i t y of the team t e a c h i n g movement even at the o u t s e t .  I t a l s o confirms the f a c t t h a t  no one person or o r g a n i z a t i o n a c t u a l l y founded the movement. A recent study shows t h a t team t e a c h i n g i s i n c r e a s i n g r a p i d l y i n the elementary  s c h o o l s of the United S t a t e s : 5 percent  of  the s c h o o l s i n the study were u s i n g the p l a n i n 1955-1956; 15 percent were u s i n g i t i n 1960-1961; and 30 percent were 20  u s i n g i t i n 1965-1966. approximately States w i l l  Dr. Robert  h a l f of the elementary  be u s i n g the team concept  Anderson p r e d i c t s t h a t s c h o o l s i n the  United  i n instruction within  21  the next  decade. The author found a s i m i l a r t r e n d i n B r i t i s h  Columbia.  20 " P r o j e c t on the I n s t r u c t i o n a l Programme of the Public Schools." In W i l l i a m B. Ragan, Modern Elementary C u r r i c u l u m (Toronto: H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, 1966), 146. 21 K e i t h L o w e l l , Paul Blake and Sidney T i e d t , Contemporary Curriculum i n the Elementary School (New York: Harper and Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1968), 139.  85 s c h o o l s  Of t h e  1964-1965;  1 s c h o o l or 2 percent  plan i n 1965-1966; 3 schools  the in  s u r v e y e d : none were u s i n g team t e a c h i n g  1966-1967; 9 schools  1968;  or 61 percent  sample were  or 4 percent  or 11 percent  25 s c h o o l s o r 3 0 p e r c e n t  51 s c h o o l s  of the  or 94 percent  schools  r e p o r t e d t h a t during the  were u s i n g  i t in 1968-1969;  i t in 1970-1971.  Furthermore, 21  but  discontinued i t .  or 25 percent  i n d i c a t e d t h a t team t e a c h i n g w i l l  50 s c h o o l s  or  teams w o u l d r e m a i n t h e said  to  same, and  team t e a c h i n g w i l l  these  facts  be  s t a t e d the  be  5 schools  only  expanded  or 6  of percent  In l i g h t  t h a t team t e a c h i n g w i l l  Columbia elementary s c h o o l s  used  schools  number  eliminated 1971-1972.  i t seems l i k e l y  expand i n B r i t i s h  next  59 p e r c e n t  79  Six  period 1965-1970 they  team t e a c h i n g  1971-1972,  i t i n 1967-  i t i n 1 9 6 9 - 1 9 7 0 ; and  were u s i n g  schools  using  were u s i n g i t  were u s i n g  were u s i n g  in  of  continue  during  the  years.  THEORETICAL RATIONALE FOR Those who lieve  that teachers  members.  promote t h e  o f a group can  n  concept  o f team t e a c h i n g  a r e more e f f e c t i v e when w o r k i n g a s  Lobb s t a t e s t h a t t h e  team t e a c h i n g  TEAM TEACHING  i s the  belief  begroup  keystone i n a r a t i o n a l e f o r  that the t o t a l  be g r e a t e r t h a n t h e  sum  accomplishments  of the  t a l e n t s of  the  22 individual teachers." ing  i s more e f f i c i e n t  The  belief  educationally.  i s also held that The  teach-  hypothetical  —  ing  (San  D e l b e r t M. L o b b , P r a c t i c a l A s p e c t s o f Team T e a c h F r a n c i s c o : F e a r o n P u b l i s h e r , 1964), 8 .  O  tO  O  \o 0>  \Q  vo  ON r—I I  <H I UA  ^o  \0  O  rH  O H I  ON r—I I  ON rH I  \0  \0  ON r—I I O-  to  ON rH  ON rH  \0  vO ON r-f  ON  ON  \o  oO  ON rH  ON rH  80  70  60  50 co O  5  o CO  40  30  20  10  o CZZJ  I  I  I  II  Figure  I I  I  _  1  The Growth o f Team T e a c h i n g i n 85 B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l s 1965-1971  23 Chamberlin  summarizes them a s f o l l o w s :  Planning Stage - opportunity to redefine goals - opportunity f o r in-service instruction - opportunity to reorganize instructional patterns - o p p o r t u n i t y t o s t i m u l a t e community i n t e r e s t The Student - p u p i l s become more i n d e p e n d e n t u n d e r team t e a c h i n g - t h e team c o n c e p t can h e l p b u i l d a s e n s e o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n the student - t h e team a p p r o a c h p r o v i d e s f l e x i b i l i t y t o meet t h e v a r y i n g needs o f the s e v e r a l s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n s - p u p i l s c a n be g r o u p e d i n a r e a s o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t t o them - s t u d e n t - t e a c h e r p e r s o n a l i t y p r o b l e m s c a n be r e d u c e d - s u p e r i o r t e a c h e r s a r e s h a r e d by a l l s t u d e n t s - t h e team a p p r o a c h p e r m i t s g r e a t e r a t t e n t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l students - t e a m t e a c h i n g can p r o v i d e f o r i m p r o v e d g u i d a n c e Staff - d i f f e r e n t i a t e s but d o e s n o t d e t r a c t f r o m t e a c h e r r o l e - encourages a b l e t e a c h e r s t o remain i n the classroom - increases opportunity f o r personal recognition - makes more e f f e c t i v e u s e o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l t a l e n t s and i n t e r e s t o f s t a f f members - r e l i e v e s t e a c h e r s o f r o u t i n e t a s k s t h r o u g h t h e use of a i d e s -  e n a b l e s t e a c h e r s t o s h a r e i n f o r m a t i o n and i d e a s w h i c h h e l p s o l v e p r o b l e m s and i m p r o v e t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l background e n c o u r a g e s e a c h member t o do h i s v e r y b e s t r e s u l t s i n lower p u p i l - s t a f f r a t i o reduces the adverse r e s u l t s o f t e a c h e r absence n e u t r a l i z e s the e f f e c t o f the poor t e a c h e r provides in-service education opportunities  Teacher-Learning Situation - a l l o w s s t u d e n t s t o work a c r o s s g r a d e l i n e s w i t h subject matter s p e c i a l i s t s - allows b e t t e r c o n t r o l of p u p i l - s t a f f r a t i o through u s e o f l a r g e , medium and s m a l l g r o u p i n g s - p r o v i d e s c h i l d r e n w i t h s e v e r a l a d u l t images t o s t u d y - i m p r o v e s c o r r e l a t i o n o f s c h o o l work, homework, and field experiences - makes f o r a more b a l a n c e d c u r r i c u l u m Chamberlin,  op.  c i t . , 7-10.  - provides f o rf l e x i b l e scheduling - p r o v i d e s a wider range o f grouping possibilities - p r o v i d e s a w i d e r r e s o u r c e o f t a l e n t , knowledge, s k i l l s and e x p e r i e n c e f r o m w h i c h t o d e r i v e new e d u c a t i v e experiences - g i v e s t e a c h e r s an o p p o r t u n i t y t o s e t e x a m p l e s o f c o o p e r a t i o n and s h a r i n g F a c i l i t i e s a n d Equipment _ s c h o o l f a c i l i t i e s c a n be u s e d more e f f i c i e n t l y - team i n s t r u c t i o n e n c o u r a g e s f u l l e r u t i l i z a t i o n o f a u d i o - v i s u a l and o t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n a l media - team t e a c h i n g p r o v i d e s an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c l a s s r o o m e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n i n i n s t r u c t i o n a l media. Of t h e 2 2 8 r e s p o n s e s r e c e i v e d f r o m t e a c h e r s  and p r i n c i p a l s  u s i n g team t e a c h i n g a t t h e e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l l e v e l Columbia, 1 7 7 o r 7 8 percent objective  felt  felt  fullest To  s c h o o l s o r 40 p e r -  and i n t e r e s t s .  arrangements f o r l a r g e group, s m a l l instruction  was f e l t  The most  o b j e c t i v e o f 59 s c h o o l s o r 2 6 percent  improve t h e q u a l i t y  of instruction.  percent  felt  provide  f o r cooperative planning,  instruction  t o be t h e most i m p o r t a n t  most  important  and e v a l u a t i o n .  sample.  The l e a s t  important  instructional  o b j e c t i v e by 1 4  To p r o v i d e f l e x i b l e  objective f o r 11 schools  or 7  objective to  To make e x t e n s i v e u s e o f a u d i o - v i s u a l a n d o t h e r  schools or 6 percent.  was t o  Sixteen schools  t h a t i t was t h e most i m p o r t a n t  m e d i a was f e l t  group  t o be t h e most i m -  o b j e c t i v e by 8 4 s c h o o l s o r 37 p e r c e n t .  important  t o meet  o b j e c t i v e was t o make t h e  use o f t e a c h e r s ' s t r e n g t h s , s k i l l s  individualized  portant  Ninety-one  t h a t t h e most i m p o r t a n t  provide f l e x i b l e  and  important  o f team t e a c h i n g was t o p r o v i d e f l e x i b i l i t y  t h e v a r y i n g needs o f s t u d e n t s . cent  t h a t t h e most  i n British  s c h e d u l i n g was t h e  or 5 percent  o b j e c t i v e s were t o h e l p  of the  beginning  teachers  ation with  acquire  experienced  professional s k i l l  teachers  through a s s o c i -  and t o p r o v i d e  for effective  i n s t r u c t i o n through use o f p a r a - p r o f e s s i o n a l s i n l i e u to  supplement t h e s e r v i c e s o f c e r t i f i e d When a s k e d t o s t a t e what t h e y  best as  f e a t u r e s o f team t e a c h i n g  of or  teachers. considered  t h e 85 p r i n c i p a l s  t o be t h e responded  follows: Cooperative quality  and s h a r i n g o f i d e a s  of instruction  flexible  grouping  strengths phere  planning  (11); better  ( 1 2 ) ; e a s i e r a n d more u s e o f  (15); f u l l e s t  and i n t e r e s t s  use o f t e a c h e r s '  (20); p o s i t i v e  ( 1 3 ) ; more u s e o f i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  i n s t r u c t i o n (13);  good i n s e r v i c e  experience  teacher  (9); better pupil-teacher relationships  morale  f o r teachers  l e a r n i n g atmos-  (11); better  (8);  better evaluation of c h i l d r e n (11); better  tion  o f programme  children  versatility scheduling The greatest  ( 5 ) ; i n c r e a s e d s o c i a l awareness o f  ( 6 ) ; more e f f i c i e n t  more e f f i c i e n t  use o f f a c i l i t i e s ( 4 ) ;  use o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l time  and i n n o v a t i o n  ( 2 ) ; more  ( 3 ) ; more u s e o f f l e x i b l e  ( 2 ) ; more u s e o f n o n - g r a d i n g ( 1 ) .  143 team t e a c h e r s  surveyed  stated that the  advantages o f team t e a c h i n g were:  Cooperative  evaluation  ( 2 8 ) ; e a s i e r a n d more u s e o f  f l e x i b l e grouping  ( 2 5 ) ; more i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  (22);  planning  best  evalua-  cooperative  use o f t e a c h e r s '  student-teacher  and s h a r i n g  skills  instruction  of ideas (41);  and i n t e r e s t s  (40); b e t t e r  r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( 1 8 ) ; more e f f i c i e n t  use  of  equipment  better  student  tunities phere from  (12); b e t t e r q u a l i t y achievement  of i n s t r u c t i o n (14);  ( 4 ) ; good i n s e r v i c e  ( 1 2 ) ; s t i m u l a t i n g and i n t e r e s t i n g  oppor-  s c h o o l atmos-  (11); greater opportunity f o r pupils to learn each o t h e r  open t o change  (5); less  duplication  ( 4 ) ; g r e a t e r student  (13);  more t i m e  f o r planning  ledge  of students  (4); teachers  social  awareness  ( 8 ) ; more s p e c i f i c  ( 3 ) ; moral support  more  know-  ( 3 ) ; more u s e o f  para-professionals (2). No s i m p l e means  exist  f o r confirming these  hypotheses.  Most o f t h e team t e a c h i n g p r o j e c t s t o d a t e have p r o v i d e d f o r a minimal  e v a l u a t i o n programme.  experiences sufficiently  d e r i v e d from  field  Rather trials  satisfactory to indicate  than  formal  research,  have been deemed success  or f a i l u r e .  TEACHING TEAMS Organizational It  Patterns  must be r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e r e a r e a l m o s t  possibilities  f o r the  structural  ing groups i n t e a c h i n g . draw w i t h works.  firm  There are  same b a s i s . point  lines  That  I t i s t h e r e f o r e hard  s i m i l a r teams but a r e not  a set of procedures From t h e  w h i c h two  very  simple  o r more t e a c h e r s  f o r anyone t o  precisely,  few  a team  are organized  i s a reinforcement  o f v i e w t h a t team t e a c h i n g  idea than  o r g a n i z a t i o n o f s m a l l work-  a p i c t u r e o f how,  they  and  practices.  type  o f t e a c h i n g by  exchange c l a s s e s on type  of  informal  cooperative  and  a programme f o r a g r o u p o f p u p i l s , t h e r e about t e a c h i n g  plan,  an  teams i n  i n which a group of t e a c h e r s  Types o f Teaching  the  f o r the  organization  wide range o f c o n c e p t i o n s  on  i s more o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  v o l u n t a r y b a s i s , t o t h e more s t r u c t u r a l  evaluate  infinite  instruct, is a  teams.  Teams  A variety  o f f o r m a l and  o r g a n i z a t i o n h a v e been i d e n t i f i e d Anderson i d e n t i f i e s  i n f o r m a l p a t t e r n s o f team by  s i x i n f o r m a l and  various  authors.  f o u r f o r m a l team  arrange-  25  ments.  Informal  organizations identified  i n c l u d e : (a) a  25 84-88.  Robert  H.  Anderson, Teaching 6  i n a World of  Change, —  simple tion  voluntary  c o l l a b o r a t i o n without  o f permanence;  (b) d i v i s i o n  workload preparation; grouping  purposes;  experiences;  combining  older teacher  relative  a temporary  basis.  an  apprentice  Team S t r u c t u r e w i t h  on  a  continuing  a c h a i r m a n and  or teachers  a s s i s t e d by  Voluntary  peer s t a t u s  ( c ) f o r m a l i z e d team s t r u c t u r e on  Ibid.,  84.  specific  voluntary ( f ) an teacher  identified  Membership  leadership  or r o t a t i n g b a s i s with  teacher  specific  26  (a) f o r m a l i z e d team s t r u c t u r e w i t h  designated primarily  2  to simplify  or younger  Formal o r g a n i z a t i o n s  Figure  include:  of c l a s s e s f o r  e a s e o f w i t h d r a w a l ; and  working with  assump-  of p u p i l s f o r  (e) i n f o r m a l team s t r u c t u r e w i t h  memberships and  on  of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  (c) i n t e r c h a n g e  (d)  s t r u c t u r e or  emphasized;  a i d e s on  the (b)  a continuing  a hierarchical  leader teacher basis;  basis,  with  Figure 3  27  F o r m a l i z e d Team S t r u c t u r e w i t h L e a d e r s h i p a Continuing or Rotating Basis  the  l e a d e r a s s u m i n g a permanent r o l e  ment o r e q u i v a l e n t structure with of  remuneration;  several levels  and w i t h  on  salary  (d) f o r m a l i z e d  of responsibility  supple-  hierarchical above t h a t  teacher.  /  ST  ST  \  TL = T e a m Leader T  ST = Senior T e a c h e r (or Specialist T e a c h e r )  T  T  T = Teacher  Figure Formalized  Team S t r u c t u r e  I n an a r t i c l e that  teaching 2 7  2  on a H i e r a r c h i c a l B a s i s  i n I 9 6 0 Cunningham  teams c a n be d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r  Ibid.,  28.  published  4 ^  'Ibid.  85.  claims  categories:  team-leader type,  a s s o c i a t e t y p e , master  teacher-beginner  29 type,  and  c o o r d i n a t e d team t y p e .  a hierarchical  authority structure with  and  the  possibility  The  a s s o c i a t e type  generally  has  no  type  team-leader type a designated  i n the  designated  teacher type  coordinated-team  large-group ing  of other r o l e s  s m a l l e r i n o r d e r t o be  teacher-beginning The  The  manageable.  personal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  The  leader  command.  l e a d e r s h i p and  is  master  embraces a t r a i n i n g f u n c t i o n .  joins together  p r e s e n t a t i o n s but  chain of  has  with  f o r planning  e a c h team member  for a single  class  of  and  retain-  normal  size. Will  Hemeyer and  Jean  between two  B.  McGrew make a n o t h e r  impor-  o f t e a c h i n g teams.  One  tant  distinction  type  o f team does c o o r d i n a t e t e a c h i n g and  associate teaching. unit may  i s preserved be  In the  but  combined a t  the t o t a l  think  c e r t a i n times  When t h e  one  other  the t y p i c a l  rescheduled for certain  t o them.  does  classroom  so t h a t  they  purposes. i t s basic  Each t e a c h e r  o f a number o f t e a c h e r s  group i s s u b d i v i d e d  o f needs w i t h i n the  the  o t h e r h a n d , assumes as  group a s s i g n e d  o f h i m s e l f as  group.  former,  c l a s s e s are  A s s o c i a t e t e a c h i n g , on t h e unit  types  must  of a l a r g e  i t i s done on t h e  l a r g e group f o r p a r t i c u l a r types  basis  of  subgroups. 29 L u v e r n L. Cunningham, "Team T e a c h i n g . Where Do We A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s Notebook, VII ( A p r i l , I 9 6 0 ) , 2-3. 30 J u d s o n J . S h a p l i n and H e n r y F. O l d s ( e d s . ) , Team Teaching, 101. Stand?"  S  S  S  S  S  S. :  S  S  S  Students  s s s s  s s s s  s s s s  s s s s  'Phase II —^-Individual Teacher Control  s s s s  s s s s  s s s s  s s s s  s s s s  s s s s  Teachers Plan Together  fj  Figure Coordinate  Chamberlin  Communicate Cooperote Colloborote  rjr 5'  Team Type  states that there  are three  b a s i c models  32 in  team t e a c h i n g .  with  a teacher  The f i r s t  i s a hierarchy organization  i n charge o f the u n i t  and s e v e r a l l e v e l s o f  p r o f e s s i o n a l s and n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l s w o r k i n g w i t h second arrangement i s l e s s f o r m a l . plan  i n which s e v e r a l teachers  instructional  It i s a  specific  ranks s p e c i f i c a l l y  designated  However,  a cooperative  may  assume ing  responsibility  certain  The  cooperative  p l a n and c a r r y o u t t h e team's  programme on a c o o p e r a t i v e  unit  him.  elect  basis with  f o r the s t a f f  members.  a team c o o r d i n a t o r t o  f o r s c h e d u l i n g team m e e t i n g s ,  records, f a c i l i t a t i n g  no  maintain-  communication, and main-  31 and  L e s l i e J . C h a m b e r l i n , Team T e a c h i n g : A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 40. 3 2  Ibid.,  21-22.  Organization  S=Senior Teacher P= P r o f e s s i o n a l Tea'cher C = C e r t i f i e d Teacher C A = C l e r i c a l Aide TA=Teacher Aide  One Teacher In-Charge Several levels of Professionals  and Nonprofessionals  Figure Hierarchical  taining  contact  team t e a c h i n g Unit.  This  with  the  arrangement  Team  i s the  Cooperative  Ibid. ,  22.  The  R e s e a r c h and  or cooperative  Figure  21.  Structure  administration.  is a hierarchical  Ibid.,  6'  7  Team  Structure  third  type  of  Instruction team  arrangement  i n which  a local  college  or university  provides research,  e v a l u a t i o n , and c o n s u l t a t i v e a i d . Teams may work " v e r t i c a l l y " all  grade l e v e l s  subjects;  i n a single  subject  through the school at or closely  o r t h e y may work " h o r i z o n t a l l y "  i n several  the  v a r i o u s team c o m b i n a t i o n s i s g i v e n by B r o w n e l l a n d Six  The most  a t one g r a d e  but  T a y l o r , 35  subjects.  related  comprehensive  p o s s i b l e models a r e o u t l i n e d  level  summary o f  by them a s  follows  Model I I  classes  team  At one end o f t h e c o n t i n u u m , a team consists of a l l classes of a p a r t i c u l a r grade l e v e l . Such a team c a n be f o r m e d f o r e a c h g r a d e . In a very l a r g e s c h o o l , more t h a n one team p e r g r a d e c o u l d be o r g a n i z e d .  1  grades"  I  •Aj;. •  5  Model  classes  Model I I I  1  grades  I n a m i d d l e p o s i t i o n , a team con*' t a i n s c l a s s e s f r o m two g r a d e levels. In a six-grade school, more t h a n one team p e r p a i r o f g r a d e s c o u l d be o r g a n i z e d . Model I c  1  te am |  At t h e o t h e r e x t r e m e , a team comp r i s e s one c l a s s f r o m a l l g r a d e levels. As many teams c a n be formed a s t h e r e a r e v e r t i c a l arrangements o f c l a s s e s .  2  3  4  5  6  classes team i  grades  At one e x t r e m e , a t e a m c o n s i s t s o f one c o n t e n t a r e a a n d p u p i l s f r o m one g r a d e l e v e l . As many  35  classes  A  B  lang. arts  team  science  team ,  C  D  E  l_-  ^ J o h n A. B r o w n e l l a n d H a r r i s A. T a y l o r , " T h e o r e t i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e s o f T e a c h i n g Teams," P h i D e l t a Kappan, XLV (January, 1 9 6 2 ) , 152-153.  t e a m s c a n be f o r m e d a s t h e r e are major content areas i n t h e curriculum. Model l i e I n a m i d d l e p o s i t i o n , a team | grades ' c o m p r i s e s one c o n t e n t a r e a a n d ' p u p i l s f r o m t w o o r t h r e e g r a d e j science levels. A t e a m c a n be f o r m e d j lang. arts f o r each major s u b j e c t a r e a . Model  2  3  4'  5  6  team team  .. i.  IIIc grades  At t h e o t h e r e x t r e m e , a team c o m p r i s e s one c o n t e n t a r e a a n d p u p i l s from a l l grade l e v e l s . As many t e a m s c a n be f o r m e d a s there are s i m i l a r content areas at a l l grade l e v e l s . The a u t h o r s a l s o p o i n t o u t t h a t I  1  and I I  talents  m i g h t be t w o t e a c h e r s forming a team.  lang. arts  team  social stud.  team  mathematics  team  simple v a r i a t i o n s i n any grade w i t h  o f Models complementary  F u r t h e r m o r e a n y one o f t h e t e a m s  d e s c r i b e d a b o v e c o u l d be m o d i f i e d b y t h e i n c l u s i o n o r e x c l u s i o n o f c e r t a i n c a t e g o r i e s o f t e a c h e r s and a u x i l i a r y p e r s o n n e l . These might i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g examples w h i c h a r e a m o d i f i c a t i o n o f Model  I.  TEAM TEACHER  auxiliary (meher  TEAM TEACHER  Itachcr iid«  T E A M TEACHRR INTERN TEACHKR  j miliary teacher teacher aide  T E A M LEADER  TEAM LEADER  MASTER TEACHER  STUDENT  TEACHER  INTERN TEACHER T E A M LEADER  •miliary leacher leather aide community  Figure 8  3  6  T e a c h i n g Teams w i t h V a r i o u s C a t e g o r i e s o f P e r s o n n e l  I b i d . , 153.  teams i l l u s t r a t e with  some o f t h e  team t e a c h i n g .  of the  structural  Olds  numerous v a r i a b l e s a s s o c i a t e d  has  made a s t a r t  v a r i a b l e s w h i c h can  be  i n the  analysis  chosen i n  developing  37 team o r g a n i z a t i o n .  He  p o i n t s out  t h a t the  team, a s a  group, i s l o c a t e d s t r u c t u r a l l y w i t h i n a l a r g e r content ing  such f a c t o r s as gradedness, d e p a r t m e n t a l i z a t i o n ,  available  financial  resources.  The  c o n t r o l of p u p i l  of time,  space l o c a t i o n s vary.  t a s k s § and  organized  on  different  principles  some e m p h a s i z i n g a h i e r a r c h i c a l either  and  principles.  others maintaining Other important  i n c l u d e the type  and  coordination built fore, can  conclude  be  extent  another  categorized along  d e p e n d i n g on  the  and  teacher  nature  also  of a u t h o r i t y s t r u c t u r e ,  o r on  substantive  equalitarian  or  of procedural  and  author,  Robert  to  scope of the  special-  by  Olds  substantive  One Ohm,  complex  on  collegial  variables identified  a simple and  given  assignments  Teams a r e  i n t o team o r g a n i z a t i o n .  with  and  system of a u t h o r i t y based  d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s e s  ization  includ-  amount o f autonomy  t o t h e team f o r t h e  small  may,  there-  that  "a team  continuum  instructional  vari-  38 a b l e s f o r which i t i s r e s p o n s i b l e , " Examples o f Teaching With the  Teams i n t h e  various types  United  States  o f teams, as  described  above,  37 o f Team  S h a p l i n and O l d s , Teaching." Ibid., 103. 3 g  op.  c i t . , Chapter 4,  "A  Taxonomy  i n m i n d i t i s o f v a l u e t o examine some a c t u a l t e a c h i n g in  action.  The F r a n k l i n S c h o o l :  The f i r s t  b e s t known e l e m e n t a r y  s c h o o l team t e a c h i n g  an  entire  Harvard  various that  U n i v e r s i t y at the F r a n k l i n School in  1957-1958.  mentation.  In the year  t h r e e teams.  designate  are the result  of past  a n d one was s m a l l , composed  The r o s t e r  into  of s i x  of four teachers.  teachers  instruction  f o r leadership i n  o f t h e team a l s o i n c l u d e d t h r e e  i n a r t , music and p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n f o r p u p i l s i n a l l t h e groups.  a part time  clerical  assistant. equal  size.  Each  adjacent  T h e r e a r e t h r e e t e a c h e r s , two s e n i o r t e a c h e r s  a team l e a d e r on e a c h team.  b e e n r e p l a c e d by t e a c h e r  aides.  Part time  teachers  E a c h team h a s a  A l s o t h e r e a r e two s p e c i a l i s t s ,  the other  larger  Today, t h e  team i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r 150 t o 180 p u p i l s on two grade l e v e l s .  who  E a c h team  a i d e , a n d t h e two  s c h o o l h a s t h r e e teams o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y  and  experi-  1959-1960 t h e s c h o o l was d i v i d e d  teams were a s s i g n e d a q u a r t e r t i m e  aide.  1958-1963  team o r g a n i z a t i o n s o  t e a c h e r s who h a d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  was a s s i g n e d  and  with  o f team l e a d e r a n d s e n i o r t e a c h e r were u s e d t o  teams.  specialist  involving  i n Lexington,  Two o f t h e teams were l a r g e , composed  or eight teachers The t i t l e s  project  Through t h e y e a r s  c h a n g e s were made i n t h e t o t a l  t h e teams i n u s e t o d a y  provide  c o m p r e h e n s i v e and p e r h a p s  s c h o o l was one e s t a b l i s h e d i n c o o p e r a t i o n  Massachusettes,  the  teams  i n physical education.  have  clerical  one i n a r t a n d m u s i c Interns are a part of  Figure Organization  9  f o r Team T e a c h i n g  i n the Franklin  School  1959-1960  some o f t h e t e a m s . one  The d e s i g n  a n d team l e a d e r s  o f t h e teams i s a h i e r a r c h i c a l  and s e n i o r t e a c h e r s  receive a salary  supplement. The  Norwalk P l a n :  I n 1958^-1959 a n o t h e r e x p l o r a t o r y  was begun i n N o r w a l k , C o n n e c t i c u t . f o u r teams i n v o l v e d a team l e a d e r , a teacher  aide working with  grade l e v e l rooms.  i n classroom  The team l e a d e r  about  project  Each o f t h e o r i g i n a l a cooperating  teacher  and  69-85 p u p i l s a t a s i n g l e  spaces equal  t o three  regular  r e c e i v e d a s a l a r y supplement.  In  30 - ^ R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , E l l i s A. H a g s t r o m a n d Wade M. R o b i n s o n , "Team T e a c h i n g i n an E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , " S c h o o l R e v i e w , L X V I I I ( S p r i n g , i 9 6 0 ) , 8. I n M a u r i c e H i l l s o n , Change and I n n o v a t i o n i n E l e m e n t a r y E d u c a t i o n (New Y o r k : H o l t , R i n e h a r t and W i n s t o n , 1965), 1 7 9  SPECIALIST PHY5. CDU.  ST  ST  SPECIALIST ART  SPECIALIST MUSIC  T  T«»I  T A  •TL  TL  TL  T  C A  T  T  T  TOR I  TA  CA  5T  5T  5T  T  TOR I  CA  TA  FIGURE 3. T h e Lexington Team Structure. P : Principal; T L : T e a m Leader; S T : Senior Teacher; T : Teacher; I: Intern; T A : Teacher A i d e ; C A : Clerical A i d e .  Figure  10 ° 4  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g  i n the Franklin  1963-1964  S h a p l i n a n d O l d s , op. c i t . , 195.  School  T  1960-1961 t h e N o r w a l k team a p p r o a c h was expanded t o i n c l u d e teams o f v a r y i n g s i z e s .  S e v e n o f t h e teams were f i v e - m e m b e r  teams w i t h a team l e a d e r , t h r e e  c o o p e r a t i n g t e a c h e r s , and a  teacher aide working with approximately  135  children.  S e v e r a l were four-member teams w i t h  a b o u t 105-110  Two s c h o o l s were o r g a n i z e d  entirely  on a team t e a c h i n g  but  children  from adjacent  most teams w o r k e d w i t h  T E A M  1  L C A D EL R  j  T E A C H E R  basis  grades.  [COOPERATING,  AIDE:  !  TEACWCQ  P U PI us (fc'9-85)  Figure  pupils.  •''  ll " 4  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g  i n t h e Norwalk P l a n  1960-1961  The Dundee  Elementary School:  The Dundee  Elementary  School,  Greenwich, Connecticut,  e s t a b l i s h e d another  version ofthe  scheme  i n 1962.  t h r e e major  o f team t e a c h i n g  There.are  t e a c h i n g teams, each o f which has t a k e n Scottish  clan.  About 240 s t u d e n t s  a r e i n t h e Stewart  ( K - 2 ) , t h e F r a s e r C l a n h a s 140 s t u d e n t s  4 1  Ibid.,  199.  t h e name o f a Clan  ( G r a d e s 3-4), a n d  Stewart Clan  Fraser Clan  (K-2) 240  (3-4) 140  MacKenzie Clan  i  010 ST  ST  [PTj  |_PT  |TA| Figure  Organization  140 is  students  are  a f o u r t h c l a n , the  teaching  specialists  physical  education,  MacKenzie C l a n  Barclay  and  team h i e r a r c h y  ties. aide  The  both are  The as  (Grades 5-6).  The  special  a practice teacher  parts of the  t h e i r team t e a c h i n g  of  four to s i x  o f a t e a m l e a d e r and  compensated f o r t h e i r  Pittsburgh Plan:  -There  i n speech therapy  i n s t r u c t i o n a l team has  team a l s o has  integral  School  C l a n , which c o n s i s t s  plus s p e c i a l i s t s  The  teacher;  Dundee  i n music, a r t , f o r e i g n languages,  psychology. uses the  12  f o r Team T e a c h i n g i n t h e 1962-1963  i n the  and  a  and and  teachers senior  responsibilia  teacher  team.  Pittsburgh public schools  p r o j e c t i n I960.  K-6)  4  ra  III  @[3 IS ft!  (Specialists 520  (5-6) 140  TL  ra  Claii^-;^•• •  The  programme  began was  The  Teaching Team"1 team  leader  master  teacher  -— a  4  regular  teachers  1  teacher  intern —  student  from  a the  school of  education  of  a local  university  or  college  team  mother  —  a  resident o f the c o m -  munity  many  of  ties  of  who the a  teacher  has  quali-  g o o d  L a r g e g r o u p for l a n g u a g e arts  using  audio-visual  j  aids (filmstrips, o v e r h e a d  |  projector, o p a q u e projec-  |  tor, slides,  t  The  team  i  1 regular  I  A  team the  I  etc.)  Small  leader teacher  mother  group  for.creative  writing 1 teacher  operates  .  projector  11  •  pupils •  S m a l l g r o u p f o r oral  1 0 7 pupils  ex-  pression 1  teacher  intern  13 pupils  Small g r o u p for p h o n i c s w o r k in p h o n e t i c analysis  S m a l l g r o u p for s e n t e n c e structure 1  t ...teacher 5  |  |  Gifted  /\  A b l e college-going  o  8. pupils  pupils  *  average | below  teacher  | team  leader  J  Teacher  ^  T e a c h e r Interne  average  slow  Figure  13  4 2  Team T e a c h i n g P l a n f o r a T h i r d G r a d e C l a s s o f 144 P u p i l s i n t h e P i t t s b u r g h P u b l i c S c h o o l s , 1960-1961  " P u p i l s , P a t t e r n s and P o s s i b i l i t i e s : A D e s c r i p t i o n o f Team T e a c h i n g i n P i t t s b u r g h , " 1961 A n n u a l R e p o r t o f t h e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f S c h o o l s , Board o r E d u c a t i o n , P i t t s b u r g h , Pa., p. 15. I n H i l l s o n , Change and I n n o v a t i o n . . ., 193.  initiated kinds  i n a cluster  of f i v e  elementary  o f t e a c h i n g teams were o r g a n i z e d  schools.  Three  i n each s c h o o l :  mary, i n t e r m e d i a t e a n d s p e c i a l  subject.  d e p a r t m e n t teams a r e o r g a n i z e d  on a g r a d e - l e v e l b a s i s .  is  a kindergarten-first  a third  g r a d e team.  vertical  type  In t h e  pri-  primary There  g r a d e team, a s e c o n d g r a d e team, and  In the intermediate  section there  o f o r g a n i z a t i o n i n which f o u r t h , f i f t h  is a  and  s i x t h g r a d e s a r e combined i n t o two teams o f p u p i l s w i t h  one  team o f t e a c h e r s .  The team o f t e a c h e r s u s u a l l y c o n s i s t s o f  the  social  language a r t s ,  library  teachers.  s t u d i e s , s c i e n c e , a r i t h m e t i c and  S p e c i a l s u b j e c t teams a r e f o r m e d f o r a r t ,  music and p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n . teachers and  on e a c h team.  i s given a salary  mother  One t e a c h e r increase.  Plan:  i s appointed  teachers  e a c h s e m e s t e r , p l u s some c l e r i c a l  a  of a t y p i c a l  simple  teachers  class.  hierarchical designated  teachers.  a n d two  assistance.  team s e r v e s a group o f p u p i l s a p p r o x i m a t e l y size  a  appropriate  and i n d u c t i o n o f b e g i n n i n g  E a c h t e a m c o n s i s t s o f two e x p e r i e n c e d interns  launched  I960 b a s e d upon t h e p r e m i s e t h a t  o f o r g a n i z a t i o n o f f e r s an e s p e c i a l l y  framework f o r t h e t r a i n i n g  team l e a d e r  intern.  The U n i v e r s i t y o f W i s c o n s i n  team t e a c h i n g programme i n type  there are f i v e  On e a c h team i s a l s o a team  ( t e a c h e r a i d e ) and a s t u d e n t  The W i s c o n s i n  this  Typically  three times  teacher Each the  Some o f t h e teams a r e o r g a n i z e d  basis with  one o f t h e  a s team l e a d e r .  on  experienced  In other  cases  t h e two  I  !  EXPERIENCED  '  TEACHER'•  •  I  EXPERIENCED TEACI^ltR  I J^JCRNS J 2 ) _ F A L L _ • [ INTERNS (2) SPRING  PART-TIME AIDC  P U P I L S 6 5 - 90  Figure Organization  1443  f o r Team T e a c h i n g  i n Wisconsin  1960-1961  experienced  teachers  share  the leadership function equally.  B a l d w i n Summer E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l : ary in  School  I960.  teaching ity  The B a l d w i n Summer E l e m e n t -  i n New Y o r k s t a t e , began i t s team t e a c h i n g However, i t was n o t f u l l y  teams a r e o r g a n i z e d  and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  refined until  on a h i e r a r c h i c a l  flowing  p r i n c i p a l t o teacher-in-charge  divided  i n t o f o u r teams; two f o r r e a d i n g  The f a c u l t y  One t e a m t e a c h e s t h e h i g h  low a c h i e v e r s .  i n t e r n teacher  4 3  Shaplin  a n d two f o r matheand t h e o t h e r  E a c h t e a m i s composed o f a r e a d i n g  i s usually assigned and O l d s ,  author-  of the school i s  achievers  l e a d e r o r a m a t h e m a t i c s team l e a d e r p l u s An  basis,  The  t o team l e a d e r t o s e n i o r  to intern to pupil.  the  1964.  down f r o m t h e s u p e r v i s i n g  teacher  matics.  project  two s e n i o r  t o the lower  o p . c i t . , 202.  team  teachers. achievers,  MATHEMATICS  Lower Achievers  Reading Team Leader Principal  MTL . Math.Team Leader  Psychologist  ST £s<\  Senior Teachers  W INT . l~  , Clerical Aide ) Internes  Figure  15  4 4  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g i n t h e B a l d w i n Summer E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l  1964-1965  Change  R i c h a r d M i l l e r ( e d . ) , P e r s p e c t i v e s on E d u c a t i o n a l (New Y o r k : A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 19b7), 19b.  but  o c c a s i o n a l l y he works w i t h t h e o t h e r t e a m s .  s i o n a l s a r e n o t employed.  Paraprofes-  The s e r v i c e o f a c l e r i c a l  aide i s  a v a i l a b l e t o e a c h team b u t she i s n o t a s s i g n e d t o a p a r t i c u lar  team.  Other examples:  Elmcrest  E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , L i v e r p o o l , New  45 York, i s t h e s i t e  o f another  team t e a c h i n g  t h e w h o l e s c h o o l was o r g a n i z e d 1964.  The s t a f f  on a team t e a c h i n g b a s i s i n  Team—principal,  c o n s u l t a n t , and i n s t r u c t i o n a l  pupil  c o n s u l t a n t ; Resource  Kindergarten  I I f o r s i x and s e v e n - y e a r - o l d s ; year-olds;  and Team I V f o r 10 a n d 1 1 - y e a r - o l d s .  the  staff.  organization  This i s mainly  Leadership  o f team  l e a d e r s h i p being  p r o v i d e d by  Team.  A n o t h e r programme i s f o u n d primary  A secretary,  a i d e a r e a l s o on  a cooperative type  (Teams I - I V ) w i t h  reading,  Team I I I f o r e i g h t a n d n i n e -  h a l f - t i m e t e a c h e r a i d e s , and a l i b r a r y  i n Englewood,  e m p h a s i s i s on n o n g r a d e d n e s s .  usually multiage  Florida.^  The teams a r e  i n make-up, and a n u n u s u a l l y  ^ A r t h u r Haas, " F i r s t - y e a r Elementary S c h o o l , " American School ( O c t o b e r , 1965), 22.  ing  Team—  Team; Teams I and  two  The  personnel  o f a r t , l i b r a r y , music, p h y s i c a l education,  d e n t a l h y g i e n i s t and n u r s e ;  the  Here  c o n s i s t s o f 33 t e a c h e r s who a r e d i v i d e d i n t o  seven teams: L e a d e r s h i p  teachers  project.  flexible  Organization i n Elmcrest B o a r d J o u r n a l , GLI  ^ R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , " T h r e e E x a m p l e s o f Team T e a c h i n A c t i o n , " The N a t i o n ' s S c h o o l s , LXV (May, I960), 102-  building  makes i t p o s s i b l e f o r v a r i o u s c l a s s e s and  merge and  separate  with  relative  teams t o  ease.  Team o r g a n i z a t i o n i s  School  and  quite informal. The Elementary  Hamilton  School  Elementary  i n Newton, M a s s a c h u s e t t e s ,  f o r m a l t e a c h i n g teams. group of peers  the  H o r a c e Mann  also.have  I n each s c h o o l teams a c t a s  with the  Garden S p r i n g s  principal Elementary  as  ina  leader.  School, Feyette  County,  4$ K e n t u c k y , began team t e a c h i n g i n 1 9 6 3 . divided  into  Intermediate divided  for  olds).  primary  has  skills.  responsibility  The  curriculum i s (1-6),  They work the  demonstration In r e a d i n g  and  an  the together  responsibility according  to  mathematics  f o r 2 or 3 l e v e l s .  In the  each  inter-  4 t e a c h e r s work t o g e t h e r c o o p e r a t i v e l y  each t e a c h i n g h i s  specialty.  One  of the  l a r g e r team t e a c h i n g  auspices  of the  Claremont Graduate School  4 7  school i s  o l d s ) and  levels  science dividing  d i s c u s s i o n and  i n t e r e s t s and  mediate l e v e l s ,  the  In t h e  s t u d i e s and  lecturing,  teacher  year  a r e d i v i d e d i n t o team p a i r s .  social  their  s e c t i o n (6-9 year  s e c t i o n (9-12  into levels.  teachers in  a Primary  The  Miller,  op.  programmes i s u n d e r in  California.^  c i t . ,278.  ^ I b i d . , 259-260. 49 ' M a l c o l m P. D o u g l a s , "Team T e a c h i n g : F u n d a m e n t a l Change o r P a s s i n g F a n c y ? " CTA J o u r n a l . L I X ( M a r c h , 1 9 6 3 ) , 28-29. "*  Consul tar* 3 -  ;  Consultants  from R & D  Center,  State Departrieht, e t c .  from Central S t a f f  INSTRUCTIONAL DECISIONMAKING COMMITTEE .  Building P r i n c i p a l  Unit Leader.  Unit Leader  Unit Leader  D  B  2. c e r t i f i e d teachers 1 Instructional secretary 1 teacher aide  3 certified teachers 1 instructional secretary 1 teacher aide  3 certified teachers 1 instructional secretary 1 teacher aide  3 certified;. teachers 1 instructional secretary 1 teacher aide  Kindergarten A.M. and P.M. 120-175 students  Grades 1-2 100-150 students  Grades 3-4 100-150 students  Grades 5-6 100-150 students  Figure O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g  16^  i n Wisconsin  Elementary  Schools  1967-196S  ^ H e r b e r t J . K l a u s m e i r a n d D o r i s M. Cook, " P r o j e c t M o d e l s : A F a c i l i t a t i v e Environment f o r I n c r e a s i n g E f f i c i e n c y i n P u p i l L e a r n i n g and f o r Conducting Educationa l R e s e a r c h and D e v e l o p m e n t , " W i s c o n s i n U n i v e r s i t y , 1967 (ERIC E D 0 1 6 0 0 4 ) , 3.  In g e n e r a l terms, the  teaching  project  o f f r o m 120  are  comprised  four to s i x teachers. it  by  t o 180  a i d e and  auxiliary  occasional talented citizens. teachers  this  p u p i l s with  E a c h t e a m e l e c t s o r has  i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a team l e a d e r .  are the teacher  from  chosen f o r  O t h e r team members  teacher  as w e l l  Some teams i n c l u d e  as intern  as w e l l . In c o n c l u s i o n t h r e e  be m e n t i o n e d . mal  teams a s s o c i a t e d w i t h  I n 1968  recent  Wisconsin  team o r g a n i z a t i o n s m i g h t  U n i v e r s i t y implemented  t e a c h i n g teams i n s e v e r a l e l e m e n t a r y  were d i v i d e d i n t o G r a d e s 3-4,  and  two  or three  and  a teacher  four units:  Grades  certified aide.  5-6.  schools.  Kindergarten, E a c h team had  teachers,  I n 1967  the  one  Schools  Grades a unit  1-2, leader,  instructional  Klein  for-  secretary  School, Mountain  View,  51 California  a l s o e s t a b l i s h e d team t e a c h i n g .  formed a nongraded primary G r a d e s 4-6.  team and  The  a teaching  school  team f o r  E a c h team i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a t h r e e  year  programme f o r t h e e n t i r e g r o u p o f s t u d e n t s i n t h e team. T e a c h e r s h a v e j o i n t a u t h o r i t y and m u t u a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . McGill  U n i v e r s i t y i n Canada began e l e m e n t a r y  education-teams  52 i n the  same y e a r .  I n some s c h o o l s  i n t e r n s worked  with  51 "The K l e i n C o n c e p t f o r Team T e a c h i n g and C o n t i n u o u s P r o g r e s s , " M o u n t a i n View S c h o o l D i s t r i c t , C a l i f o r n i a , 1967. (ERIC ED027713) • 52 M. H o r o w i t z , " P r o j e c t Meet: M c G i l l E l e m e n t a r y E d u c a t i o n T e a c h i n g Teams," M c G i l l J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n , I I ( F a l l , 1967), 183. J  two  experienced  t e a c h e r s a t one g r a d e l e v e l  and i n o t h e r  s c h o o l s i n t e r n s w o r k e d on a team i n c l u d i n g a team l e a d e r a n d t e a c h e r s from  a number o f g r a d e s .  The d e s c r i p t i o n s o f team t e a c h i n g i n t h e A m e r i c a n literature  do n o t make c l e a r w h i c h t y p e  frequently  used.  Examples o f T e a c h i n g  Teams i n B r i t i s h  Of t h e 142 teams s u r v e y e d 59 p e r c e n t were  o f t e a m i s most  Columbia  i n British  C o l u m b i a 84 o r  c o o p e r a t i v e teams w i t h no l e a d e r .  Forty-one  teams o r 28 p e r c e n t were t e a m s o f two o r more t e a c h e r s exchanging percent ing  c l a s s e s on an i n f o r m a l b a s i s .  reported having  peers with  or 8 percent  a f o r m a l i z e d team s t r u c t u r e o f t e a c h -  l e a d e r s h i p on a r o t a t i n g  i n charge  and s e v e r a l l e v e l s  n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l s working with The m a j o r i t y o f teams,.108  schools with  800 p u p i l s and 13  Social  him. o r 77  p e r c e n t , were i n  teams o r 10  p e r c e n t were i n s c h o o l s  with  pupils.  percent)  t e a m s , 10  of professionals  p e r c e n t were i n s c h o o l s w i t h up t o  T y p e s o f teams v a r i e d . (45  T w e l v e teams  p o p u l a t i o n o f up t o 400 o r 600.  a student  Twenty-one teams o r 15  up t o 200  basis.  s a i d t h a t they had a h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e  with a teacher and  S i x teams o r 4  The 142 teams i n c l u d e d 64  i n t e r m e d i a t e t e a m s , 57  (8 p e r c e n t )  (41  s u b j e c t teams s u c h  S t u d i e s Teams, 8  (6percent) s p l i t  percent)  primary  a s S c i e n c e Teams o r primary-intermediate  50  45  40  35  to  e to 0 H  30  25  20  15  10  5  0<  400 School  600  1 800  Population  Figure The  !  1  I 200  Number o f Teams p e r S c h o o l  17  according  t o School  Population  teams w i t h  o r 3 - 5 , 2 (2 p e r c e n t )  g r a d e s 3-4  complete  a r y s c h o o l teams w i t h g r a d e s 1-7, a n d 1 (1 p e r c e n t ) garten  the  kinder-  team. The r a n g e o f g r a d e l e v e l s  varied  element-  i n e a c h team t h e r e f o r e  T h i r t y - s e v e n teams o r 2 6 p e r c e n t  considerably.  sample had a range o f 4 y e a r s .  of  T h i r t y - o n e teams o r 22  percent  had a range o f 3 y e a r s .  T w e n t y - e i g h t teams o r 20  percent  had a range o f 2 y e a r s .  A range o f 1 year  reported  by 20 teams o r 14 p e r c e n t .  Two  was  teams o r 2  percent  r e p o r t e d a range o f 7 y e a r s . T h e r e was of  teams.  also  The t o t a l  considerable variation  number o f team members i n c l u d i n g  p r o f e s s i o n a l s r a n g e d f r o m 2 t o 16. had:  42 teams o r 2 9 p e r c e n t  52 teams o r 36 p e r c e n t 17 p e r c e n t to  with  with  with  The t o t a l  r a n g e d f r o m 2 t o 6. with  5 teachers  pupils  the  team.  with  with  number o f c e r t i f i e d  The 142 teams s u r v e y e d  teachers  and 1 team w i t h  teachers, with  with p e r team  h a d : 7 0 teams o r  2 t e a c h e r s , 39 teams o r 28 p e r c e n t with  with  3  4 t e a c h e r s , 2 teams  6 teachers.  The number o f  a c c o r d i n g t o t h e number o f  about  7  9 t o 10 members, 6  11 t o 12 members, a n d 1 team  i n e a c h team v a r i e d  certified  2 t e a m members,  3 t o 4 team members, 25 teams o r  t e a c h e r s , 3 0 teams o r 22 p e r c e n t with  non-  surveyed  5 t o 6 members, 6 teams o r 4 p e r c e n t  teams o r 4 p e r c e n t  50 p e r c e n t  The 142 teams  o f t h e sample w i t h  8 members, 2 teams o r 2 p e r c e n t  16 members.  i n the size  25-30 p u p i l s  per teacher  on  35  30  25 W  a  CO CB  1  I  E-i  20  ;  15  10  5  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Years F i g u r e 18 The Number of Teams a c c o r d i n g t o Range o f School Years  Subject areas taught by the team were r e p o r t e d as follows.  S i x t y - t h r e e percent o r 91 o f the teams taught a l l  s u b j e c t s . Fourteen teams or 10 percent taught 5 t o 6 s u b j e c t s . Only 4 teams taught two s u b j e c t s and 8 teams o r 5 percent s p e c i a l i z e d i n one s u b j e c t .  W i t h t h e s e f a c t s i n mind, t h e f o l l o w i n g team o r g a n i zations are described. John Tod Elementary S c h o o l :  John Tod Elementary S c h o o l ,  Kamloops, began team t e a c h i n g i n 1968. i s 5 0 0 and i t has Grades 1 t o 7 . taught.  I t s school population  The e n t i r e s c h o o l i s team  There a r e f o u r c o o p e r a t i v e teams o f t e a c h i n g peers  who d e s i g n a t e l e a d e r s h i p on a r o t a t i n g b a s i s .  The s c h o o l  employs a "group o f t e a c h e r s " concept w i t h a chairman f o r each group.  Group A i n c l u d e s 3 t e a c h e r s and 7 6 p u p i l s a t t h e  f i r s t and second y e a r l e v e l .  Group B has 4 t e a c h e r s and 141  s t u d e n t s a t t h e second and t h i r d y e a r l e v e l .  Group C has 4  t e a c h e r s and 1 3 5 s t u d e n t s a t t h e f o u r t h and f i f t h y e a r  level.  Group D i n c l u d e s 5 t e a c h e r s and 155 s t u d e n t s a t t h e s i x t h and seventh y e a r l e v e l .  There i s a P r i m a r y C o o r d i n a t o r and an  Intermediate Coordinator appointed s t a f f o f 16.  by t h e p r i n c i p a l  from t h e  A s c h o o l s e c r e t a r y , l i b r a r i a n and c o n s u l t i n g  t e a c h e r work c l o s e l y w i t h each group. Gordon Park S c h o o l :  Gordon Park S c h o o l , P o w e l l R i v e r ,  i n i t i a t e d team t e a c h i n g i n 1 9 6 9 . o f 386 and i n c l u d e s Grades 1 t o 7 . team t a u g h t .  I t has a s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n The e n t i r e s c h o o l i s  There a r e f o u r teams w i t h a f o r m a l i z e d s t r u c -  t u r e o f t e a c h i n g peers who d e s i g n a t e l e a d e r s h i p on a r o t a t i n g basis.  One "team," Team A, i s a s i n g l e c l a s s o f 38 Grade 7  pupils.  Team B i n c l u d e s 3 t e a c h e r s and 9 7 s t u d e n t s a t t h e  f i f t h and s i x t h y e a r l e v e l .  Team C has 2 t e a c h e r s and 9 1  Group A  Group B  3 teachers 76 students 1 s t and 2nd year.  Primary .Coordinator  Group C  I4. t e a c h e r s IILI students 2nd and 3 r d y e a r  Group D  I|. t e a c h e r s 135 s t u d e n t s ' ' ij.th. and' '5>th year  Intermediate C oordinator  5 teachers :V' 1-55 students ,6th and 7 t h year,  -Librarian  . . ' M . ' . i ^ v - , ill  g Teacher Supervising: P r i n c i p a l Figure  19  O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Team T e a c h i n g  i n John Tod S c h o o l  1970-1971  pupils the  i n year  four.  s e c o n d and t h i r d  Team D h a s 3 t e a c h e r s a n d 94 p u p i l s a t year  level.  Team E h a s 3 t e a c h e r s a n d  66 p u p i l s i n k i n d e r g a r t e n a n d f i r s t except  year.  A l l t h e teams,  Team A, h a v e one o r two t e a c h e r a i d e s .  a l s o two r e m e d i a l  t e a c h e r s , one f o r t h e p r i m a r y  one f o r t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e g r a d e s . secretary.  There a r e  A l l teachers teach  g r a d e s and  T h e r e i s one s c h o o l  language a r t s ,  arithmetic,  K-7)  (Whole S c h o o l  (Intermediate)  —  (Team A ) *  I  (Team C)  (Team B) Y e a r s 5 and 6 3 teachers 97 p u p i l s  Year 7 1 teacher 38 pupils  1 Remedial  Year 4 2 teachers 91 p u p i l s  Teacher  (Primary) (Team E )  (Team D)  Y e a r s K and 1 3 teachers 66 p u p i l s  Years 2 and 3 teachers 94 p u p i l s 1 Remedial Figure Team T e a c h i n g  social ized  Kent E l e m e n t a r y  Some t e a c h e r s h a v e  School:  Kent  School, Agassiz,  special-  The s t a f f  of 12 t e a c h e r s , 2 c o u n s e l l o r s , 1 l i b r a r i a n , \ A full  commenced  I t has a s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n o f 3 3 0  i n c l u d e s K i n d e r g a r t e n t o Grade 6 .  music t e a c h e r .  School  e d u c a t i o n and m u s i c .  team t e a c h i n g i n 1 9 6 9 . and  20  O r g a n i z a t i o n i n Gordon Park 1969-1970  s t u d i e s , s c i e n c e and a r t .  i n physical  Teacher  time  i s composed  and 1 d i s t r i c t  s e c r e t a r y , a part time  cook f o r  the l u n c h supplement, parent h e l p e r s , and student complement the t e a c h i n g s t a f f .  The  teachers  s c h o o l i s organized  into  4 c o o p e r a t i v e teams i n which s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s p l a n and c a r r y out the teams' i n s t r u c t i o n a l programme with no ranks designated.  specific  There i s a 4 t e a c h e r Open Area Team, a 3  t e a c h e r Intermediate 2 t e a c h e r Beginners  Team, a 3 t e a c h e r Primary Team.  The  Team, and  counsellors, librarian  a  and  music t e a c h e r work c l o s e l y with a l l teams. MacCorkindale Elementary S c h o o l : l o c a t e d i n Vancouver.  T h i s open area s c h o o l i s  I t has a s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n of Team t e a c h i n g was  450  and  i n c l u d e s years K t o 7.  begun i n  and  i n c l u d e s the e n t i r e s c h o o l except the k i n d e r g a r t e n .  There are 4 f o r m a l i z e d teams of t e a c h i n g peers who l e a d e r s h i p every t h r e e or f o u r months.  1967  change  Team A has 3 t e a c h e r s ,  90-100 p u p i l s i n years 1 and 2, 1 p a i d t e a c h e r a i d e , and parent a i d e s . years 2 and 3 , 4 aides. 4 and  Team B has  10  5 t e a c h e r s , 115-130 p u p i l s i n  i n t e r n s , 1 p r o f e s s i o n a l a i d e and  5 volunteer  Team C c o n s i s t s of 3 t e a c h e r s , 90-100 p u p i l s i n years 5, 1 i n t e r n , 1 t e a c h e r a i d e , and 1 c l e r i c a l  assistant.  Team D has 4 t e a c h e r s , 115-130 p u p i l s i n years 6 and 7, 2 p a r t time t e a c h e r a i d e s .  and  In teams A, B and C i n s t r u c t i o n  i s p r i n c i p a l l y i n teams, with one t e a c h e r being the l e a d e r f o r h i s area of s t r e n g t h .  So one t e a c h e r would l e a d the  teams f o r s c i e n c e , another f o r a r i t h m e t i c , another f o r language a r t s , and another developed  for social studies.  a p l a t o o n i n g system with each t e a c h e r  Team D has specializing  Principal (K  -  7)  Team A 90-100 (Yearl-2) 3 teachers 11 a i d e s  90-100 (Year 4-5) 3 teachers 1 intern 1 aide 1 clerical s assistant  115-130 (Year 2-3) 5 teachers 4 interns 6 aides  115-130 (Year 6-7) 4 teachers 2 part time aides  Special Counsellor' F i g u r e 21 Team Teaching  i n a subject area.  O r g a n i z a t i o n i n MacCorkindale 1970-1971  School  So one t e a c h e r w i l l t e a c h a r i t h m e t i c ,  a n o t h e r s c i e n c e , and a n o t h e r s o c i a l H i g h l a n d s Elementary S c h o o l :  studies.  H i g h l a n d s Elementary S c h o o l ,  North Vancouver, began team t e a c h i n g i n 1966. The s c h o o l has a s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n o f 507 and i n c l u d e s Grades 1 t o 7. Teams i n t h i s s c h o o l have formed i n two s u b j e c t a r e a s , s o c i a l s t u d i e s and language a r t s . Teams i n t h e y e a r 1969-1970.  There were 4 S o c i a l S t u d i e s  The teams were c o o p e r a t i v e i n  s t r u c t u r e w i t h no s p e c i f i c r a n k s d e s i g n a t e d . 4 t e a c h e r s and 98 Grade 7 p u p i l s .  Team A i n c l u d e d  Team B had 3 t e a c h e r s and  Social  S t u d i e s Teams  Team 98 ( G r . 7) 4 teachers  90  90 ( G r . 3 a n d 4) 3 teachers  65 (Gr. 5) 2 teachers  ( G r . 6) 3 teachers  Language  Arts  110 ( G r . 4-7) 4 teachers 1 librarian 1 teacher aide Figure Social  S t u d i e s a n d Language A r t s Teams a t H i g h l a n d s 1969-1970  90 G r a d e 6 p u p i l s . students. All  and  Team C h a d 2 t e a c h e r s  Team D h a d 3 t e a c h e r s  teachers  to t h e i r  22  The p r i n c i p a l  a c t s as a resource  a n d 90 G r a d e 3  p e r s o n and l e a d e r when  social  studies  meetings  necessary.  It included 4 teachers, 1  1 a i d e and a l l p u p i l s i n G r a d e s 4 t o 7.  s t r u c t u r e was f o r m a l i z e d w i t h Most  students.  i s at a l l important  T h e r e was one Language A r t s Team. librarian,  and 65 G r a d e 5  i n a team p l a n t o g e t h e r and t e a c h  pupils.  School  The team  l e a d e r s h i p on a r o t a t i n g  o f t h e team i n s t r u c t i o n was d e v o t e d t o r e a d i n g .  basis.  Westview E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l :  T h i s elementary  Vancouver began team t e a c h i n g i n 1966.  s c h o o l i n North  During t h e y e a r 1969-  1970 i t had a c o o p e r a t i v e team a t t h e Grade 7 l e v e l . team i n c l u d e d 3 t e a c h e r s , 86 c h i l d r e n and 1 i n t e r n . A a c t e d as l e a d e r i n a r i t h m e t i c and s c i e n c e . in social studies. teachers taught Puntledge  The Teacher  Teacher B l e d  Teacher C l e d i n language a r t s . A l l  every  Park S c h o o l :  subject. Puntledge  Park S c h o o l , C o u r t e n a y ,  began team t e a c h i n g i n 1967. The s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n i s 600 and i n c l u d e s Grades 1 t o 7 p l u s a k i n d e r g a r t e n .  The s c h o o l  has 3 c o o p e r a t i v e teams i n which s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s p l a n and c a r r y out t h e teams' i n s t r u c t i o n a l programme w i t h no s p e c i f i c ranks designated.  Team A i s i n t h e open a r e a and i n c l u d e s  6 f u l l time t e a c h e r s , 4 p a r t time t e a c h e r s , 180 p u p i l s i n Grades 5-7, 1 i n t e r n and 1 p a r t t i m e t e a c h e r a i d e . A l l t e a c h e r s t e a c h language a r t s , 2 t e a c h e r s t e a c h Grade 7 s o c i a l s t u d i e s and a r i t h m e t i c , 2 t e a c h e r s t e a c h Grade 5-7 s c i e n c e and Grade 5-6 a r i t h m e t i c , and 2 t e a c h e r s t e a c h Grade 5-6 s o c i a l s t u d i e s and a l l t h e a r t . S t u d i e s Team.  Team B i s a S o c i a l  I t includes 2 teachers, 65 c h i l d r e n at the  Grade 4 l e v e l , and 1 t e a c h e r a i d e .  Team C i s a K i n d e r g a r t e n  Team w h i c h has 2 t e a c h e r s , 50-60 c h i l d r e n , and 2 t e a c h e r aides. Alexander  Elementary S c h o o l :  Alexander  I t began team t e a c h i n g i n 1970.  School i s i n K i t i m a t .  The s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n i s  309 and i n c l u d e s Grades 1 t o 7. taught.  The e n t i r e s c h o o l i s team  There a r e 3 c o o p e r a t i v e teams i n which no s p e c i f i c  ranks are designated.  Team A i n c l u d e s 4 t e a c h e r s , 101 p u p i l s  i n Grades 1-2, and 5 t e a c h e r a i d e s . and 104 p u p i l s i n Grades 3-4.  Team B has 3 t e a c h e r s  Team C has 3 t e a c h e r s , 104  p u p i l s i n Grades 5-7, 1 t e a c h e r a i d e and 1 c l e r i c a l Other Examples:  E a g l e Harbour P r i m a r y S c h o o l , West Vancouver,  began team t e a c h i n g i n 1967. 165  assistant.  I t has a s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n o f  i n c l u d i n g Grades 1-4 and a k i n d e r g a r t e n .  There a r e two  c o o p e r a t i v e teams o f 2 t e a c h e r s w i t h 60 p u p i l s i n each. s c h o o l s e c r e t a r y , a h a l f time a i d e and a t r a v e l l i n g  The  remedial  t e a c h e r supplement t h e s t a f f . Another i n t e r e s t i n g team o p e r a t e d  i n Cleveland  Elementary S c h o o l , North Vancouver, i n t h e y e a r 1967-1968. T h i s s c h o o l has a p o p u l a t i o n o f 663 and i n c l u d e s Grades 1-7. The team i n 1967-1968 c o n s i s t e d o f 92 Grade 7 s t u d e n t s , 3 t e a c h e r s a t a l l t i m e s , and t h e p r i n c i p a l p a r t t i m e .  The  team was a c o o p e r a t i v e one i n which each t e a c h e r taught i n h i s area of s t r e n g t h .  Teacher A t a u g h t  s c i e n c e , Teacher B  t a u g h t s o c i a l s t u d i e s , Teacher C t a u g h t language a r t s and t h e p r i n c i p a l taught a r i t h m e t i c . Lonsdale  Elementary S c h o o l , North Vancouver, began  team t e a c h i n g i n 1970. I t has a s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n o f 400 and t e a c h e s Grades 1-7. t h e Grade 4 and 5 l e v e l .  The team i s a Language A r t s Team a t I t i s hierarchical i nstructure  and i n c l u d e s 2 t e a c h e r s , 70 p u p i l s , 1 l i b r a r i a n , 1 r e m e d i a l  reading  teacher,  8 teacher  and  a l s o works c l o s e l y w i t h  the  aides.  i n 1968.  informal  cooperative  tive  purposes.  of the 91  The  team a s w e l l .  The  programme.  the  leader  social  l e d the  team i n s c i e n c e  and  The  social  s t u d i e s and  to  a  language a r t s  music.  taught  and  Teacher  art.  She  purposes,  Teacher  also  special  C  teachers  interests in  science.  i n 1967.  gan  team t e a c h i n g  and  i n c l u d e s Grades 1  I t has  t o 6.  The  l a r g e s t anywhere.  and  200  200  p u p i l s i n years  p u p i l s i n years 4-6.  1-3.  i n North Vancouver,  a school  population  teams i n t h i s  school  Team A i n c l u d e s 6  in  400  of are,  teachers  Team B i n c l u d e s 6 t e a c h e r s  Teachers s p e c i a l i z e  be-  and  subject  areas. Alwin  Holland  Elementary School,  began team t e a c h i n g  i n 1967.  cooperative  The  teams.  B  taught  i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p of  Brooksbank Elementary School  perhaps, the  the  mathematics.  C rotated frequently according  and  a librarian  taught  s t u d i e s programme and  education.  administra-  for administrative  l e d the  an  a s a r e g u l a r member  a s s i s t e d with  l a n g u a g e a r t s programme and  B and  a leader for  specialist,  l e d the  physical  I 9 6 8 - I 9 6 9 was  year  team c o n s i s t e d o f 3 t e a c h e r s  aide  T e a c h e r A,  the  functioned  A reading  time s u p e r v i s o r y  V a n c o u v e r , began team  T h e r e was  However, she  Grade 3 p u p i l s .  part  team d u r i n g  one.  vice-principal  team.  Seymour E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , teaching  The  In i t s f i r s t  Fort year  P r i m a r i u m e n r o l l e d 150  St.  John,  i t had  two  pupils in  Grades 1 and 2. aide.  The  I t had 6 t e a c h e r s , 2 i n t e r n s and 1 t e a c h e r  A p p r o p r i a t e Placement D i v i s i o n  p u p i l s i n Grades 6 and 7.  I t had  (APD)  enrolled  60  2 t e a c h e r s and 1 i n t e r n .  Muheim Memorial School, Smithers, r e p o r t e d a t e a c h ing of  team i n 1968-1969.  i n f o r m a l and c o n s i s t e d  3 t e a c h e r s , the p r i n c i p a l and 120 Grade 7 p u p i l s .  A was two  The team was  the l e a d e r i n s o c i a l s t u d i e s a s s i s t e d by the  teachers.  taught  Teacher B taught  Elementary  other  language a r t s , Teacher C  s c i e n c e and Teacher D taught Hillcrest  Teacher  mathematics.  S c h o o l , Coquitlam,  experimented  w i t h a " B i g Room" type of team t e a c h i n g i n 1967-1968.  The  team was  and  c o o p e r a t i v e and  included 2 teachers, 1 intern  73 p u p i l s at the Grade 5 l e v e l . was  expanded t o 150  The f o l l o w i n g year the team  p u p i l s i n Grades 5 and  P a r k s v i l l e Elementary  School, P a r k s v i l l e , had i t s  f i r s t t e a c h i n g team i n 1970-1971. with no l e a d e r .  The team was  cooperative  I t c o n s i s t e d of 4 f u l l time t e a c h e r s , 1 p a r t  time t e a c h e r , and 130 p u p i l s i n Grades 4-6. t h e r e were 5 t e a c h e r s .  In the morning  Three of these taught language a r t s  and 2 taught a r i t h m e t i c . teachers.  6.  In the a f t e r n o o n t h e r e were 4  During t h i s time, s c i e n c e , a r t , music and p h y s i c a l  e d u c a t i o n were taught.  Team Teaching  53 Roles-^  As seen i n the team t e a c h i n g examples l i s t e d ,  teacher  53 ^ F o r a comprehensive o u t l i n e see Chamberlin (pp. 2531), Lobb (pp. 16-21), B a i r and Woodward (pp. 61-83), Johnson and Hunt (pp. 2-6).  /  a s s i g n m e n t s w i t h i n teams r e p r e s e n t roles  and  specializations.  team l e a d e r and fied  and  employed team m o t h e r s . ary teachers. mean i f one function. be  F r a n k l i n School  senior teacher.  practice teachers  One  The  teacher  The  aides.  of  the  identi-  Pittsburgh  programme u s e d  schools auxilititles  t h e team s t r u c t u r e i n w h i c h  they  L o b b , f o r example, s t a t e s t h a t team p e r s o n n e l  certified  teachers  actually  teachers; assigned  occasions.^  auxiliary  to the  somewhat f r o m s c h o o l t o  resource  personnel  t h e team f o r s p e c i a l  s c h o o l but  f o l l o w i n g d u t i e s and  personnel—non-  team; and  Concepts of the  4  can  f o l l o w i n g groups: p r o f e s s i o n a l s —  — n o n - t e a m members a s s o c i a t e d w i t h  clude the  Dundee S c h o o l  Claremont  i s t o understand  trained,  vary  introduced  must h a v e some i d e a o f what t h e s e  c a t e g o r i z e d i n t o the  p o s e s and  a c o n s i d e r a b l e number  pur-  r o l e s o f team members i n general they i n -  responsibilities.  Professionals Team L e a d e r :  The  to the  person  r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the  activities  tional  team.  He  i s a key  planning  t e r m s team l e a d e r o r e x e c u t i v e t e a c h e r  i s i n c h a r g e and  activities  o f t h e team's s t a f f . c o n d u c t s some o f t h e be  ing  an  and He  approves the  e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r capable  (San  figure  d a i l y working  i s considered  large-group  of the  instruc-  in a l l assignment  a master t e a c h e r  classes.  He  of assessing  refer  and  i s expected  to  individual  and  ^ D e l b e r t M. L o b b , P r a c t i c a l A s p e c t s o f Team T e a c h F r a n c i s c o : F e a r o n P u b l i s h e r , 1964), l b .  group needs, p l a n n i n g organizing teachers  and  and  programme.  i n s t r u c t i o n a l and  directing  specialists Chamberlin  the  efforts  curriculum goals,  o f both  and  his fellow  i n c a r r y i n g forward  the  total  summarizes h i s s e l e c t e d d u t i e s  as  follows: a p p r a i s e s p r o g r e s s o f program; c o o r d i n a t e s , d i r e c t s , and s c h e d u l e s team a c t i v i t i e s ; communicates a l l i n f o r m a t i o n t o and f r o m t h e team; makes d e c i s i o n s i n c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n s ; g e n e r a l r e s o u r c e p e r s o n f o r team; e n c o u r a g e s and i m p l e m e n t s r e s e a r c h a c t i v i t y ; m o d e l s f o r h i s f e l l o w team members; r e p r e s e n t s t h e team t o a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and community; s t i m u l a t e s t h o u g h t and a c t i o n ; p r o m o t e s a r t i c u l a t i o n o f team p r o g r a m w i t h o t h e r p r o g r a m s t h r o u g h o u t t h e s c h o o l ; o r i e n t s and a s s i s t s t e a c h e r s n e e d i n g h e l p , e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e new t o t h e team; s e r v e s a s c h a i r m a n f o r m e e t i n g s ; c o o r d i n a t e s w i t h the p r i n c i p a l , a program d e a l i n g w i t h p u p i l d i s c i p l i n e and b e h a v i o r ; k e e p s a b r e a s t o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n ; s e r v e s as a member o f t h e school's Advisory Council; teaches, e s p e c i a l l y l a r g e g r o u p i n s t r u c t i o n and m a t e r i a l s meant t o i n t r o d u c e a unit. ? 5  P r o f e s s i o n a l Teacher: teacher, person tion  l e a d t e a c h e r and  who  has  classroom  professional teacher  certified,  teaching  qualified  classes expected  and  i n the  fields  expected  area  to lead the  and  has  experience.  depth i n h i s subject f i e l d  competence i n r e l a t e d be  terms s e n i o r t e a c h e r ,  master  refer to  completed a r e c o g n i z e d master's l e v e l  programme, i s f u l l y  successful and  The  to teach  He  has  breadth  T h i s person  some o f t h e  preparation for classes.  Chamberlin,  op.  s t a f f members and His  and should  large-group  of h i s p r e p a r a t i o n or i n t e r e s t . other  educa-  considerable  as w e l l as knowledge  of study.  a  He  is  make a c a d e m i c  s e l e c t e d d u t i e s i n c l u d e the  cit. ,  28.  PRINCIPAL  Team Leader Senior .Teacher  Senior Teacher  Team Leader  Team Leader  I—!—I  Senior Teacher  Senior Senior Teacher Teacher  Senior Teacher/ Specialist for Physical Education  Specialist for Art & Music  Teacher  Teacher  Teacher  i  Teaching Aide  Clerical Aide  ALPHA  I  Teaching. Aide  Clerical Aide  BETA  Figure Team R o l e s  r  Teacher Teacher Teacher Teaching Teacher Teacher Intern Teacher  23  " ' Teaching Aide  I;  t  Clerical " Aide  OMEGA  5 6  i n a Hierarchy  o f Personnel  following: S e r v e s a s a model f o r h i s f e l l o w team members; s t i m u l a t e s t h o u g h t and a c t i o n ; g i v e s p l a n n i n g l e a d e r s h i p f o r s u b j e c t a r e a s p e c i a l i t y ; a d v i s e s team l e a d e r o f s p e c i a l needs; keeps a b r e a s t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e i n h i s s u b j e c t area s p e c i a l i t y ; serves as a r e s o u r c e p e r s o n f o r subSject a r e a w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g and c u r r i c u l u m development;  W i l l i a m C. W o l f a n d B r a d l e y M. Loomer, The E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l : A P e r s p e c t i v e ( C h i c a g o : Rand M c N a l l y and Company, 1 9 6 6 ) , 120. J  develops a curriculum resource f i l e f o r a s u b j e c t a r e a a n d t e a c h e s most l a r g e - g r o u p t h a t a r e a ; keeps p a r e n t s informed through comments on r e p o r t s ; s e r v e s a s a t e a c h i n g team.57 Regular  Teacher:  The t e r m s r e g u l a r t e a c h e r ,  particular classes i n conferences, member o f a  beginning  teacher, provisional teacher or teacher refer t o a member who h a s c o m p l e t e d h i s t e a c h e r certified  staff  e d u c a t i o n and i s  but l a c k s t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e .  Some o f h i s  duties include: shares i n c o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g o f l e s s o n s and p l a n s l e s s o n s i n d i v i d u a l l y f o r some g r o u p s o f c h i l d r e n ; s t u d i e s cumulative records o f a l l c h i l d r e n assigned t o t h e team t o d e t e r m i n e s p e c i a l n e e d s ; k e e p s p a r e n t s i n f o r m e d t h r o u g h c o n f e r e n c e s , comments on r e p o r t s ; w o r k s w i t h f e l l o w team members t o i m p r o v e i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s and p r o v i d e f o r needs o f s t u d e n t s a s s i g n e d t o t h e team; t e a c h e s most s u b j e c t s t o c h i l d r e n i n g r o u p s o f v a r y i n g s i z e s ; d i r e c t s t h e work o f a s s i g n e d i n t e r n g a n d a i d e s ; s e r v e s a s a t e a c h i n g member o f a team.5o  Teacher I n t e r n : and  cadet  The t e r m s t e a c h e r a s s i s t a n t , t e a c h e r  t e a c h e r r e f e r t o a s t a f f member who h a s n o t com-  pleted a teacher for  teaching experience.  college vided to  education  a teaching c e r t i f i c a t e .  little  or university.  programme a n d does n o t y e t q u a l i f y Usually this  person  has had  The i n t e r n may be e n r o l l e d  The i n - s e r v i c e  at a  o p p o r t u n i t i e s pro-  by t h e team t e a c h i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s h o u l d be u t i l i z e d  the f u l l e s t  that  intern  extent  on h i s b e h a l f .  he c o u l d p e r f o r m a r e :  C h a m b e r l i n , o p . c i t . , 29 I b i d . , 30.  Some o f t h e s e r v i c e s  u n d e r s u p e r v i s i o n , work w i t h p u p i l s i n l a r g e , medium, and s m a l l g r o u p s , and i n d i v i d u a l l y t o p r o v i d e a p p r o p r i a t e i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s , e x p l a i n the purpose of m a t e r i a l s , provide meaningful p r a c t i c e t o develop m a s t e r y , p r o v i d e i n d i v i d u a l and s m a l l g r o u p r e m e d i a l i n s t r u c t i o n or a d d i t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n to p u p i l s with s p e c i a l n e e d s , meet t h e i r s p e c i a l n e e d s f o r i n f o r m a t i o n and s t i m u l a t e t h e i r i n t e r e s t s and d e v e l o p m e n t , s u p e r v i s e c h i l d r e n when s c h e d u l e d , i n t e r p r e t t h e s c h o o l ' s p r o g r a m t o t h e s t u d e n t s : beyond t h e s e s e r v i c e s t h e i n t e r n w i l l — s u p e r v i s e t h e work o f t h e a i d e s , d e s i g n and p r e p a r e i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s , be an a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a n t i n a l l m e e t i n g s , keep a b r e a s t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e , a s s i s t f e l l o w s t a f f members w i t h t h e i r professional duties.5" Teacher S p e c i a l i s t : t e a c h e r who the  has  The  a high l e v e l  c u r r i c u l u m such  specialist  of s k i l l  He  may  The  non-professionals are  o r may  term  Many s c h o o l s o f f e r voluntary help.  clerical  be a f u l l  aide, auxiliary  O r d i n a r i l y no  The  clerical  college education  collections, clerical Ibid.,  31.  and  enlist  i s required  a i d e , a c t i n g as a s e c r e t a r y t o  r o u t i n e matters  assistance with  describe  school.  viding  Much o f t h e  time  others  d u t i e s as t y p i n g , f i l i n g ,  and  guidance  assistant.  t h e team p e r f o r m s s u c h  tory,  of  personnel,  technical  a p a i d a i d e programme w h i l e  most h a v e c o m p l e t e d h i g h Aide:  not  reading,  f r e q u e n t l y used t o  p a r a - p r o f e s s i o n a l s , p a r e n t - a i d e , and  Clerical  certified  team.  Non-professionals:  but  is a  i n a s e l e c t e d area  as a r t , music, r e m e d i a l  or p h y s i c a l education. member o f t h e  teacher  keeping  and  pro-  of attendance,  inven-  r e c o r d s o f team m e e t i n g s .  a i d e ' s time i s spent  in assisting  teachers ing  i n preparing materials f o r instruction  pupils.  Technical assist  Aide:  The t e c h n i c a l a i d e ' s  t o maintain  functions are t o  a u d i o - v i s u a l equipment a n d o t h e r  i n s t r u c t i o n a l media, and t o a s s i s t equipment  t h e s t a f f when u s i n g  this  and m a t e r i a l .  Teacher Aide:  Teacher a i d e d u t i e s range from t h e simple  of l i s t e n i n g ,  typical  chief  i n the administration of the school's I n s t r u c t i o n a l  Media Center,  task  and e v a l u a t -  list  to providing technical assistance.  A  of duties includes:  A s s i s t i n g c h i l d r e n with t h e i r clothes; a s s i s t i n g handic a p p e d c h i l d r e n ; a s s i s t i n g on f i e l d t r i p s ; a s s i s t i n g i n general classroom r o u t i n e s ; a s s i s t i n g with the milk program; d e v e l o p i n g b i b l i o g r a p h i e s and doing l i b r a r y research;conducting d a i l y health surveys; helping with c l a s s r o o m housekeeping; m a i n t a i n i n g r e c o r d s and i n v e n t o r i e s ; o r i e n t i n g new s t u d e n t s ; r e a d i n g a l o u d a n d s t o r y t e l l i n g ; s e c u r i n g , s e t t i n g up, a n d o p e r a t i n g a u d i o v i s u a l m a t e r i a l s and o t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n a l m e d i a ; s u p e r v i s i n g areas outside t h e classroom; t y p i n g , d u p l i c a t i n g , and p r e p a r i n g i n s t r u c t i o n a l a n d e v a l u a t i v e m a t e r i a l s and c o r r e s p o n d e n c e ; w o r k i n g w i t h c l u b s o r o t h e r s t u d e n t activities.  R e s o u r c e and S u p p o r t  Personnel  Resource and support  personnel  include a l l others  who a r e u s e d on a n y o c c a s i o n t o e n r i c h t h e l e a r n i n g e x p e r i ence o f t h e s t u d e n t s .  T h e s e may i n c l u d e l a y and p r o f e s -  s i o n a l members w i t h i n t h e s c h o o l  Community C o n s u l t a n t : 6 0  Ibid.,  36.  o r t h e community.  The community  consultant  i s not a  r  Principal Team Leader  Team Leader  Team Leader  Language A.-is  Mathematics.'-  Social Studies  |  (inside broken line: the administrative cabinet)  Senior Teacher  Senior Teacher  Senior Teacher  Science  Art and Music  Language Arts  (inside solid outer line: the instructional cabinet)  Figure Administrative  24  6 1  and I n s t r u c t i o n a l  Cabinet  p r o f e s s i o n a l team member b u t i s a l a y p e r s o n whose k n o w l e d g e o f t h e community and i t s r e s o u r c e s  c a n p r o v e t o be  valuable  t o t h e team i n i t s e n d e a v o u r s t o p r o v i d e an e n r i c h e d tional Student  programme. Resources:  T h e s e i n c l u d e any and a l l  w h i c h members o f t h e s t u d e n t function. tional  educa-  contributions  body c a n make t o t h e c l a s s  I t i s often a great  untapped source o f i n s t r u c -  power.  ^"*-Anderson, H a g s t r o m a n d R o b i n s o n , op. c i t . , 78.  Harvey - Team Leader Marge - Assistant Team Leader George - Teacher Tommy - Teacher Aide  Florence - Teacher Maureen - Intern Joan - Intern Mary - Teacher Aide  .62 Figure 25  The Direct Instruction Team and Support Centres Bruce Joyce, The Teacher and His Staff: Man, Media and Machines (Washington, D.C.: Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1967), 15.  Community special  Resource Persons:  knowledge, s k i l l  T h i s means anyone who  or  competence t h a t  can  has  be  a  utilized  t o add  depth t o the  routine  instructional  Support  Personnel:  Support  personnel  support  t o the  teaching  i n the  case of a d m i n i s t r a t o r s ,  e m p l o y e e s who p e r s o n s may  offer  be  non-certified cal  staff.  school  certified as  i n the  Included  as  are  case of s c h o o l  are  programme.  non-team process.  secretarial  s u c h p e r s o n s as t h e  nurse, psychologist  and  school  principal,  These  and  or  cleri-  librarian,  supervisors  and  consultants. The  r o l e of p r i n c i p a l  organization director  and  are  able  tional  s u p e r v i s i o n , and  orderly,  the  for leadership  coordinator  of the  balanced  Since  to attend  management d e t a i l s ,  opportunity  ture  do  not  in  role  team l e a d e r s  p r i n c i p a l has i n curriculum  guidance.  activities sequential  sub-  administrative  more t i m e  and  development, i n s t r u c -  programme f o r t h e  author's survey  of  their  becomes  o f s e v e r a l teams t o  ensure  entire  the an  school.  Columbia  It i s of i n t e r e s t ,  Columbia.  and  I n a s e n s e he  i n d i c a t e w h i c h team t e a c h i n g  of the  British  present  d e s c r i p t i o n s o f team t e a c h i n g  f r e q u e n t l y used. findings  team  t o many r o u t i n e  Team T e a c h i n g R o l e s i n B r i t i s h  The  teaching  becomes somewhat a k i n t o t h e  of i n s t r u c t i o n .  ordinates  under the  o f #5  i n American  r o l e s are  most  t h e r e f o r e , t o note team t e a c h i n g  litera-  the  schools  Team L e a d e r s : 75  percent  Of t h e 143  Leadership,  said  however, was m a i n l y  responsibility  i n selecting  or 35  Only  on an i n f o r m a l o r r o t a t i n g  a n d 13 by t h e team members.  tion  107  t h a t t h e r e was a team l e a d e r .  Of t h e 35 l e a d e r s , 22 were  basis.  responding,  s t a t e d t h a t t h e i r team h a d no l e a d e r .  o r 24 p e r c e n t  teachers  team t e a c h e r s  c h o s e n by t h e a d m i n i s t r a T w e l v e l e a d e r s h a d some  o t h e r members  o f t h e team b u t  22 d i d n o t . Interns:  on teams w i t h  no i n t e r n s .  t e a m h a d one i n t e r n . had  r e p o r t e d t h a t 131  The t e a c h e r s  three  Five teachers  Three t e a c h e r s  Ten t e a c h e r s , o r 7 percent  that  t h e l i b r a r i a n was a t e a m member.  cent  of the teachers team.  ever,  were  indicated that that t h e i r  their  team  interns.  Librarian:  the  said  o r 92 p e r c e n t  o f t h e sample,  said  A n o t h e r 28 o r 20  s t a t e d he was i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d  Seventy-nine  o r 56 p e r c e n t  perwith  o f t h e t e a c h e r s , how-  r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e l i b r a r i a n h a d no s p e c i a l f u n c t i o n  relative  t o t h e team.  Teacher Aides:  No a i d e s were u s e d  on t h e teams o f 82 o r 58  Of t h e o t h e r t e a c h e r s , 29 o r 21  percent  of the teachers.  percent  r e p o r t e d t h e u s e o f 1 a i d e p e r team, 11  u s e d 2 a i d e s p e r team, 13  or 9 percent  or 8 percent  u s e d 3 a i d e s p e r team,  2 t e a c h e r s u s e d 4 a i d e s p e r team, 4 t e a c h e r s u s e d p e r team, 1 t e a c h e r 10 a i d e s .  5 aides  h a d 8 a i d e s i n t h e team and a n o t h e r  Approximately  half  of these  a i d e s were  had  voluntary  and  h a l f were p a i d .  Teacher  Most o f t h e v o l u n t e e r s were  a i d e s were m a i n l y  used  r e g u l a r t e a c h e r s a n d t o mark. work a n d 12 p e r c e n t  Clerical that  Aides:  clerical  helped  About  Resource Personnel:  of the teachers  necessary.  a i d e two d a y s a week.  resource  The amount  was a f o l l o w s :  people that  13 t e a c h e r s u s e d  of the time;  the time;  14 o t h e r t e a c h e r s u s e d  a t some p o i n t resource  resource people  them 10-15 p e r c e n t  and F l e x i b l e  Types o f  of  of the  20-25  time.  Scheduling  Grouping A c e n t r a l aspect  grouping.  1  them 2-  them 5 p e r c e n t  a n d 20 t e a c h e r s made u s e o f r e s o u r c e p e o p l e  Grouping  people  10 t e a c h e r s u s e d  14 t e a c h e r s u s e d  of the i n s t r u c t i o n a l  by 55  Eighty-six teachers or  o f time  o f the i n s t r u c t i o n a l time;  percent  indicated  a i d e two h o u r s a day a n d s i x  3 percent  time;  did clerical  learners.  o f t h e team t e a c h e r s .  during the year.  percent  13 p e r c e n t  R e s o u r c e p e r s o n n e l were n o t u s e d  60 p e r c e n t , h o w e v e r , u s e d  were u s e d  slower  materials f o r  a s s i s t a n c e c o u l d be o b t a i n e d when  t e a c h e r s h a d one c l e r i c a l  39 p e r c e n t  About  50 p e r c e n t  One t e a c h e r h a d a c l e r i c a l  or  t o prepare  parents.  The p l a n s  call  o f most team p l a n s i s f l e x i b l e f o r v a r y i n g group s i z e  from  small  s e m i n a r g r o u p s o f 12 t o 15 p u p i l s , w o r k i n g g r o u p s o f 3 t o 8 pupils,  t o l a r g e g r o u p s o f 40, 75, 100, 150 o r more  pupils.  experiences with the right  teachers at the right  When c o n s i d e r i n g g r o u p i n g thinking team.  of the t o t a l  time.  t e a c h e r s s h o u l d b e g i n by  group o f s t u d e n t s , a s s i g n e d t o the  T h i s p o i n t i s emphasized  by G o o d l a d :  In c o o p e r a t i v e t e a c h i n g , s t a f f members b e g i n by t h i n k i n g a b o u t g r o u p i n g by e x a m i n i n g a n i n i t i a l s e l f c o n t a i n e d c l u s t e r o f , f o r example, 9 0 , 1 5 0 , o r 2 0 0 s t u d e n t s — a l l t h o s e t o be t a u g h t by a n i d e n t i f i e d cluster of personnel. They do n o t b e g i n by s p i n n i n g o f f i n t h e i r minds, o r i n a c t u a l p r a c t i c e , t h r e e o r f i v e o r seven c l a s s groups o f 3 0 each. It i s this i n i t i a l conceptualization of cooperative teaching t h a t i s s o c r u c i a l a n d , f r e q u e n t l y , so d i f f i c u l t t o grasp.63 The  author  there than  i s no n e e d t o p r e - d e t e r m i n e short periods of time.  according of  calls  f o r b l o c k s o f time  abilities  difficulties  H e r e we f i n d  and t h e c u r r i c u l u m .  or with  or successes.  Team t h e needs  Pupils of  p u p i l s who have  p u p i l s who There  shift  t h e concept  fashioned to suit  may be g r o u p e d w i t h  needs and i n t e r e s t s ;  that  g r o u p s t r u c t u r e f o r more  s c h e d u l i n g wedded t o team t e a c h i n g .  the teacher, the pupil,  varying  article  Group s t r u c t u r e s h o u l d  t o n e e d and p u r p o s e . ^  flexible  teaching of  g o e s on t o p o i n t o u t i n a n o t h e r  experience  can a l s o  similar  similar  be c o n s i d e r a b l e  N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n , P r o j e c t on I n s t r u c t i o n : P l a n n i n g a n d O r g a n i z i n g f o r T e a c h i n g (Washington, D.G.: t h e A s s o c i a t i o n , 1 9 6 3 ) , 08. ^ J o h n I . Goodlad, " C o o p e r a t i v e Teaching i n Educat i o n a l Reform," N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l , XLIV (January, 1 9 6 5 ) , 1 2 ."  ©©o o o  S p e c i a l N e e d s Group  o ©o © o  o e o o  o©© o o ooo©©  Small-Group Instructions  1  1  -a-  Single  e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 o ooo  0  Tutorial  1  Instruction  o o 0 o o o o 0 0 o  o o o o o o ooo o o 0 o 0 o 0 o o o o ooo 0 o o o o e o 0 0 o o o o o 0 o o o 0 o o o o o o  4 Large Group Instructions  1 1  5  •  •'••I-. *  *  o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o  Total Group Instructions  o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o  ^  o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ^  o o o o oO 0 O 0 O 0 o o o o  o o o o o  o o o o o o o o o o o ' o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o • •fr  Pupils  o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o  -k  Teachers  Figure  *  -k  26  ~&  6 5  F l e x i b l e Grouping as a C e n t r a l Aspect o f Team Teaching  6 5 Richard  Change, 198.  Miller  (ed.), P e r s p e c t i v e s on E d u c a t i o n a l  heterogeneous grouping t o give others regardless of a b i l i t y writing  pupils  a c h a n c e t o work w i t h  or achievement.  about g r o u p i n g p o s s i b i l i t i e s  i n team  Shaplin i n teaching  states: Team t e a c h i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y a t t h e e l e m e n t a r y l e v e l , makes i t p o s s i b l e t o d i v i d e s t u d e n t s i n t o d i f f e r e n t a b i l i t y groups f o r each s e p a r a t e s u b j e c t , and t o d e v e l o p t h e k i n d o f f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g s , e a s i l y changed a s c h i l d r e n change, t h a t may i m p r o v e t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f i n s t r u c t i o n w i t h o u t t h e r i g i d , o f t e n c r u e l and a r b i t r a r y s e p a r a t i o n s b r o u g h t a b o u t by more common s y s t e m s o f a b i l i t y g r o u p i n g . Under team t e a c h i n g i t i s p o s s i b l e t o d i v i d e a group o f s t u d e n t s i n t o subgroups o f any d e s i r e d s i z e , o r t o make u s e o f t u t o r i a l o r independent study. I t i s also possible t o vary the time l i m i t s o f c l a s s e s . 0 0  One o f t h e b a s i c i s that  p r e m i s e s u n d e r l y i n g team  some m a t e r i a l s i n t h e e l e m e n t a r y c u r r i c u l u m  the t r a d i t i o n a l groups o f 30. a given topic  h a s been  assembly, t h e c h i l d r e n  It  o f needs  may  different  Once t h e g e n e r a l  presented i n the larger can break i n t o  for drill  i s understood that  child  c a n be  a s w e l l t o 5 0 , 9 0 , o r 150 p u p i l s a t one t i m e a s t o  taught  basis  teaching  and mastery  g r o u p s change  these areas.  Or a c h i l d  or extended  from time t o time. and i n an  A  entirely  may work i n d e p e n d e n t l y f o r s e v e r a l o t h e r s f o r work on a  problem. Team t e a c h e r s must p l a n w h i c h  Review,  learnings.  d e p e n d i n g on h i s p r o g r e s s i n  p e r i o d s a n d t h e n g r o u p w i t h some special  general  s m a l l e r g r o u p s on t h e  be i n one g r o u p f o r r e a d i n g one f o r a r i t h m e t i c ,  c o n c e p t on  purposes are served  J u d s o n T. S h a p l i n , "Team T e a c h i n g , " S a t u r d a y X L I V (May 2 0 , 1 9 6 1 ) , 54.  Various Groupings of Students  Large Group Instruction by Team  -  i 5.  Phase II Phase I  4  —  \  —  s s s s s s s s s si  T  S S S S S S S S S S / S  s \ s s s s s s ' s s s s ' s s s s s s /s s L  —  t  Teachers Plan Together Cooperative Model  ,67 27  Figure Various  best  Groupings f o r S p e c i f i c  by l a r g e - g r o u p  independent  study.  group i n s t r u c t i o n  Hierorchy Model  instruction, In g e n e r a l  Purposes  small-group  i t i s agreed  d i s c u s s i o n and that  large-  i s most a p p r o p r i a t e when:  P l a n s c a l l f o r m a t e r i a l t h a t s t u d e n t s l e a r n b e s t when e x p l a i n e d by o t h e r s ; m a t e r i a l t o be p r e s e n t e d i s v i s u a l r a t h e r than v e r b a l ; t h e major o b j e c t i v e i s o r i e n t a t i o n , m o t i v a t i o n , or enrichment; c o n s i d e r a b l e t e c h n i c a l  C h a m b e r l i n , op. c i t . , 41•  equipment i s e s s e n t i a l f o r r e a c h i n g t h e e d u c a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s ; t e a c h e r t i m e i s an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r ; a n d c h i l d r e n a r e b e i n g t a u g h t t o l i s t e n , t a k e n o t e s , and develop s e l f - c o n t r o l under c e r t a i n conditions.°° Small  groups o f students  studied  i s best  a r e u s u a l l y f o r m e d when t h e m a t e r i a l  learned through  student  interaction:  ideas  a r e t o be e x c h a n g e d o r d i s c u s s e d , a n d t h e g o a l i s t o i m p r o v e personal relations between c e r t a i n instruction  between c e r t a i n  students  situation  lends  m a t e r i a l t o be c o v e r e d working alone  basic unit  practice  itself  can best  and g r o u p s , o r  members.  An  individual  t o s i t u a t i o n s where t h e  be l e a r n e d by t h e s t u d e n t s  and where t h e emphasis i s on r e s e a r c h o r  investigation. the  and s t a f f  students  Although  t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s need s h o u l d  be  f o r d e c i d i n g group assignments, i n a c t u a l  c h i l d r e n are mostly  a s s i g n e d t o t h e t e a m on t h e  69 basis  o f grade.  grouping  I t i s o f v a l u e , t h e r e f o r e , t o examine  procedures  i n a few r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s c h o o l s .  Examples o f Grouping Team T e a c h i n g  and S c h e d u l i n g  i n United  States  Schools  70 Franklin  School:  ment a s a u n i t .  The team t r e a t s But b o t h  class  size  i t s entire  pupil  comple-  and b a s e s o f g r o u p  68 I b i d . , 66. A l s o s e e D a v i d W. Beggs ( e d . ) , Team T e a c h i n g : B o l d New V e n t u r e ( I n d i a n a p o l i s : U n i f i e d C o l l e g e P r e s s I n c . , 1964), 169-174. 6 9  Ibid.,  64.  A n d e r s o n , H a g s t r o m a n d R o b i n s o n , op. c i t . , 7#-  Figure Various Grouping  ztf  1  Assignments  c o m p o s i t i o n may v a r y f r o m c l a s s p e r i o d goal  o f One S t u d e n t  to class period.  i s f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g b a s e d on s p e c i f i c  needs.  The  Thus t h e  t e a m may r e g r o u p a n d s u b d i v i d e t h e p u p i l s , i n much t h e same way t h a t and  the teacher of the self-contained  classroom groups  regroups t h e p u p i l s under h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .  group  o f f r o m 75 t o 250 p u p i l s may meet a s a s i n g l e  The e n t i r e large  group t o hear a l e c t u r e o r s t o r y , t o see a demonstration, o r to  view a movie.  (retarded  Or f r o m t h e l a r g e g r o u p  and a c c e l e r a t e d ) o r a s e l e c t e d  C h a m b e r l i n , op. c i t . , 6 4 .  t h e extremes i n d i v i d u a l o r group  may w i t h d r a w . ability  The p u p i l s may be r e d e p l o y e d  groups o f standard  size  into  f o r follow-up  interest or  activities  a f t e r a l e s s o n f o r a l a r g e group. The terion  f o r instruction  another other  p u p i l s may be g r o u p e d  criterion  subject.  much o f t h e i r teacher  Some p u p i l s w i l l instruction.  f o r n e a r l y every  i n reading  scheme f o r g r o u p i n g . Franklin  o r any  have t h e same t e a c h e r f o r  O t h e r p u p i l s may meet a  different  and d i s a b i l i t i e s ,  i n French,  such as a t a l e n t  o r t h e need f o r r e m e d i a l  o r s p e e c h , a r e a l s o accommodated i n t h e Groups  o f 75 have met r o u t i n e l y  i nthe  S c h o o l , a n d g r o u p s o f 11+0 o r 215 a r e n o t uncommon  at a l l grade l e v e l s . for  i n language a r t s  subject.  Special a b i l i t i e s  treatment  cri-  i n a r i t h m e t i c and on t h e b a s i s o f  f o r instruction  i n music, p r o f i c i e n c y  on t h e b a s i s o f one  reciting,  S m a l l g r o u p s o f 10 o r 12 a r e a l s o u s e d  d i s c u s s i o n and t h o s e  high rate of interaction  a c t i v i t i e s that require a  between p u p i l s o r p u p i l s a n d  teacher. 72 Pittsburgh nature  Plan:  i n which they  need  according t o the of the pupils.  i n l a r g e g r o u p s o f 70 t o 120 f o r s u b j e c t s  c a n make n o r m a l p r o g r e s s , a n d i n s m a l l  5 t o 15 f o r c o n c e n t r a t e d  they  i n size  o f t h e s u b j e c t and t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  Pupils are assigned  of  The g r o u p s v a r y  instruction  groups  i n s u b j e c t s i n which  s p e c i a l h e l p o r have o u t s t a n d i n g a b i l i t y . A pupil 72 " P u p i l s , P a t t e r n s and P o s s i b i l i t i e s : A D e s c r i p t i o n o f Team T e a c h i n g i n P i t t s b u r g h , " 1961 A n n u a l R e p o r t o f t h e Superintendent o f S c h o o l s , P i t t s b u r g h Board o f P u b l i c Education. I n H i l l s o n , Change a n d I n n o v a t i o n . . . ., 193-197.  Large Extension of vocabulary Dramatization Choral speaking Testing  Reading  English  Small Phonics Oral reading  .• • . '' ;  Building of vocabulary  '•" (Vocabulary development). Testing  Introduction of new skills Remedial instruction Presentation' of oral reports Creative writing Reinforcement of skills "Preparation of oral reports Preparation of school newsTesting paper . Testing, :  Spelling  Introduction of new words Written practice Testing  Clarifying .'the • meaning of 'words. Analysis of words Extension of vocabulary for able . .• Reduction of vocabulary for r  slow • Testing Introduction of letter form Improvement of common errors Practice  Handwriting  Social Studies  Science  Arithmetic  Library  Introduction to units of study Clarification of concepts . Concluding activities of unit Testing '  '  . ''  Remedial instruction  Study skills Preparation of project' Research Simplification of material Testing  Introduction to unit of study Demonstration of experiment Concluding activity of unit Testing  Experimentation Recording of experiment Research for reports Reinforcement of basic skills Testing ' *  Introduction of new skills Clarification of concepts Testing  Extension of skills for able Simplification of terms and  Story telling by teacher Presentation of book talks by children Appreciation of poetry Introduction of library skills  Physical Education Art Music  concepts for slow Remedial instruction Testing  1  Individual research Refinement of skills ' Deepening of appreciation Training of pupils as aides  s  Special subject teams are not teams in the technical sense : but they collaborate in planning activities involving all children in a team.  F i g u r e 2 9 73 The P i t t s b u r g h P l a n o f T y p e s o f M a t e r i a l s and A c t i v i t i e s A p p r o p r i a t e E i t h e r t o Large Groups o r t o S m a l l Groups  7 3  Haas,  op. c i t . ,  1 9 0 - 1 9 1  may a  be  assigned  different  at  he  optimum  In the  of  their  may,  i s continually  meets t h e  grade l e v e l  and  upper f i f t h  a r e not  r e c e i v e most  for  and  slower  i n t h e m o r n i n g and  grade l e v e l  meeting with  the  i n the  the  that  every  child  instructional  tion.  Only  the  t e a m u s e s l a r g e and  language a r t s ,  homogeneous g r o u p i n g .  The  heterogeneous grouping. their  ability  and  the  fifth sixth  team  music,  Teams t r y t o p l a n s c h e d u l e s  i s i n a s m a l l group at l e a s t  Dundee S c h o o l T h e  team  afternoon.  are grouped f o r s c i e n c e , a r i t h m e t i c , l i b r a r y , or p h y s i c a l education.  They  large-group  instructional  f o u r t h grade l e v e l  f o r language a r t s  art  and  reading  p u p i l s are  teachers teach  once a  s m a l l group  and  remainder of the  The  a  h e l p , o r a d v a n c e d work.  intermediate grades the  grade l e v e l  they  along  same home-room t e a c h e r .  remedial  p u p i l s on t h e  When s t u d e n t s  is  in  are assigned to  assigned to other teachers  special  In the  e n c o u r a g e d t o move  grades c h i l d r e n  i n s t r u c t i o n from the  instruction,  He  team most competent  b a s i s of reading a b i l i t y ,  h o w e v e r , be  subject.  to  rate.  primary  home-room on t h e  s u b j e c t and  o f group f o r another  by t h e member o f t h e  s u b j e c t and  h i s own  k i n d o f g r o u p f o r one  kind or s i z e  always taught that  t o one  so  day. instruc-  m a t h e m a t i c s have s u b j e c t s have  divided according  according to  to  their  strengths.  ' ^ N i c h o l a s D. P o l a s , The Dynamics o f Team T e a c h i n g (Dubuque, Iowa: W i l l i a m C. Brown Company, 1965), 31-32.  Elmcrest  School:  The s c h o o l u s e s d i a g n o s t i c g r o u p i n g f o r  instruction within i n which grouped  pupils  subject  units,  i n t e r e s t - a c t i v i t y grouping  r e c e i v e l a r g e group  on t h e b a s i s  of interest  instruction  and t h e n a r e  within a particular  a n d h e t e r o g e n e o u s home-room g r o u p i n g w i t h a b r o a d of  unit,  spectrum  abilities. 76  Washington grouped  School:  In t h e Washington  by a b i l i t y ,  random s a m p l e . by a b i l i t y  need, grade and i n t e r e s t ,  At one t i m e , f o r example,  i n arithmetic  by b o t h g r a d e and i n t e r e s t 77 Plan:''  as w e l l  i n spelling  and s o c i a l  I n Englewood,  Florida,  c l a s s e s together are regarded as a l a r g e  initial  of several  daily, jointly  ^ P h i l i p L a m b e r t , "Team T e a c h i n g i n T o d a y ' s C o l l e g e R e c o r d , LXIV ( M a r c h , 19&3), 481.  World,"  comprising the larger  ^Haas, 7  being  occur planned  by a l l c l a s s e s  activity  class  "family" i n a family  Regroupings w i t h i n the nest  d e p e n d i n g upon t h e p a r t i c u l a r  Teaching  s t u d i e s , and  i n science.  g r o u p i n g s a r e q u i t e h e t e r o g e n e o u s but c h i l d r e n  " n e s t " o f rooms.  a s by  g r o u p i n g may be  a n d r e a d i n g , by n e e d  a n d l a n g u a g e , by g r a d e i n penmanship  Englewood  School c h i l d r e n are  family.  op. c i t . , 2 2 .  77 ''John I . G o o d l a n d a n d R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , The Nong r a d e d E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l ( R e v i s e d E d i t i o n ) (New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t , B r a c e and W o r l d I n c . , 1963), 97-96.  3:30SI40  90 Students Large Reading Group (Lower Achievers)  I  CC  CC 90 Students Large Reading Group (Higher Achievers)  3-40- ; MO <'  Small Reading Groups  Small Math. Groups  CC — Counsel Corner ®  1  — Flexible Special Needs Group  Figure Variety  3078  and f l e x i b i l i t y o f G r o u p i n g f o r V a r i o u s Subjects i n t h e B a l d w i n Summer E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l  78 Change,  Richard 192.  Miller  (ed.), Perspective  on  Educational  Estabrook  School:  Grouping  i t y , and i n t e r e s t . are a l l used. groupings involved.  i n t h e s c h o o l i s by need, a b i l -  Large, s m a l l , and medium s i z e d groups  The f o l l o w i n g f i g u r e shows t h e v a r i e t y o f  i n which two p u p i l s B i l l The groups are taught  (B) and Mary (M) a r e  by v a r i o u s members o f t h e  team i n c l u d i n g t h e team l e a d e r ( T L ) , s e n i o r t e a c h e r teacher  (T), teacher a s s i s t a n t  teacher  (RRT)  (ST),  (TA), remedial r e a d i n g  and a i d e s ( A i d e s ) .  DELTA TEAM PUPIL SCHEDULE, MAY 7 Home Room  Language Arts  Time 8:45 • 9:00 •  i  •10:00•10:30-  Handwriting Recess  (25)  T3  TL (30)  (28)  B  TL  -(19)  (16)-  ST2  (116)  (170)  STl Ti  -2:15 •  TL  •2:55 - 3:10 3:15  rs  (29)  • 2:35  STl  ST2  (105)  — s ; —  (30)  (30)  (26) E M  sn  B  (29)  / ,sn  (2i)  B  TO  (170)  M  T5  (170)  M '  BM  Ti  (10)  Ti  (9)  \ ST2 _  TL  n V (20)  T£ (30)  (27)  TZ- (28)  TL  (12)  M  (18)  B  Wl  ST2  (80)  •1:45  M  -Trih B Aides (170)  • 1:15 •  (61)  (10)  (32)  Lunch  Science  To  sn „ (18) B  •12:15 •  Social Studies  ST2  M  (31)  M  (30)  Spelling  ,(30)  Ti  ST2  (31)  (19) I  B Aides  (34)  To  (25)  TZ  •11:45 •  160  120  Ti (25)  |  Ti  T3 (35)  •10:55' • 11:15-  Mathematics  100  40  20  ST1 (26) TL I ST1 (9)4- -(16)  Ti  5T5  ^(25)  (31)  T3 (33)  ST2  M (30)  7"  F i g u r e 31^° A Team Schedule  a t Estabrook  School  79 ' M e d i l l B a i r and R i c h a r d G. Woodward, Team Teachi n g i n A c t i o n (Boston: Houghton, M i f f l i n Company, 1964), 155-178. °Ibid.,156.  Examples o f Grouping Team T e a c h i n g  and  53  percent  teachers  schools surveyed  f o r the  of the  entire  day.  said  afternoon.  The  i n the  teams o f 12  or 9 percent  approximately devoted  p u p i l s were a s s i g n e d  f a c t o r was teachers  o r 26  o r 10  or  Nineteen  period daily  was  percent  of the  teachers.  team s t u d e n t s v a r i e d .  56 p e r c e n t ,  indicated  o r 23  percent  20 t e a c h e r s  i t was  reported  said  m u s i c and  percent  i t was  age;  random s e l e c t i o n ;  i t t o be  on t h e  Flexible  grouping  g r o u p i n s t r u c t i o n was art.  language a r t s ,  s a i d the of the  s t a t e d i t t o be t h e  o r 14  said 16  and  b a s i s of t e s t was  mainly  Some t e a c h e r s  pupil;  o r 12  in social  Large  studies, science,  reported that they  p h y s i c a l education,  percent  ability.  u s e d by most t e a m s .  used  20  percent  o r 11  measured  32  reading  ability;  teachers  as  basic  pupils'  i t was  teachers 15  that  b a s i s of grade  of the teachers level  only  for  t o t h e teams on t h e  percent  Six  team t a u g h t  for selecting  the g e n e r a l achievement  other teachers said  14  One  or  t o team t e a c h i n g  O t h e r b a s e s f o r team a s s i g n m e n t were r e p o r t e d  f o l l o w s : 37  level;  case.  of the t e a c h e r s .  p e r i o d s p e r day.  m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s , 80  level.  devoted  stated that t h e i r  b a s i c reasons  employed  Seventy-five teachers  m o r n i n g was  t o team t e a c h i n g by The  The  percent two  by t h e a u t h o r  t h a t t h e y u s e d team t e a c h i n g  i n the  o r 14  Columbia  sample r e p o r t e d t h i s t o be t h e  or 4 percent  teachers  in British  Schools  Most o f t h e team t e a c h i n g  Scheduling  used  i t in  arithmetic, creative  w r i t i n g , h e a l t h and F r e n c h .  D a i l y meetings o f t h e l a r g e  g r o u p were h e l d by t h e teams o f 7 3 o r 5 1 p e r c e n t teachers.  Thirty-seven teachers  u l e d meetings.  Sixteen teachers  l a r g e g r o u p s met t w i c e a week. had  or 26 percent  h e l d unsched-  or 12 percent  said  met w i t h  used  s c i e n c e , h e a l t h , French,  used  cent  of the time.  or 31 percent  ability,  level,  random s e l e c t i o n  ment.  Most t e a c h e r s  and need.  science.  said  that  mately  used  that  i t 25 per-  or 12 percent  o f the time.  reported  Students  Other groupings  Some t e a c h e r s  50 percent  said  grade  changed  instruction  arithmetic, social  studies  a l s o used i t i n a r t , h e a l t h , Forty-six teachers study  of the i n s t r u c t i o n a l  or 32 percent  used  as t h e b a s i s f o r a s s i g n -  Individualized  reported that individualized  teachers  said  of the time.  s m a l l g r o u p s were  i n language a r t s ,  music and p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n . percent  s a i d they  and i n t e r e s t  o r when n e c e s s a r y .  was u s e d m a i n l y and  studies,  a s s i g n e d t o s m a l l g r o u p s on t h e b a s i s o f l e a r n i n g  difficulties,  frequently  50 percent  Seventeen t e a c h e r s  s m a l l g r o u p s t o be u s e d 7 5 p e r c e n t were m a i n l y  i t i n social  57 o r 4 0 p e r c e n t ,  s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n  Forty-four teachers  group  a r t , m u s i c and p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n .  m a j o r i t y o f team t e a c h e r s ,  they  Small  i n language a r t s and a r i t h m e t i c .  Some t e a c h e r s , however, a l s o u s e d  The  a week a n d 5 t e a c h e r s  l a r g e g r o u p s once a week.  i n s t r u c t i o n was m a i n l y  their  or 5 percent  Seven t e a c h e r s  l a r g e g r o u p s t h a t met t h r e e t i m e s  or 4 percent  of the  i t was u s e d  or 33  was u s e d  time.  approxi-  Forty-five  25 percent  of the  time.  The  percent no  use  same number o f t e a c h e r s  of the time.  With these examine a few Eagle  facts  and  ren are grouped mainly  School:  Eagle  Grades 1  individualized according to  many o f t h e  nated.  divisions  On  -4. emphasizes  instruction.  interest  and  need.  between s u b j e c t s have been  elimi-  some d a y s t h e y  3 plan t h e i r  own  include specific  more immature p u p i l s p l a n u n d e r t h e some c h o i c e o f a c t i v i t y  "work t i m e "  children  read, prepare  o f equipment and  are  individually  of  the  day  out  i s spent  experiences, oral  French  H a r b o u r may 1.  Small  teacher  of a  the  teacher  During  the  or w r i t t e n r e p o r t s ,  materials.  These  or i n small groups.  activities The  rest  i n l a r g e or s m a l l groups f o r language  experimental  science units,  or p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n . be  direction  oral  programme  Some o f  i s always allowed.  using a variety carried  Child-  spread  a s s i g n m e n t s o r p l a n t o work on n e e d e d s k i l l s .  but  schools.  has  C h i l d r e n i n G r a d e s 2 and  each morning.  to  H a r b o u r S c h o o l , West  I n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n , w h i c h began i n l a n g u a g e a r t s , and  reported  practices in specific  i t s k i n d e r g a r t e n and  progress  5 percent  i n mind, i t i s o f i n t e r e s t  of the grouping  Vancouver, with  or  75  used  instruction.  Harbour Elementary  continuous  6 teachers  Only  of i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  s t a t e d i t was  c r e a t i v e drama,  A student's  day  at  Eagle  summarized a s f o l l o w s :  Group A c t i v i t i e s  (2-10  (a) T e a c h e r d i r e c t e d - common i n t e r e s t s - strengthening s k i l l s  students) (b)  Pupil  organized  - research - p r e p a r a t i o n of r e p o r t s  -  expanding improving  concepts study h a b i t s  - experimentation - l e a r n i n g games - preparation of plays  - literary appreciation 2.  Large  Group  (a) Up 3.  t o 30  (b)  students  discussions s h a r i n g time o r a l French m u s i c and a r t a c t i v i t i e s physical education excursions  Independent -  Activities Up  t o 90  students  -  opening e x e r c i s e s PE a c t i v i t i e s music f i l m s t r i p o r movies r e s o u r c e speakers from t h e community - excursions  Activities  r e a d i n g f o r enjoyment researching p r e p a r i n g o r a l or w r i t t e n r e p o r t s viewing f i l m s t r i p s u s i n g programmed m a t e r i a l s creative writing experimenting strengthening s k i l l s  .=  Figure The  Percentage  Teacher and 1 pupil  32  o f Time D e v o t e d t o V a r i o u s at Eagle Harbour School  Groupings  so  C l e v e l a n d Elementary ver,  School:  C l e v e l a n d S c h o o l , North Vancou-  e v o l v e d an u n u s u a l g r o u p i n g scheme f o r i t s team o f 92  Grade 7 s t u d e n t s .  D u r i n g the y e a r 1967-1968 t h e  were d i v i d e d h e t e r o g e n e o u s l y 10 each.  i n t o 9 teams o f  approximately  Each team had 1 l e a d e r of t o p a b i l i t y .  had i t s own  Each team  time t a b l e f o r t h e week and the student l e a d e r  h e l p e d t o g u i d e h i s group t h r o u g h were f u l l y  students  each p e r i o d .  The  d e p a r t m e n t a l i z e d so t h a t at a l l t i m e s 9  proceeded s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . t o 6 t i m e s per week.  teachers activities  Each group met w i t h a t e a c h e r 4  The time t a b l e a l l o w e d f o r t h e t e a c h i n g  o f 10, 20, 30 o r 90 p u p i l s by one t e a c h e r . were most f r e q u e n t l y used.  S m a l l groups  Superior students g e n e r a l l y  worked on c o n t r a c t e d assignments w i t h h e l p when needed. Study c a r r e l s were used f o r independent work. were r e v i s e d each week.  Time t a b l e s  An example of t h i s team's s c h e d u l i n g  i s g i v e n on t h e n e x t page. Alwin Holland School:  A l w i n H o l l a n d S c h o o l , F o r t S t . John,  r e p o r t e d a v a r i e t y of g r o u p i n g s b e i n g used i n 1967-1968.  In  t h e open a r e a Premarium Team,where 150 Grade 1 and 2 p u p i l s were e n r o l l e d , i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n was  emphasized.  P u p i l s m a i n l y worked i n s m a l l groups of 2 t o 6 w i t h t h e i r desks c l u s t e r e d t o g e t h e r . the a c t i v i t i e s  There were g r e a t v a r i a t i o n s i n  p r o c e e d i n g a t one t i m e .  The l e a r n i n g t a s k s  o f each group, however, were seen as common o b j e c t i v e s . t h e ADP  In  ( A p p r o p r i a t e Placement D i v i s i o n ) Team, p u p i l s were  s e l e c t e d m a i n l y on t h e b a s i s o f r e t a r d a t i o n i n r e a d i n g .  A  MONDAY OPENING EXERCISES  •rt M CD  1.  Spell(A)  Spell(A)  LA(E)  LA  Spell(A)  Spell(A)  Spell(A)  Spell(A)  Spell(A)  2.  SS(E)  SS(F)  LA Spell(A)  SS  Sc(F)  LA(C)  Sc(Sr)  LA(C)  LA( A)  3.  Math  Math  Math  Math  Math  Math  Math  Math  Math  4.  Sc(E)  Sc(Sr)  Sc(B)  Sc  SS(A)  LA(E)  LA(C)  SS(E)  LA(C)  5.  Art  LA(E)  Art  LA(C)  LA(C)  SS  Art  LA( A)  Sc(Sr)  6.  Art  LA(B)  Art  LA(E)  LA( A)  Sc(F)  Art  Sc(Sr)  SS(F)  7.  Art  PE  Music  PE  Music  PE  Music  Music  Music  7  8  9  1  2  3  4  5 Pupil  A - Study Area B - Work Area C - C l a s s Area (22)  6  Teams  D - C l a s s Area (11) E - L i s t e n i n g Centre F - Film Strip Projector  G - E i g h t Study C a r r e l s H - Resource Centre  F i g u r e 33 Team Time Table a t C l e v e l a n d  School  oa  M  m i n o r i t y were a l s o  significantly  deficient  i n arithmetic.  G r o u p s w e r e , t h e r e f o r e , f o r m e d on t h e b a s i s o f a c h i e v e m e n t in  a r i t h m e t i c and r e a d i n g .  ized  Some p u p i l s were on  programmes.  Alexander  Elementary  Alexander  School, Kitimat, t r i e s  S o c i a l grouping home-rooms.  art,  School:  The I n t e r m e d i a t e  Team a t  t o use a v a r i e t y  of group-  I n t h e y e a r 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 7 1 t h e team h a d 9 5 y e a r  ings.  for  individual-  was u s e d  and 3 a b i l i t y  music and p h y s i c a l  Social  t o d i v i d e t h e p u p i l s among t h r e e  The c h i l d r e n were d i v i d e d  language a r t s  into  5 ability  groups  groups f o r a r i t h m e t i c .  For  e d u c a t i o n p u p i l s were g r o u p e d by s e x .  s t u d i e s and s c i e n c e were t a u g h t  groups with  4 students.  t o t h e home-room  each t e a c h e r t e a c h i n g o n e - t h i r d o f t h e m a t e r i a l  three times.  The a i m o f t h e team was t o a c h i e v e  small  ible  In language a r t s ,  teachers  groups.  f o r example, two  were e a c h r e s p o n s i b l e f o r two g r o u p s , had  a remedial group o n l y .  w o u l d work  independently  s t r u c t i o n was  found  showing o f f i l m s . percent  time  estimated  for individualized  f o r s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n  Gordon Park Elementary River,  i n the l i b r a r y .  The t e a c h e r s  f o r l a r g e group  teacher  F r e q u e n t l y one o f t h e two g r o u p s Large  group i n -  t o be most u n s u c c e s s f u l e x c e p t  o f the time  the time  while the t h i r d  flex-  f o r the  t h a t they used  75  25 percent  of  study,  and 5 p e r c e n t  of the  instruction.  School:  Gordon Park S c h o o l ,  reported the f o l l o w i n g types  of grouping  Powell  i n 1970-1971.  The 3 8 6 p u p i l s i n t h e s c h o o l were a s s i g n e d t o one o f f i v e teams m a i n l y on t h e b a s i s o f age and grade l e v e l . use i n d i v i d u a l i z e d s t u d y f o r language a r t s .  A l l teams  When s m a l l  g r o u p i n g i s done i n t h i s s u b j e c t i t i s on t h e b a s i s o f "independence."  The s c h o o l b u l l e t i n makes t h e f o l l o w i n g  recommendations: 1.  Recommend t h a t you group a c c o r d i n g t o independence i n language a r t s r a t h e r t h a n  ability.  2.  C a p i t a l i z e on t h o s e who do not work i n d e p e n d e n t l y .  3.  Group so t h a t you have some independent independent  workers,  workers and dependent workers  semi-  i n each team.  Large group i n s t r u c t i o n i n a l l teams i s m a i n l y used f o r music, p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n , a r t , s c i e n c e and s o c i a l s t u d i e s . A r i t h m e t i c i s t a u g h t i n s m a l l groups.  S m a l l groups a r e  changed f r e q u e n t l y a c c o r d i n g t o need and i n t e r e s t . v a r y i n s i z e from 5-20 p u p i l s .  Teachers  They  reported that large  group i n s t r u c t i o n was used about 10 percent o f t h e t i m e , s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n 60 p e r c e n t o f t h e t i m e , and i n d i v i d u a l i z e d study 3 0 percent of the time. A r t h u r Stevenson  Elementary  School:  The g r o u p i n g and  s c h e d u l i n g o f t h e t h i r d and f o u r t h y e a r team a t A r t h u r Stevenson  S c h o o l , Westsyde, was v e r y f l e x i b l e .  During t h e  y e a r 1969-1970, 135 s t u d e n t s were a s s i g n e d t o t h e 4 t e a c h e r team on t h e b a s i s o f age and r e a d i n g a b i l i t y . s t u d y was used about 60 p e r c e n t o f t h e t i m e .  Individualized S m a l l group  i n s t r u c t i o n was used f o r about 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e t i m e . groups v a r i e d i n s i z e from 5-10 p u p i l s and were used i n  These  reading,  a r i t h m e t i c and  i n s t r u c t i o n was  creative writing.  used f o r 20 percent  50-65 p u p i l s i n the  group.  The  Large  of the  group  time with  team f o u n d t h i s  about  type  of  grouping u s e f u l f o r music, p h y s i c a l education,  health,  phonics,  G r o u p s were  c u r s i v e w r i t i n g , a r t and  arithmetic.  c h a n g e d f o r each s u b j e c t  daily.  c h a n g e s were made on t h e  b a s i s of t e s t  or  interest.  A pupil could,  next  t h a t he  day.  I t was  The  Spirit  off.  time t a b l e supervised conducted opening  one  day  The  groups,  results,  social  in a  reading.  the  different  I t was  also  teachers  copies, that  changed  could  exit  of the  top  be  of  the  children,  e x e r c i s e s , made announcements and A typical  their  easily  p e r s o n named a t t h e  week.  the  team i s shown b e l o w .  as t h e  e n t r a n c e and  movements f o r one  needs  another group of c h i l d r e n  t o day  duplicated  i n , were r u n  periodic  with  and  t i m e t a b l e u s e d by  a l t e r e d f r o m day  programme. filled  w o u l d be  subject  t h e r e f o r e , be  group f o r a r i t h m e t i c , s c i e n c e likely  Within  conducted  time t a b l e  for  i s outlined.  Monday, Date: S u p e r v i s i o n , Name: 9 : 0 0 O p e n i n g E x e r c i s e s (1 t e a c h e r , r e s t f r e e ) 9 : 1 0 O r a l F r e n c h — L a r g e Group (1 t e a c h e r , r e s t f r e e ) 9 : 2 0 Language A r t s — L a r g e G r o u p (2 t e a c h e r s , 2 f r e e ) 9 : 3 0 Language A r t s — S m a l l G r o u p s — I n d i v i d u a l Work t e a c h e r s , parent aides supervise groups, or read with c h i l d r e n or mark). Some p u p i l s go t o t h e remedial consultant. 1 0 : 3 0 Recess 1 0 : 4 5 A r i t h m e t i c — L a r g e G r o u p s (2 t e a c h e r s , r e s t f r e e ) 1 1 : 0 0 A r i t h m e t i c — S m a l l Groups ] — I n d i v i d u a l Work t e a c n e r s , parent a i d e s ; 1 1 : 3 0 P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n — G i r l s (1 t e a c h e r ) M u s i c — B o y s (1 t e a c h e r , 2 f r e e ) t  e  a  c  h  e  a  c  h  e  r  s  r  s  D  a  r  e  r  e  n  t  n  t  a  i  d  1 4  t  1 4  e  D  a  a  i  d  e  s  p  s  1 2 : 0 0 Lunch 1 : 0 0 S o c i a l S t u d i e s — L a r g e G r o u p s (1 t e a c h e r ) — S m a l l G r o u p s (3 t e a c h e r s and a i d e s ) 2 : 0 0 A r t — W h o l e c l a s s (3 t e a c h e r s , 1 f r e e ) 2 : 5 0 M u s i c — G i r l s (1 t e a c h e r ) P h y s i c a l Education--Boys (1 t e a c h e r , 2 f r e e ) F r a s e r Lake Elementary School  reported a  students  Junior-Secondary  team  i n 1968-1969.  o f 100  s e c o n d and  and  individual  one  study  teacher  third  aide.  were u s e d .  were d i v i d e d i n t o t e n g r o u p s o f 10-12 varied  Fraser  students.  a c c o r d i n g t o s u b j e c t a r e a , need, i n t e r e s t  A typical  day's s c h e d u l e  Teacher X  Teacher Y  Teacher  Roll  Roll  Simon  Large  The  Lake  year  It included three teachers, a  Fraser U n i v e r s i t y student s m a l l g r o u p s and  School:  groups,  students Groups and  ability.  i s shown b e l o w .  Z  Intern  Teacher  Roll  Roll  Aide  9-9:05 Roll  Call  Call  Call  Call  Call  9:05-9:25 Group A Reading  Group B Reading  Gr. D,E,F Creative Writing  Group C Reading  Gr. G,H,I Independent Work (Supervise)  Gr. H I , J Creative Writing  Group F Reading  Group G Reading  Gr. A,B,C Independent Study  9:25-9:45 G r o u p D,E S t o r y Appreciation Introduction to Silent Reading  ;  9:45-10:05 Group H Reading  Group I Reading  Group J Reading  Gr. A,B,C Creative Writing  G r . D,E,F,E Independent Study  Printing Second Year Primary  Individual Instruction  Observing  Organize material f o r Arithmetic  10:05-10:20 Writing T h i r d Year Primary  10:20-10:30 All  t e a c h e r s mark and h e l p  s t u d e n t s complete  reading  work  10:45-1H05 11:05-11:25 Large group l e s s o n on introduction to number sentence  Preparation Time  Guided activity period  Assist i n guided activity  T h i r d Year Primary A r i t h m e t i c work a t rotating stations  10:45-11:25  Set o u t material for Arithmetic activity period Set up new bulletin board  11:25-12 Large group f o r music i n music room  Planning period. Individual instruction g i v e n on some d a y s  Assist with s t u d i e s and materials  1:00-1:20 Group I , J S e t up work on SRA novel Group G,H G r o u p A,F t o library to research story  S e t up NPR Group D,E  Phonics lesson Group C  Supervise Group on listening centre Group  1:20-1:40 Individual Instruction (Remedial)  1:00-34.0  Individual Instruction (Remedial)  Phonics Group B  Group C Set up project  Introduce and show film  Prepare Art materials  Seminar on F i l m Group G  Assist with Art material  1:40-2:00 Planning  Period  2-2:20, 2:20-2:40, 2:40-3:00 Group A Seminar on f i l m  Group D Seminar on f i l m  Group B  Group E  Group H  Group C  Group F  Group  Hillcrest  Art project related to film  Elementary  School:  I n 1967-1968,  C o q u i t l a m , h a d a team o f 73 G r a d e At was  the beginning administered  groups.  was  of test  in  results,  the brightest.  a given length  throughout  These p u p i l s  instruction,  the year.  team a s a w h o l e .  they  of time.  the pupils  t h e team was  The l a r g e s t  into  divided  Language a r t s and a r i t h m e t i c  using these small groups.  School,  Achievement Test  f o r the purpose of d i v i d i n g  On t h e b a s i s  individual  Hillcrest  5 s t u d e n t s and 2 t e a c h e r s .  of the term a Stanford  i n t o t h r e e major groups. taught  I  were  o f the groups  d i d n o t n e e d a s much  c o u l d work f a s t e r Membership  and do more  i n the groups v a r i e d  A l l o t h e r s u b j e c t s were t a u g h t t o t h e  W h i l e one t e a c h e r was  responsible  f o r the  l e s s o n p r e s e n t a t i o n , a l l t e a c h e r s were i n v o l v e d i n t h e follow-up  activities.  follow-up  activity,  varied  and  Elementary  at other times  School:  Lonsdale  the  d i d the  c h i l d r e n was  activities  children.  School,  North  2 teachers  and  t e s t e d at the  8 aides.  beginning  The  were r a r e l y  changed.  7  s t a t i o n s and  different  The  of the  g r o u p s o f 8-12  year  f o l l o w i n g s t a t i o n s were  1.  Listening  divided  These  groups  Wednesday.  used:  Post  2.  Phonics  3.  Reading  4.  Free  5.  L i b r a r y Research  6.  Creative Writing  7.  S.R.A.  Comprehension  Reading  Diiring the year they  and  of  s t u d e n t s worked a t  r o t a t e d e v e r y Monday and  The  Team  Vancouver,  e n t i r e group  7 groups a c c o r d i n g t o reading grade score.  time  same  1970-1971, a Language A r t s Team i n c l u d i n g 70 G r a d e 4  5 pupils,  into  while  t h e whole c l a s s  t o meet t h e n e e d s o f p a r t i c u l a r  Lonsdale had, i n  At t i m e s  the  s t a t i o n s were c h a n g e d so t h a t a t  included novel  d i s c u s s i o n s and  some  research projects.  Planning  To  be  communicate and  s u c c e s s f u l , a t e a c h i n g team must c o l l a b o r a t e , cooperate.  Reports  from s c h o o l s u s i n g  the  c e n t r e around an  joint  opportunity  planning  sessions.  f o r open c o m m u n i c a t i o n and  d e c i s i o n s which are mutually staff.  acceptable  A l l team members s h o u l d  s e s s i o n s r e g a r d l e s s of the strength  Such s e s s i o n s  of the  programme l i e s  operational  t o the  participate  nature  of t h e i r  largely  provide  in  participating planning  duties for  i n the  "the  endeavour  of  8l all  for excellence." Planning  that  o f any  f o r team t e a c h i n g  other teaching  i s no  as f a r as t h e  different  from  b a s i c elements  are  c o n c e r n e d , but i s more complex. I n g l o w p o i n t s out t h a t team t e a c h e r s , o f n e c e s s i t y , have t o o p e r a t e a c r o s s a more e x t e n s i v e r a n g e o f c u r r i c u l u m decision-making t h a n do t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n more c o n v e n t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l arrangements. I n v a r i o u s d e g r e e s t h e y have t o d i s c o v e r the underlying r a t i o n a l e of the curriculum . . . and, b e c a u s e o f t h e s o c i a l - p r o f e s s i o n a l n a t u r e o f a team g r o u p , s e l f - j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f a g i v e n p l a n o f c u r r i c u l u m a c t i o n i s u s u a l l y n o t enough; t h e p l a n more o f t e n t h a n n o t , h a s t o meet t h e c o l l e c t i v e a p p r o v a l o f t h e group.°2 Short-term  and  long-term  I n t e g r a t i o n of separate ject  area  to  decide  who  will  lines,  Furthermore, the  are, therefore,  and  perform efforts  essential.  p r e s e n t a t i o n s , o f t e n c r o s s i n g sub-  i s a must f o r c o o r d i n a t i o n .  t h e what, how actually  planning  The  team  has  when o f p r e s e n t a t i o n s a s w e l l  the  various instructional  o f a p a r t i c u l a r team must  roles. complement  81 Lobb, op.  cit. ,  24.  82 G a i l M. I n g l o w , The Emergent Y o r k : John W i l e y and S o n s , I n c . , i 9 6 0 ) ,  as  i n Curriculum 290.  (New  and  supplement the  instructional  efforts  the  school. Generally  team p l a n n i n g  tends to focus  on  overall  curriculum  d e c i s i o n s , on  scheduling,  discussing  special  problems of students,  ing  student  lessons  progress.  i s done by  each a r e a .  and  on  one  o r two  on  assessing  Detailed planning  of  members who  planning  devices  and  the  i s very  o f new  time-consuming.  As  making  report-  individual  specialize  Shaplin p o i n t s out,  development  teams i n  and  Whenever p o s s i b l e t i m e i s s e t a s i d e  h o u r s f o r team p l a n n i n g . joint  and  of other  in  during  school  however, t h a t  teaching  techniques  a result,  teachers 83  often  become overwhelmed by  E x a m p l e s o f Team P l a n n i n g In the team l e a d e r s coordinates  F r a n k l i n School  school  t h i s g r o u p i n an  for  of the planning  provided  and  responsible  24-  which join for  a l l team members u n d e r t h e senior teacher.  "Team T e a c h i n g . "  three  C l a s s r o o m work i n e a c h  op.  leader-  ."'Time i s f o u n d  opportunities  p r e s e n c e o f s p e c i a l i s t s and  Figure  the  senior teachers  t a k i n g advantage of the  ^Shaplin, See  principal  cabinet  planning.  j o i n t l y by  through the  g 4  The  J  States  administrative cabinet  instructional  team l e a d e r and by  United the  activities.  school-wide curriculum  ship  i n c r e a s e d work l o a d .  i n the  c o n s t i t u t e the  team i s p l a n n e d  the  clerical  c i t . , 70.  o f l a r g e g r o u p l e s s o n s and  the  c r e a t i o n of fewer  groups  85 than  teachers.  v  In the  from r e g u l a r classroom p u p i l s are  duty  i n l a r g e groups.  team a c t i v i t i e s preparing  Klein  such  as  School  daily,  each t e a c h e r  during the time  " T h i s time  setting  up  the  art materials, duplicating  is utilized science  that to  plan  demonstrations,  m a t e r i a l s , or  t h e team i n a c t i o n f o r e v a l u a t i o n o f s p e c i f i c  i s freed  observing  activity  in  86 progress." E s t a b r o o k S c h o o l has l o n g r a n g e and w e e k l y t o t a l - t e a m p l a n n i n g a s w e l l as sub-team p l a n n i n g and 87 individual a formal  planning.  Wheatley  Y o r k , meets  b a s i s t h r e e p e r i o d s a week f o r " o r g a n i z e d  of the teaching procedures, ences,  S c h o o l , New  film  lectures,  s h o w i n g s and  appropriate  planning  arranging f o r laboratory experi-  previewing,  preparing testing  on  planning  l a r g e group  programmes, e v a l u a t i n g  p l a c i n g of p u p i l s ,  and  s t u d y i n g new  and  curriculum  materials. " ^ E x a m p l e s o f Team P l a n n i n g Team p l a n n i n g teams s u r v e y e d  in British  i s an  in British  integral  Columbia.  Columbia part of almost a l l Of t h e  143  teachers  85 A n d e r s o n , H a g s t r o m and  R o b i n s o n , op.  c i t . , 80.  86 Progress  "The K l e i n C o n c e p t f o r Team T e a c h i n g and i n E d u c a t i o n , " op. c i t . , 5. 87 B a i r and Woodward, op. c i t . , 84-104.  Continuous  88 Science  E l i z a b e t h A. S i m e n d i n g e r , "Team T e a c h i n g T e a c h e r , XXXIV ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 7 ) , 50.  in  Science,"  responding,  75 o r  for planning.  55 p e r c e n t  s t a t e d t h a t t h e i r team met  m e e t i n g s were h e l d once a week. reported or two  by  8 or 6 percent  5 percent  said their  team met  p l a n n i n g when n e c e s s a r y . 6 6 p e r c e n t , had school hours. indicated  Sixty-one  school time.  Seven  three times  planning  teachers  a week.  Thirty-  A combination  o r 73 p e r c e n t  teams.  stated this  One t o be  however,  meetings and  during  weekly  plan-  h u n d r e d and so.  The  four  other  o f p l a n n i n g used were: weekly p l a n n i n g , monthly  ning, daily  o r 5& p e r c e n t  teachers planned  p l a n n i n g , and  jointly  percent,  on t h e  by  specialty.  Only  stated this  not  teams t h e  work  Sixty teachers  Only  G e n e r a l l y each t e a c h e r 30 teachers t o be  principal  the  teams o f 2 5 p e r c e n t  i n 19 percent  of the  In j u s t  planning  of the  42  not 14  h i s subject  of the  sample  over h a l f  sessions  t e a c h e r s he  r e p o r t s he  or  or  frequently in  planned  or 21 percent  case.  attended  20 teachers  participated  plan-  was  o t h e r h a n d , s a i d t h a t t h e i r team d i d work j o i n t l y .  main  Eighty-three  reported that classroom  indicated that students  team p l a n n i n g .  by u n i t s .  a l l team members.  plan a l l classroom percent  planning  or  outside  o r 43 p e r c e n t ,  of long-range  for  t e a c h e r s , 94  sessions  were a b l e t o s c h e d u l e  teachers  and  teachers.  teachers  u s e d by most o f t h e  In the  m e e t i n g s were  A m a j o r i t y of the  n i n g was  types  said  s t a t e d t h a t t h e i r teams met  to hold t h e i r  that they  Bi-weekly  of the  o r 23 p e r c e n t  teachers  o r 16 p e r c e n t  Twenty-three teachers  daily  of  the  "sometimes." always  never attended.  attended Most  of  the  team p l a n n i n g  t i m e was  cussing the special  r e p o r t e d as b e i n g  problems of students.  devoted t o  T h i s was  f o l l o w e d by t h e amount o f t i m e d e v o t e d t o o v e r a l l d e c i s i o n s and p u p i l t i m e was  s c h o o l and on t h e weekends.  school,  one team worked  year  closely  with  great  together  but  ficulty  contained  classroom  planning  Within  intermediate  also relieved  they  could plan  for daily redif-  e a c h team some  teacher.  self-  coopera-  of the  The team c h a i r m e n and t h e  of teaching  primary  during  school  Groups o f t e a c h e r s  duties periodically  so t h a t  together.  Kent E l e m e n t a r y  the  planning  e x i s t e d as a  c o o r d i n a t o r s were a b l e t o meet  were  School,  A g a s s i z , had i t s f o u r  r e g u l a r l y i n school time at l e a s t  principal.  quite  e x i s t e d between some o f t h e t e a c h e r s  time through t h e use o f a r e l i e f  meet  except  and v i r t u a l l y  a l l year.  team b u t n o t a l l o f them. and  situation  The f o u r t h team h a d g r e a t  together  this  instructionally  The t h i r d team d i d some team  i n language a r t s . i n planning  planning  but worked  i n s t r u c t i o n a l l y worked i n i s o l a t i o n  grouping  tive  Of t h e f o u r teams a t  A n o t h e r team worked  i n team p l a n n i n g  i n more i s o l a t i o n .  m e e t i n g s were  s c h o o l , a t r e c e s s , a t noon,  i n a total-team  success.  curriculum  concerns.  Kamloops, p l a n n i n g  i n t h e e a r l y morning before  after  all  J o h n Tod S c h o o l ,  closely-  The s m a l l e s t p e r c e n t a g e o f  devoted t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e At  held  evaluation.  dis-  During  these  once a month w i t h t h e  m e e t i n g s t e a c h e r s were  d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s  teams  that affected t h e i r  involved i n teams.  Decisions  that  a f f e c t e d t h e w h o l e s c h o o l had  s t a f f tea held  in  Park S c h o o l ,  s e s s i o n s took a great  Team's t i m e .  Each t e a c h e r  t h e week f o r p l a n n i n g  these that  Courtenay, r e p o r t e d deal  i n the  and  the  the  checking  had  As  c o u l d be  and  partners decide  had  was  s u c c e s s f u l o r i f c h a n g e s were n e c e s s a r y . work l o a d became t o o  teaching  partners  s t u d i e s and students  planning  development  teachers .to  uni>t a p p r o a c h was  on t h e  reflect  on  evening  own  although  team met  hear s u c c e s s f u l teaching  programme  the  o r on weekends.  In  each F r i d a y a f t e r n o o n  techniques  and  year  the  nine  from 2 - 4  p.m.  specific plan  problems,  future  intern  a teacher  or  during  some team members a l s o met  home i n t h e  evening  as  t h i s time. needed at  throughout the  year  The one  co-  discussed  L a r g e - g r o u p a c t i v i t i e s were s u p e r v i s e d aide  social  little'  ventures. and  in  arithmetic  constantly  at  times  necessary  Throughout the  t h e week's work, l o o k  evaluate  Often  r a t e so t h e r e was  o f each p u p i l .  on.  flexibility  generally followed  teachers  so  for  I n l a n g u a g e a r t s and  worked at t h e i r  operative the  t o meet i n t h e  science.  carried  whether the  h e a v y i t was  possible,  partner"  time t o  assignments together  when t h e  team  periods  o f t e n as  "teaching  the  planning, the  free  s e s s i o n s added g r e a t  programmes b e c a u s e t h e  that  Intermediate  open a r e a  p e r i o d s were b a c k e d o f f w i t h day-to-day planning  of the  or p r e p a r a t i o n .  Teachers s t a t e d that these to  the  once a month.  Puntledge planning  a forum at  by  team an  entire  another's  t o d i s c u s s more  team  important  plans  or problems encountered.  m e e t i n g s were a t  least  two  hours  Seymour E l e m e n t a r y planning  and  T h e r e was  Usually  long.  School,  Vancouver, i n d i c a t e d t h a t  evaluation sessions took place  daily  these  c o n s u l t a t i o n and  at  least  frequently.  one  lengthy  meeting  a week. At G o r d o n P a r k S c h o o l , school  meets f o r t w e n t y m i n u t e s e v e r y  programmes t h r o u g h o u t the  Powell  three  the  intermediate  school.  R i v e r , the two  The  whole  weeks t o  two  coordinate  p r i m a r y teams  teams meet s e p a r a t e l y w i t h  their  o r d i n a t o r s once a week t o p l a n programmes f o r t h e i r Teams meet d a i l y t o  coordinate  the  All  p u p i l s i n a team u s u a l l y t a k e  art  at the  one  team member p l a n s  p l a n and aim  same t i m e .  teach  f o r the  every  child."  only general the next  Since  lessons  Individual teachers  one  specific  l e s s o n o u t l i n e s are  are  be  one  but  suggested  suitable for  prepared  time t a b l e d .  and  usually  The  programme can schedules  pod.  activities.  these  p h y s i c a l education.  i s : "No  co-  studies, science  teach  Team E t i m e t a b l e f o r p u p i l s i n y e a r  An  daily  example  i s given  on  of the  page.  School  Facilities  Space Requirement Any the  them.  day's  social  A l l teachers  m u s i c and  school  next  and  and  f o r Team  plan that  curriculum  as  Equipment Teaching  a f f e c t s the  team t e a c h i n g  pupil-teacher ratio  does i s v e r y  and  much d e p e n d e n t  Time  Monday  9:009:15  Tuesday  Wednesday Opening  9:15  Thursday  Friday  Exercises  LANGUAGE ARTS  10:30  RECESS  10:45 11:05  SCIENCE  ARITHMETIC  11:0511:20  PRINTING  11:2012:00  MUSIC  NOON HOUR  1:001:20  STORY AND SHARING TIME  1:201:45 1:452:30 3:00  LANGUAGE ARTS  P.E. Art  S c i e n c e and ^*-~A related activities  . , . Social c*. Studies  ART  P.E.  P.E. Art  F i g u r e 34 Time T a b l e  f o r Team E Gordon P a r k E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l ,  1970-1971  designed fact, into  t o meet t h e  some e d u c a t o r s a team t e a c h i n g  available. existing will not  r e q u i r e m e n t s o f team t e a c h i n g . b e l i e v e i t i s best programme u n t i l  M i t c h e l l states that  be  as good as  which wish to  programmes o f  modifying  entry  adequate f a c i l i t i e s  "schools  structures f o r cooperative  h a v e some d i f f i c u l t y  t o postpone  In  them.  a b u i l d i n g designed  The  are use  instruction  results  will  f r o m s c r a t c h , but i t 89  is  p o s s i b l e t o operate  "although schools  an  s u c h programmes."  unfavourable  environment  Lobb adds t h a t  does n o t  prevent  f r o m b e c o m i n g i n v o l v e d i n team t e a c h i n g  i t can  lead  on to  serious  frustration."  When c o n s t r u c t i n g o r a l t e r i n g teaching tion  two  distinctive  must be  recognized.  a b u i l d i n g f o r team  f e a t u r e s of t h i s type 91 First,  g r o u p p u p i l s f r e q u e n t l y must be  the  and  space f o r the  considered.  study.  building  individual  Furthermore, i f the  and  organiza-  n e e d t o g r o u p and  e m p h a s i s on more e f f e c t i v e u t i l i z a t i o n sitates  of  Second,  of personnel  the  team t o  the neces-  confer,  programme i s t o shape  rather than v i c e versa,  s p a c e must be  re-  plan  the  flexible—  e x p a n s i b l e , c o n v e r t i b l e , v e r s a t i l e and m a l l e a b l e . B a i r and 89 nal M i t c ht e e al cl h, i n"gH o wu is li ln g beC o o Woodward s t^aD to e td h a tP. team f pa ec ri al ti itvaet e d T eiafc h i n g P r o g r a m s , " The N a t i o n a l E l e m e n t a r y P r i n c i p a l , X L I V (January,  1 9 6 5 ) , 52. 90  91  L o b b , op. c i t . , 12. B a i r and Woodward, op.  cit. ,  ,  36.  - accommodate g r o u p s o f v a r i o u s s i z e s , f r o m one o r two p u p i l s t o s e v e r a l hundred; - p e r m i t f r e q u e n t change o f g r o u p s i z e w i t h minimum l o s s o f t i m e between i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s ; - p r o v i d e a "home b a s e " f o r e a c h p u p i l t o s t u d y , f o r s t o r a g e o f p e r s o n a l s u p p l i e s and b o o k s ; - p r o v i d e a "home b a s e " f o r e a c h t e a c h e r where he c a n s t u d y , p l a n , c o n f e r , and d e v e l o p i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s a l o n e , i n s m a l l g r o u p s , and w i t h t o t a l t earns; - make i m m e d i a t e l y a v a i l a b l e w h a t e v e r t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g a i d s may be r e q u i r e d i n any s p a c e by t e a c h e r s o r pupils; - p r o v i d e an i n s t r u c t i o n a l r e s o u r c e c e n t r e f o r t e a c h e r s and p u p i l s , i n c l u d i n g t h e l a t e s t t e c h n o l o g y a n d developments f a c i l i t a t i n g independent and s m a l l group study; - allow f o r t h e proper a c c o u s t i c a l s o l u t i o n o f t h e problems o f s e p a r a t i o n o f sound and o f adequate s o u n d d i s t r i b u t i o n and i n t e n s i t y . 9 2 These concepts  a r e summarized by C h a m b e r l i n  i n the following  figure. Specialized istics. ing  Large  team t e a c h i n g s p a c e h a s c e r t a i n  group i n s t r u c t i o n  from s e v e r a l classrooms  whole s c h o o l .  made f o r p r o p e r  vision,  floors  and some a r e n o t .  sight  lines  demonstrations  Classrooms of conventional s i z e instructional  rang-  or f l a t  floors;  Provisions are usually  and c o r r e c t a c o u s t i c a l and  conditions f o r a l l types  lectures,  have c a p a c i t i e s  o f p u p i l s t o t h e t o t a l team o r  They may have t i e r e d  some a r e d i v i s i b l e  ventilation  areas  character-  of projection, t e l e -  and p a n e l d i s c u s s i o n s . serve  25 t o 35 p u p i l s f o r  p u r p o s e s a n d i n some c a s e s  a s home b a s e .  They  I b i d . , 38-39A l s o s e e C y r i l G. S a r g e n t , "The O r g a n i z a t i o n o f S p a c e , " i n S h a p l i n and O l d s , op. c i t , , 216222.  Flexible Teoching Areos  Figure Flexible  are  frequently  use  f o r s m a l l group  35^  Teaching  Areas  equipped w i t h movable d i v i d e r s t o p e r m i t  movable f u r n i t u r e  seminar  and  activities.  blackboards.  Most r e c e n t  s c h o o l s have c r e a t e d permanent  seminar  in  and  size  200  t o 400  square f e e t  f u n c t i o n s as a r t , s c i e n c e , r e h e a r s a l s and obtained  individual  and  team  independent  a c h i e v e d t h r o u g h e f f e c t i v e use __  of large  range  specialized music  Often seminar  Space  have teaching  These  counselling, testing,  o t h e r space.  counselling  rooms.  s e r v e such  remedial i n s t r u c t i o n .  by d i v i d i n g  They u s u a l l y  their  space i s  providing f o r  s t u d y has  been  s p a c e , movable  furniture of both tapes,  and  carrels.  individual  and  I t u s u a l l y i n c l u d e s the s m a l l group l i s t e n i n g  records, f i l m s t r i p s ,  materials.  The  c o n t a i n s a l l a u d i o - v i s u a l a i d s and It  also includes individual  and  c a r t r i d g e f i l m s and  i n s t r u c t i o n a l media c e n t r e  study  group l i s t e n i n g ,  r e c o r d i n g and  group conference  space;  storage  previewing  viewing  school library.  individual stations;  s p a c e ; and  of  programmed  of the  a good s c h o o l spaces;  possibility  and small  central control 95  room f o r m e c h a n i c a l and office  provides  desks, storage  electronic  equipment.  a home base f o r t e a c h e r s .  The  It includes  space, s u p p l i e s , m a t e r i a l s , b u l l e t i n  B a i r and  Woodward, op.  cit. ,  team  boards  .  95 " T o r and e x c e l l e n t d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e m e d i a c e n t r e see C h a m b e r l i n , op. c i t . , 83-91.  instructional  Figure Flowing  and  files.  ials,  Wells Elementary School, Tucson, Arizona  Here t e a c h e r s , a s  o r as a t o t a l  37  team, c a r r y on  individuals,  In t h e  Flowing  planning  c e n t r e forms the  groups,  planning, preparation of  evaluation, conferring with  pupils.  i n small  Wells  teachers, parents  Elementary  School  the  materand  team  hub.  96 A r t h u r W. L a l i m e , " E l e m e n t a r y Team T e a c h i n g , " A u d i o v i s u a l I n s t r u c t i o n ,  541.  School Designed f o r V I I ( O c t o b e r , 1962),  Figure Chartwell  British  Elementary  3  8  9  7  S c h o o l , West  Vancouver  " ' " F a s h i o n e d f o r Freedom: C h a r t w e l l C o l u m b i a S c h o o l T r u s t e e , XXIV, No. 4  School," (  1  9  6  8  )  ,  The 7 3 -  98 Naramake S c h o o l : is  7  a single level  along  one s i d e  administrative cafeteria,  Naramake S c h o o l building with  of a corridor.  i n Norwalk,  three  instructional clusters  On t h e o p p o s i t e  s u i t e , the l i b r a r y  and t h e u s u a l s e r v i c e  and  Connecticut,  side  are the  auditorium-gymnasium-  facilities.  At one end a r e  INSTRUCTIONAL AREA B  rTeacherl Speciall , Prep Instr 1  tr|l  1  1 II 1  1  T  m  LIBRARY RESOURCE CENTER  AUDITORIUM GYMNASIUM CAFETERIA  4  Inst Sto  "99  Figure 3 9 Floor  P l a n o f Naramake E l e m e n t a r y Norwalk, C o n n e c t i c u t  School,  98 op.  Arthur c i t . , 52.  Lalime,  op. c i t . , a l s o  s e e B a i r and Woodward,  two  k i n d e r g a r t e n rooms.  each w i t h  six irregular  p r e p a r a t i o n a r e a , and of the  The  shaped c l a s s r o o m s ,  provides  a small  a small special-instruction  r e g u l a r classrooms  facilities  c l u s t e r arrangement  f o r a r t , while  i s equipped another  a t one  i s equipped  end  area. with  o f rooms i s a m o v a b l e p a r t i t i o n .  classroom  has  o v e r h e a d p r o j e c t o r and  Five-foot  rear screen  behind  s u r f a c e s i n two  one  of the  them a m o t i o n p i c t u r e p r o j e c t o r , s l i d e  Figure Instructional  special  Each  pull-down  screen.  classrooms  house  p r o j e c t o r and  .100  40  C l u s t e r a t Naramake E l e m e n t a r y Norwalk, C o n n e c t i c u t  B a i r and  One  for science.  Between e a c h p a i r one  teacher-  Woodward, op. c i t .  School,  filmstrip booths  projector.  that  can  be  Each c l u s t e r  converted into  A science demonstration from  table  a l s o has  72 audio t e a c h i n g  r e g u l a r classroom  i n each  cluster  desks.  can be  moved  room t o room.  Estabrook  School: ^  The  1  Estabrook  School i n Lexington,  Massachusettes,  i s a one-level, slanted  The  T c o n t a i n s t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a r e a , team  base o f the  offices  and  work a r e a , a r e s o u r c e  w i t h a stage, t h r e e double m o v a b l e d i v i d e r s , and tiered  a kitchen.  divided  on  each  in thirds  isolation.  room.  by  of the  Other  multi-purpose by  o f which have  To  rooms.  Two  regular can  p a r t i t i o n s which provide only  types  spaces,  eight  T is a  i t s r e a r are  l a r g e group area  Beyond t h e s e rooms a r e  classrooms.  maximum u s e  side  playroom  At t h e a p e x o f t h e  s i x s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n  classrooms  building.  centre, a large  c l a s s r o o m s , two  l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n  located  T-shaped  be visual  regular sized  of p r o v i s i o n s are extra conduits,  e q u i p m e n t and  different-sized  furniture to  permit  pupils.  102 Dundee S c h o o l : is the  a three-level spaces  The  Dundee S c h o o l  structure.  i s devoted 1 0 1  S h a p l i n and  intermediate l e v e l  f o r large-group a c t i v i t i e s  t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s u i t e , and level  The  i n Greenwich, C o n n e c t i c u t ,  as w e l l  as t h e  the gym-cafeteria.  t o r a t h e r c o n v e n t i o n a l spaces  B a i r and Woodward, o p . c i t . , O l d s , op. c i t . , 2 3 4 - 2 3 7 . B a i r and Woodward, op.  cit.,  houses  51-52. 50-51.  The  library, lower  for kinderAlso  see  Figure Floor  41  1 0 3  Plan o f Joseph Estabrook Elementary Lexington, Massachusettes  School  F i g u r e 42  *  F l o o r P l a n o f Dundee E l e m e n t a r y Greenwich, Connecticut  garten gradual  and  first-grade  c h i l d r e n , with the  i n t r o d u c t i o n . o f simple  houses the  team h e a d q u a r t e r s  rooms, two  o f them e q u i p p e d  side two  of t h i s  with  four adjacent carrels.  can  be  divided in half,  m o v a b l e w a l l s p e r m i t t i n g them t o be  ties  The  upper  Located  areas.  The  f o r viewing  and  open—and  Chamberlin,  op.  102.  include  group either  groups,  combined t o f o r m  closed—circuit cit.,  on  s i x of which  audio-visual f a c i l i t i e s  for  level  small  a r e a a r e room f o r s e v e n m e d i u m - s i z e d  of which  larger  possibility  grouping.  and  School,  have three  facili-  television  in  every  area.  F u r n i t u r e d e s i g n and wall-hung  tackboards,  and pegboards f a c i l i t a t e  chalkboards,  maximum  utility.  105 Nelson in  S. D i l w o r t h  San J o s e ,  School:  California,  y  The D i l w o r t h E l e m e n t a r y  comprehends f i v e  separate  School  units.  They a r e : k i n d e r g a r t e n s u i t e ,  two c l a s s r o o m  use  administration-library-Big  a r e a , and t h e c o m b i n a t i o n  Room.  Open c o v e r e d  walkways accommodate p u p i l  between t h e v a r i o u s s e c t i o n s . is  convertible.  into  Space t h r o u g h o u t  Of t h e 20 c l a s s r o o m s ,  f o u r t e a c h i n g spaces  tracting  f o r from  rooms w i t h w h i c h t h e y may be j o i n e d .  arena  and t h e m u l t i - u s e  that  rooms. and  I t h a s no p a r t i t i o n s carpeted.  to the l i b r a r y ,  material  storage, i s used  activity  50 t o 80 p u p i l s by r e Various  larger  have a d j o i n i n g s m a l l e r Examples a r e t h e  The B i g Room i s a t e a c h i n g  instructional  area  or other v i s u a l  sound  The s c h o o l ' s r e s o u r c e  adjacent  Additional  the buildings  i s t h e space e q u i v a l e n t o f f o u r r e g u l a r - s i z e d  i s fully  social  area.  circulation  e i g h t c a n be c h a n g e d  l i g h t w e i g h t movable p a r t i t i o n s .  rooms a t t h e c e n t r e o f t h e b u i l d i n g  library  wings, t h e m u l t i -  barriers,  centre, located  a u d i o - v i s u a l room, a n d i n s t r u c t i o n a l f o r s m a l l group  instruction.  space i s a v a i l a b l e  o f the covered  court.  i n t h e sunken  This i s also the school's  centre. 105  " C a l i f o r n i a E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l D r o p s o u t Nont e a c h i n g S p a c e , " The N a t i o n ' s S c h o o l s , L X X I I (November, 1 9 6 3 ) , 52-55. :  classroom < classroom classroom radj. emed  •  • c  covered corridors CON.Jl'kin  S  n. o sml. | grp. I  adj. 1 rem.'  -  I  study court  _i . _J' .. N  ST  lib-arart.% y..' ... v  •  IV  1  ••  learning arena (the big room)  inst. • matrl.  b.id e r a planter  I I I I  ••  MJ .  classroom  n  ^1  Floor  43  J - J L  106  Plan of Dilworth Elementary San J o s e , C a l i f o r n i a  School,  107 Parkway E l e m e n t a r y  School:  Parkway, Montana, i s b u i l t four  classrooms  traffic  from  around  and  with three units  a "nucleus."  School i n  each c o n t a i n i n g  The n u c l e u s  invites  t h e f o u r rooms and i s a common s p a c e f o r  t e a c h e r s and s t u d e n t s . classroom,  Parkway E l e m e n t a r y  Large  c l a s s e s are taught  normal-sized classes  s m a l l groups i n the nucleus.  s t o r a g e , t e a c h e r p l a n n i n g and  106 I, b i.d.. , .54. T  i n the remaining The n u c l e u s  in a  double  classrooms,  i s used f o r  conferences.  c  107 L e s t e r C. H a e k e l , " F a c i l i t i e s f o r E l e m e n t a r y Team T e a c h i n g , " A m e r i c a n S c h o o l B o a r d J o u r n a l , CXLVI ( J a n u a r y ,  1 9 6 3 ) , 27-2W.  | |  kindergarten kindergarten /  Figure  planter  ,  F.  Figure  44  IDS  The N u c l e u s and F l o o r P l a n o f Parkway E l e m e n t a r y Parkway, Montana  1  0  8  ibid.  School,  West D i s t r i c t Farmington,  School  .109  West D i s t r i c t  The b u i l d i n g  E a c h o f t h e f o u r rooms i n a c l u s t e r  to  the p a r t i t i o n  120  pupils.  f o l d e d , accommodate  C o r r i d o r space  doubles  from  i s not planned f o r  s e p a r a t e l y f o r g r o u p s o f 25 t o 30 s t u d e n t s . with  School,  C o n n e c t i c u t , h a s a c a p a c i t y o f 640 s t u d e n t s  k i n d e r g a r t e n t o grade s i x . expansion.  Elementary  c a n be  Double  used  rooms  l a r g e g r o u p s o f 100 as a c e n t r a l  project  2  COURT  3  c PROJECT AREA '~ro  c I ^1  -  1  JAN. BOYS n n n  CLASSROOM  Figure Floor  area with  45  110  P l a n o f West D i s t r i c t E l e m e n t a r y Farmington, Connecticut  counters, sinks,  easels, chalkboard,  School,  s t o r a g e and  109 Education  " A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s G u i d e t o Team D i g e s t , XXIX ( S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 6 3 ) , ^"^Bair  and Woodward, op. c i t .  Teaching,"  32-33.  display  space.  court.  Classrooms have t i l t  or  There are  s m a l l rooms a d j a c e n t screens  outlets  central  f o r open-  closed-television.  E x a m p l e s o f Team T e a c h i n g  Facilities  American l i t e r a t u r e i n such  British  C o l u m b i a , however, t h e  r e v e a l t h a t 65 carried large  12  were u s e d by  65  o r 46  Nine t e a c h e r s  more t h a n  adequate.  percent  the teachers.  The  group f a c i l i t i e s  Double  or  of the  schools.  percent  of  were r e p o r t e d  o r 26  team were b a r e l y  majority of teachers  33  o r 23  said  Approximately  Open a r e a s , a c t i v i t y  33  27  percent  s a i d that they  had  70  adequate. of  large percent  of  inadequate  activities.  s t u d y were r e p o r t e d t o be  q u a t e o r b a r e l y a d e q u a t e by a b o u t  said  rooms, l u n c h r o o m s  were u s e d f o r l a r g e g r o u p  for individual  were  percent  that  to  sur-  percent  t e a c h e r s , however, i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y were  Facilities  the  s t a t e d that they  were r e p o r t e d by  r e g u l a r classrooms  responded  o f t h e team t e a c h e r s  were a d e q u a t e .  or b a r e l y adequate.  Only  percent  8 o r 10  for their  In  survey f i n d i n g s  Thirty-six teachers  physical f a c i l i t i e s  many teams  described.  schools that  o r 15  or 7 percent  Inadequate f a c i l i t i e s  and  author's  In g e n e r a l , p h y s i c a l f a c i l i t i e s  a d e q u a t e by  the  as t h o s e  of the  were u s e d by  classrooms  schools.  veyed.  percent  Columbia  i n d i c a t e how  on t h e i r team t e a c h i n g i n open a r e a s .  classrooms  Regular  that  adequate f a c i l i t i e s  o r 77  in British  does n o t  operate  be  and  to a  percent  of the  adequate or good  inadeteachers. facilities  for  individual  study.  Planning areas  f o r team t e a c h i n g were  a d e q u a t e i n t h e teams o f 7 1 o r 5 0 p e r c e n t Forty-five  teachers or 32 percent  of the teachers.  reported that these  were i n a d e q u a t e .  Facilities  or  parent-teacher  c o n f e r e n c e s were a d e q u a t e i n t h e c a s e o f  54  teachers or 3 8 percent  or  3 7 p e r c e n t , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , s t a t e d t h a t t h e y  inadequate. were f o u n d of  or  o f t h e sample.  t o be n o n e x i s t e n t  vary the s i z e partitions,  were  of learning  areas  o f 4 9 or 35 percent  Moreover, 67 o r 4 7 percent  t h e y h a d v e r y few s u c h  19 percent  i n t h e case  student-teacher  Fifty-two teachers  Opportunities t o vary the s i z e  the teachers.  said  f o rindividual  areas  opportunities.  of the teachers Only  27 teachers  r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e y h a d many o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o of learning  areas  by t h e u s e o f m o v a b l e  curtains or f u r n i t u r e .  When a s k e d  t o s t a t e what  t h e g r e a t e s t n e e d o f t h e s c h o o l was, 6 2 t e a c h e r s o r 4 4 p e r c e n t said  s m a l l group areas  facilities  and 6 9 t e a c h e r s o r 4 9 percent  f o rindividual  study.  Some team t e a c h e r s s t a t e d  that  t h e i r t e a c h i n g was a i d e d by open a r e a s , m o v a b l e  easy  a c c e s s t o back-up a r e a s ,  c e n t r e and good a c o u s t i c s . pered  by crowded f a c i l i t i e s ,  portable and  dividers,  Others  dividers,  access t o the resource felt  t h a t t h e y were ham-  l a c k o f open a r e a s , l a c k o f  lack of a resource  c e n t r e , poor a c o u s t i c s ,  l a c k o f m a t e r i a l s and equipment. With these  the  easy  said  physical  British  facts  facilities  Columbia.  i n m i n d , i t i s o f v a l u e t o examine  o f a few r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s c h o o l s i n  Eagle  Harbour Elementary  School:  Eagle  V a n c o u v e r , i s an  open a r e a  octagonal-shaped  t e a c h i n g a r e a , an  stage, a l i b r a r y , o r team p l a n n i n g teaching  a r e a , and  Both areas  c h a i r s and  tables allow  an  "classes";  teams.  are f u l l y  three  The  carpeted.  a centrally  located library, and  record players.  and  l e s s o n preparation are a l s o provided.  Tote  carpets provide f o r f l e x i b l e materials part  easily  equipped  personal  study;  and  grouping.  effects.  Each c h i l d One  Another part  "wet teach-  and  and  art  area to  any  a home b a s e f o r  plastic  of the  pupils'  blackboards,  part of the  w i t h t r a p e z o i d a l t a b l e s and  formal teaching.  has  a  planning  There i s a  Science  for  equipment  s i n k i n each o f the t h r e e t a b l e s and  area.  four  rooms f o r  be t r a n s p o r t e d f r o m t h e wet  of the teaching area.  b o o k s and  for  can  for  School,  recorders, listening  t r a y s , mobile  self-  teaching  Areas f o r c o o p e r a t i v e teacher  and  is  each h a n d l i n g  Multi-purpose  and  units.  i n the  individual  i n c l u d e p r o j e c t o r s , tape  floor  the  p r o v i d i n g spaces  use  a tile  room  Light, portable  MacCorkindale  open t e a c h i n g a r e a s ,  gymnasium-activity-lunchroom.  ing  a  In  in clusters  outlets  School:  r e a d i n g , group study  area" with  room w i t h  kindergarten  p u p i l s to gather  Elementary  V a n c o u v e r , has  large  administrative area.  There are t e l e v i s i o n  MacCorkindale  activity  West  k i n d e r g a r t e n , s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n  contained.  leisure  s c h o o l composed o f one  a r e a t h e r e a r e two  discussion.  Harbour S c h o o l ,  library  is  contour  chairs  library  is  FLOOR  PLAN  —,it  »»«.» '  F i g u r e 46 111 J  Eagle Harbour Elementary  School, West Vancouver, F l o o r Plan A  "Eagle Harbour Primary S c h o o l , " The B r i t i s h Columbia School T r u s t e e , XXIII (Winter, 1967), 17. And" " E d u c a t i o n a l Trends and School Design," K i t i m a t Times, I I I , No. 1 (March 1, 1968).  Figure  47"  L X t  E a g l e H a r b o u r E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , West V a n c o u v e r ,  Floor  Plan  B  112 J o h n C o l l i n s , "A R e p o r t t o t h e L a n g l e y - M a p l e R i d g e T e a c h e r s ' C o n v e n t i o n , " H a r r i s o n H o t e l , F e b r u a r y 9, 196S.  f u r n i s h e d w i t h low t a b l e s the  library,  f o r independent  i s a completely  conference  T h i s room i s a l s o u s e d f o r  room a d j o i n s t h e m a i n o f f i c e .  They f e l t  the physical f a c i l i t i e s  were n e e d e d .  that  A  Teachers  team t e a c h i n g w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h o s e  study.  audio-  m e e t i n g s and s m a l l g r o u p work.  school reported that for  Within  e n c l o s e d room h o l d i n g  v i s u a l m a t e r i a l s and equipment. conferences, s t a f f  reading.  were  i n this adequate  for individual  more " q u i e t " a r e a s a n d s t u d y  The a r e a s  i n t h e diagram  a r e numbered a s f o l l o w s : 1.  teaching  2.  utility  3.  library  4.  multi-purpose  5.  kindergarten  6.  gymnasium-auditorium-lunchroom  7.  main s t a g e a n d m u s i c  8.  pull-out  9.  courtyard  areas o r wet  areas  room  stage  room  unit  areas  10.  outdoor  11.  conference  12.  principal's  13.  medical  room  14.  covered  blacktop play  15.  open b l a c k t o p p l a y a r e a s .  stage room office  areas  special  carrels  on t h e f o l l o w i n g  page  Vancouver Board  of School Trustees, This  i s MacCorkindale.  Cypress 3  Park Primary  school with  has  with  shelving.  This kindergarten to  o r pods o p e n i n g  a large raised,  This area  preparation area.  The  doubles central  h e x a g o n a l s c h o o l a s s e m b l y and feet  lower  than  the  directly  surfaced tional  and  can  space.  o f f any  pod  a l l o w any  to the be u s e d  Large  from the  size  of  into a large  circular  platform  as a l i b r a r y  stage  area.  thereby  and  play area.  has  The  an  ground  on  fine  days as  mobile  coat  racks  be  A l l furniture  to  grouping.  s i x classrooms.  School : ^ ^  The  T h i s elementary  classroom  folding  back t h e w a l l s d i v i d i n g  cluster  c o n t a i n s i t s own  areas  can  e a c h room.  resource  be  school i n  each  Each  In a d d i t i o n t o t h e  classrooms,  one  by  classroom  centre, including a  C l a s s r o o m s a r e a p p r o a c h e d by  contain-  increased  a u d i o - v i s u a l e q u i p m e n t , s u p p l i e s and  area.  shut  i s movable  R i v e r c o n s i s t s of f o u r hexagonal c l u s t e r s ,  walkways.  instruc-  used t o  Gold  planning  door  i s hard-  exterior  can  effect  outside  R i v e r Elementary  ence l i b r a r y ,  teacher  This i s three  Gold  ing  enclosed  c r e a t i n g the  Each classroom  others.  It  space a l s o c o n t a i n s a l a r g e  classrooms  of a miniature theatre. leading  Grade  p u p i l s i s l o c a t e d i n West V a n c o u v e r .  f o u r hexagonal areas  c e n t r a l pod by  140  School:  refer-  team  outside  covered  cluster  115 ^"How  t o Break w i t h  ( A u g u s t , 1967), 30-32. "^"Folding  Times  (May  Walls  5, 1 9 6 7 ) , 7.  the  Past," School  Progress  Used i n Newest S c h o o l , "  Vancouver  :  c o n t a i n s t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a r e a which offices,  staff  Cleveland North  room a n d m e d i c a l  School  Open A r e a :  V a n c o u v e r , was b u i l t  includes a  library,  room.  Cleveland Elementary as a t r a d i t i o n a l  School,  s c h o o l , b u t a new  w i n g was a d d e d i n 1967 f o r 90 t o 110 G r a d e 7 s t u d e n t s . is  a l a r g e open a r e a The  the  rest  Science  6,000 s q u a r e  feet.  Room i s e n c l o s e d , t h e l i b r a r y  o f t h e a r e a , but surrounded  Some o f t h e l i b r a r y except  o f about  shelving units  It  i s open t o  by l o w s t a n d s  are portable.  of shelves. The a r e a ,  f o r t h e S c i e n c e Room a n d a s m a l l a r e a n e a r t h e  entrance,  i s carpeted.  C o n s t r u c t i o n i s post  the  i s airy,  excellent  space  with  a n d beam, a n d  lighting.  T h r e e arms o f t h e c r o s s shape a r e s e t up a s c l a s s rooms w i t h board.  Students  equipment rear  chalkboards,  s i t on c h a i r s  projection  can s i t and l i s t e n This tape  i s a l s o used  They can hear  unit  screens  at flat-topped  i n c l u d e s movable c h a l k b o a r d s  p r o j e c t i o n movie u n i t ,  students  It  overhead  and a tape t o tapes  and t a c k -  desks.  and t a c k b o a r d s , learning  over  Other movable  c e n t r e where  earphones.  c a n accommodate up t o 16  children.  when s m a l l g r o u p s wish*.-a t o v i e w a m o v i e .  the audio  over  t h e e a r p h o n e s , a n d have t h e  screen  so t h a t t h e f i l m  will  not d i s t r a c t  area.  When m o v i e s a r e shown t o c l a s s - s i z e  o t h e r s i n t h e open groups the Science  Room i s u s e d . A sketch plan o f the area these  instructional  areas:  follows.  It includes  fb ( 2 . O  D  Pr?o j e e r s  «3-3L  vU» twrs  O  • ? V  Science  y  Hi I  * cf 3w  Bessie eoom  r  9 •3C.  Figure Floor  A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H.  49  P l a n o f t h e Open A r e a a t C l e v e l a n d E l e m e n t a r y North Vancouver  S t u d y a r e a (92 d e s k s ) Work a r e a ( l a r g e t a b l e s ) C l a s s a r e a (22 d e s k s ) C l a s s a r e a (11 d e s k s ) Listening centre Filmstrip projector Study c a r r e l s (8) Resource centre  School,  F r a s e r Lake Elementary-Junior-Secondary traditional and  third  classroom room.  school with  year  This area  Seminar Room  Group  Instruction  Teachers' Work Room  Seminar Room  50  P l a n o f t h e Open A r e a  School:  a t F r a s e r Lake  Kent E l e m e n t a r y  fourteen teaching stations.  open a r e a a n d n i n e a r e t r a d i t i o n a l  library  resource  serve both  types  to the resource of tape strip  School,  School  Agassiz,  Five of these classrooms.  are i n A  c e n t r e , an a u d i o - v i s u a l room a n d a gymnasium of teaching area.  The open a r e a  c e n t r e a n d a u d i o - v i s u a l room.  recorders, listening  and s l i d e  partition.  S m a l l Group Instruction  Figure  the  by a f o l d i n g  Z ^  Large  comprises  includes a double-sized  c a n be d i v i d e d  S m a l l Group Instruction  Kent E l e m e n t a r y  second  two s e m i n a r rooms, a n d a t e a c h e r ' s work  The l a r g e a r e a  Floor  This i s a  one open a r e a f o r a h u n d r e d  students.  space,  School:  i s adjacent  A wide  posts, record players, f i l m  p r o j e c t o r s , opaque p r o j e c t o r , o v e r h e a d  j e c t o r s and t e l e v i s i o n  a r e a v a i l a b l e t o both  Team t e a c h i n g i s c a r r i e d  variety  on i n b o t h  staff  pro-  and s t u d e n t s .  t h e open a r e a a n d t h e  Mi" 15 GJ  tf V  a. oj  CO CO  CP  £  ~3  oj  8  <t W  -  4.  srtu <3£ I  I A. • M i s s Co ehrsyie U ! Hes Guthnie. 3. Hi ss Woo 4. Miss Mi?.  s,  3-.  7. 8.  9. JO.  il. U. 13. 14. IX U. 17. 18.  CO  19...  a.  as.  d  s. w.  r.  K. Figure  tfGS. Gel.I HR. G o e b e t t He. Peefcy . Hi S S S i d 11 ns Mes. Srti.th Mes. p f n i a y Libigfli?.y tPoelfisoo^  I j ! ;  ! j  Teacheic Pltxrm l a g A t e a Aocif.o-VisuflL Vii.fi w i n s £OC<T> O f f i <L£ j Stage Gene-nal O f f i c e S t a f f £ocm Macule R-1 PeincipF»l*s O f f i c e - He.  | j ; : '  Furnace Ki tchen  !  51  F l o o r P l a n o f Kent Elementary S c h o o l , A g a s s i z  traditional  classrooms.  Teachers  in this  with  exception  the  physical f a c i l i t i e s ,  and  s m a l l g r o u p a r e a s , were  Westview Elementary Vancouver c a r r i e d ities.  The  regular  classrooms  when n o t  School:  This t r a d i t i o n a l  and  86  school i n existing  G r a d e 6-7  f o r s m a l l e r group a c t i v i t i e s .  Since the  three  room a d j o i n e d , movement f r o m one  on t h e  and  room t o t h e  facil-  three  Portable  activity  classrooms  North  students,  room f o r l a r g e g r o u p m e e t i n g s and  s m a l l t a b l e s were k e p t  i n use.  space  adequate.  team o f t h r e e t e a c h e r s  activity  that  of storage  on team t e a c h i n g u s i n g t h e  used the  c h a i r s and  the  school f e l t  room the  stage  activity  o t h e r was  quite  easy. Brooksbank Elementary  School:  located  i n North  with  e i g h t - s i d e d "pod"  the  an  centre.  these  the  Vancouver.  I n 1967  centre of the  activities  and  a s an  include a conference I n one pod  pod  there  of  5 classrooms  1968 pod  1 and  2.  coat  two  extension room and  w i t h washrooms i n  library.  evidence.  A l l pods  a teachers' resource a library the  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s e s f o r the  is in  In  empty f o r g r o u p  of the  i s a s c i e n c e and  school  more pods were a d d e d .  remained  Much p o r t a b l e equipment racks  school i s  I t began a s a p r i m a r y  i n c l u d e s t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a r e a and  T h e r e a r e two  and  and  T h i s open a r e a  such  as  room.  centre. Another  activity  room.  p u p i l s i n years  shelves,  tackboard  Figure Brooksbank Elementary  School,  52  North Vancouver,  Floor Plan  A  Figure  53  Brooksbank Elementary S c h o o l  Parksville  Elementary School:  intermediate area. is  The  i s overcrowded with  operating 120  carpeted. teaching separated  includes four teaching The areas with  other three are  centres  and  of average classroom  a moving p a r t i t i o n .  and  size  The  o f which i s  Two and  open  flexibility  carpets.  o n l y one  centres are t i l e d .  one  i n a modified  pupils  hampered b e c a u s e o f l a c k o f f a c i l i t i e s  open a r e a  B  T h i s e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l has  team o f f i v e t e a c h e r s  area  Floor Plan  of  can  Teachers i n t h i s  the be school  Carpet Area  c CO  crj  3s  Partition  Washrooms Storage  —K crj co  Figure Open A r e a  felt  that  greatest  at P a r k s v i l l e  overcrowding.  Selkirk  V a n c o u v e r and is  contained  f o r more s p a c e ,  Parksville  i n general, to areas f o r  Their  relieve  individual  needed.  Annex B: enrolls  a traditional  School,  were v e r y i n a d e q u a t e .  S m a l l g r o u p a r e a s and  s t u d y were a l s o  Lord  Elementary  physical f a c i l i t i e s need was  54  .Lord S e l k i r k  G r a d e s 1 t o 3 and  s c h o o l w i t h an  classrooms  Annex B i s l o c a t e d i n  on t h e  a kindergarten.  open a r e a and  second  floor.  One  two  It  self-  team o f f o u r  Open 4  Area  classes  (2nd & 3 r d  Wet  year)  Area  Library  \  f  \  Hall  Selfcontained Classroom  First  t  N  t  \  Year  First  1  Open A r e a a t L o r d S e l k i r k  i n y e a r s two  team o f two  classes  55 Annex B,  Vancouver  and t h r e e u s e t h e open a r e a . of f i r s t  contained  classrooms.  and  area.  a wet  Year  2  Figure  classes  Selfcontained Classroom  Another  y e a r s t u d e n t s use the  I n t h e open a r e a t h e r e i s a  Teachers  stated that  g r o u p i n s t r u c t i o n were a d e q u a t e .  facilities  selflibrary  f o r large  Back-up rooms and  movable  p a r t i t i o n s t o a i d s m a l l g r o u p and i n d i v i d u a l w e r e , however, l a c k i n g . was much t o o s m a l l .  I t was a l s o  Another  i n this  separate  entrances.  Team T e a c h i n g  that  using three f l i g h t s  a r e a w o u l d v e r y much l i k e  Hardware and  t h e wet a r e a  h i n d r a n c e was t h e f a c t  s t u d e n t s had t o e n t e r and e x i t , Teachers  felt  instruction  that of s t a i r s .  individual or  Software  In a d d i t i o n t o " s p a c e " team t e a c h i n g r e q u i r e s adequate equipment.  Large  equipped  with the necessary  overhead  projectors,  group i n s t r u c t i o n areas  i n s t r u c t i o n a l media, such as  blackout  c u r t a i n s and so on.  r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l s and s p e c i a l needed f o r independent However, t h e s e  s h o u l d be  General  equipment a n d m a t e r i a l s a r e  s t u d y and i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  instruction.  d e v i c e s a r e c o n s t r u c t i v e t e a c h i n g a i d s , not  s u b s t i t u t e s f o r good t e a c h i n g .  Chamberlin  includes the 118  following  items  o f hardware and s o f t w a r e  i n h i s summary.  Hardware: p o r t a b l e c h a l k b o a r d s , c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d i n s t r u c t i o n equipment; p o r t a b l e d i s p l a y boards; d u p l i c a t i n g and c o p y i n g equipment; p o r t a b l e f l a n n e l boards; m i c r o f i l m and m i c r o f i c h e r e a d e r s ; p r e v i e w e r equipment, f i l m , f i & m s t r i p , s l i d e , p r o d u c t i o n e q u i p ment f o r b o t h a u d i t o r y a n d v i s u a l i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s ; p r o j e c t i o n screens; portable p u b l i c address system; r a d i o ; r e a d i n g equipment; r e m e d i a l , speed; r e c o r d p l a y e r ; t a p e r e c o r d e r s ; t e l e v i s i o n and kinescope.  Chamberlin, Ibid.,  op. c i t . , 103.  87-88.  Software: c h a r t s , drawings, p i c t u r e s , p o s t e r s , study p r i n t s , cartoons; f i l m s ; f i l m s t r i p s ; gaming a c t i v i t y m a t e r i a l s ; globes; i n s t r u c t i o n a l tapes; maps; microf i l m and m i c r o f i c h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s ; prepared e x h i b i t s ; r e c o r d s ; r e f e r e n c e and l i b r a r y m a t e r i a l s ; resource f i l e ; s i m u l a t i o n a c t i v i t y materials; slides; transparencies. Most of the s c h o o l s d e s c r i b e d i n American l i t e r a t u r e were very w e l l equipped  with hardware and software.  team t e a c h e r s surveyed  Of the  i n B r i t i s h Columbia, 7 5 or 53 percent  s t a t e d t h a t they had adequate l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s . t e a c h e r s s a i d that these f a c i l i t i e s The  Fifteen  were more than adequate.  remainder of the t e a c h e r s , 53 or 38 percent, r e p o r t e d  inadequate was  143  or b a r e l y adequate l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s .  Television  not used i n connection w i t h team t e a c h i n g by 6 l or 43  percent of the respondents. 53 percent of the sample.  I t was  used by 71 t e a c h e r s or  Of those who  used t e l e v i s i o n most  used i t from 1 t o 5 percent of the i n s t r u c t i o n a l time. overhead p r o j e c t o r was teachers.  The  not used by 28 or 20 percent of the  Seventy-three  t e a c h e r s or 51 percent, however,  r e p o r t e d t h a t they used i t f o r both l a r g e and s m a l l group instruction. it  Twenty-two or 16 percent of the t e a c h e r s used  only f o r l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n and 19 or 14 percent  them used i t only w i t h small groups.  Of those t e a c h e r s  of who  used the overhead p r o j e c t o r , the m a j o r i t y s t a t e d t h a t they employed i t approximately t i o n a l time.  10 t o 35 percent of the  The tape r e c o r d e r was  instruc-  used f o r both l a r g e and  s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n by 53 or 37 percent of the t e a c h e r s . Seventy-two t e a c h e r s or 51 percent used i t only f o r s m a l l  group i n s t r u c t i o n . for  l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n .  indicated majority percent by  S i x teachers  that they  or 5 percent  Only  12 t e a c h e r s  n e v e r made u s e o f a t a p e  o f respondents  used the tape  o f the i n s t r u c t i o n a l time.  t h e teams o f 57 p e r c e n t  percent  s t a t e d t h e y were n e v e r u s e d .  recorder.  The  Thirty-eight  s a i d m o v i e s were s e l d o m u s e d . Teaching  Five  machines o r  i n s t r u c t i o n were n o t u s e d by 69 o r 49 p e r c e n t o f  teachers.  Twenty-nine t e a c h e r s  o r 21 p e r c e n t ,  used these  media i n i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  19  percent  u s e d them i n s m a l l g r o u p i n s t r u c t i o n  12  percent  u s e d them i n b o t h  tion.  or 9 percent  r e c o r d e r 10 t o 25  of the teachers.  of the teachers  the  i t only  M o v i e s were u s e d f r e q u e n t l y  percent  programmed  used  study.  however,  Twenty-seven o r a n d 16 o r  l a r g e and s m a l l group  instruc-  The m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s who r e s p o n d e d u s e d  teaching  m a c h i n e s o r programmed i n s t r u c t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n a l time.  Typical  15 t o 25 p e r c e n t  ofthe  comments made by t e a c h e r s  include the following: - More programmed m a t e r i a l s a r e n e e d e d . - We a r e a t t a i n i n g more a n d more m a t e r i a l s a i d s s o s t u d e n t s may d e v e l o p t h e i r i n t e r e s t s b u t t o o many educational aids are d r a s t i c a l l y over-priced. - As t h i s i s a f a i r l y new s c h o o l , c o m m e r c i a l m a t e r i a l s were a l m o s t n i l and most m a t e r i a l s u s e d h a d t o be made by t h e t e a c h e r s . - We need a l i s t e n i n g s t a t i o n f o r o u r room a l o n e n o t t o be s h a r e d w i t h o t h e r c l a s s e s i n t h e s c h o o l . - T h e r e a r e n o t n e a r l y enough m a t e r i a l a i d s . - We n e e d e n c y c l o p e d i a s , n o v e l s a n d r e f e r e n c e b o o k s . - We have v e r y few a u d i o - v i s u a l a i d s a n d t h o s e we have a r e s h a r e d w i t h 18 o t h e r t e a c h e r s . - Our s c h o o l h a s been v e r y f o r t u n a t e i n t h a t we have almost u n l i m i t e d access t o m a t e r i a l a i d s . - We have many p i c t u r e s , r e a d i n e s s games a n d c h a r t s . - We n e e d c a s s e t t e s , f i l m s t r i p s , l e a r n i n g p a c k a g e s , games, f i l m l o o p s a n d r e c o r d s .  - We a r e f o r t u n a t e t o have a n e x c e l l e n t r e s o u r c e c e n t r e w i t h f i l m s t r i p s t o r i e s , movies, t a p e s and r e c o r d s . The c h i l d r e n a n d s t a f f a r e a b l e t o u s e t h e s e . - We have t h e r e s o u r c e s b u t we a r e b a d l y o v e r c r o w d e d . - We n e e d many more o f a l l t h e a v a i l a b l e r e s o u r c e s . - More c o m m e r c i a l l y made m a t e r i a l s w o u l d s a v e v a l u a b l e teacher time. We c o u l d u s e s e l f - l e a r n i n g m a c h i n e s , f l a s h c a r d s , p h o n i c s games a n d o t h e r s u c h a i d s . - We c o u l d u s e many more b o o k s f o r o u r a b l e r e a d e r s . - N e a r l y a l l o u r t h i r d and f o u r t h y e a r p u p i l s c o u l d r u n a movie p r o j e c t o r , a n d e v e r y c h i l d c o u l d o p e r a t e a t a p e r e c o r d e r o r f i l m s t r i p p r o j e c t o r . We h a d a s i x t e e n earphone study c e n t r e so t h a t p u p i l s c o u l d l i s t e n t o t h e s e t h i n g s , a s w e l l a s programmed l e a r n ing tapes. From t h e s e ability,  f a c t s a n d comments i t c a n be s e e n t h a t t h e a v a i l -  as w e l l as t h e use o f m a t e r i a l a i d s , v a r i e d g r e a t l y  throughout  t h e teams i n B r i t i s h  Columbia.  RESEARCH ON The us w i t h  almost  descriptive list  years  the  research  r a t h e r than  evidence.  o f how  team t e a c h i n g  evaluative.  embarking  defending  the  Proponents of the  almost  who  on  such a venture.  feasibility  As u s u a l , t h e  o f team s t r u c t u r e s t h a n  aspects.  Claimed  o f c h a n g e , and  unanimously  to  and  in research-  a d v a n t a g e s and  e d u c a t i o n a l movement.  a p p l i c a b l e to the  Kelly  (  1  9  7  0  )  avoid  educational  dis-  are g e n e r a l l y perceptions  rarely  system  experienced  i t , or d e s c r i p t i o n s of p i t f a l l s  a d v a n t a g e s o f team t e a c h i n g  mythology  students  been  weaknesses.  been more i n t e r e s t e d i n d e m o n s t r a t i n g  essential  the heat  and  left  s t u d i e s have  oponents m e r e l y expose the  teachers  liked  e n t e r p r i s e has  the  Most  i n p r o f e s s i o n a l j o u r n a l s seem t o be  descriptions  ing the  o f i n n o v a t i o n i n team t e a c h i n g h a v e  merits while  Articles  before  no  TEAM TEACHING  born i n  totality  w r i t i n g about  of  the  o f change s t a t e s :  New p r o g r a m s o f i n n o v a t i o n a r e p r o c l a i m e d w i t h e x u b e r a n t e n t h u s i a s m a c c o m p a n i e d by f a n f a r e s o f r h e t o r i c . The c l a i m s o f i n n o v a t i o n a r e l o a d e d w i t h h y p e r b o l e and seem completely b l i n d t o the s l i g h t e s t p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e i r t e s t a m e n t s o f f a i t h may be u n f o u n d e d i n f a c t . Much o f what erroneously  so  i n the  light  E r i c Kelly, (February, 1  Teacher  i s c a s u a l l y observable  1  1  9  7  0  )  ,  fact  of s c i e n t i f i c  "The  9  as  Mythology  2 0 2 .  proves to  be  investigation.  o f Change," The  B.C.  research  A review o f t h e American l i t e r a t u r e  reveals  that  i s generally of  h a s been done on team t e a c h i n g  poor q u a l i t y . naire  Most o f t h e s t u d i e s  have r e l i e d  and t e s t i m o n i a l e v i d e n c e f r o m t e a c h e r s ,  parents.  R e s e a r c h e r s have a l s o l o o k e d  standardized customarily designs.  anyway.  at the results of  O n l y a few have a p p l i e d  t h e s e u s u a l l y do n o t g i v e methods t o p e r m i t  present  more s k i l l e d  Variables  teaching  staff,  methods and  student  background a r e not adequately  controlled.  pointed  out t h a t  to define  educators often  fail  research  such as  administration  b e t t e r morale i n p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a f f ,  research  f i n d i n g s but  d e t a i l s about  adequate a p p r a i s a l .  facilities,  are used  other  specific  sufficient  question-  p u p i l s and  achievement t e s t s o f t h e s o r t t h a t  One o r two r e p o r t s  superior  on  that the  Kaya  variables  120 operationally. self-contained  They s p e a k o f a team t e a c h i n g classroom plan  measurement.  comes made by a n y g i v e n teacher ing,  measured. is  i n ways t h a t  feature  s u c h a s team  grouping, f l e x i b l e  o r t h e use o f teacher  O f t e n t h e judgment t h a t  out-  leadership,  aides  schedul-  i s not  a programme i s s u c c e s s f u l  b a s e d m a i n l y on w h e t h e r s t u d e n t s r e a c t w i t h  enthusiasm.  can lead t o  Thus c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o l e a r n i n g  specialization, flexible  team p l a n n i n g ,  or a  a s t h o u g h i t were a n e n t i t y  rather than s p e c i f y i n g i t s features accurate  plan  i n t e r e s t and  The Hawthorne e f f e c t must a l s o be c o n s i d e r e d f o r  many outcomes o f team t e a c h i n g  probably r e s u l t from i t being  different it  f r o m e s t a b l i s h e d p r a c t i c e s and f r o m t h e f a c t  that  attracts special attention. Various  educators  p r o b l e m o f team t e a c h i n g scientifically  valid  have g i v e n  research.  study  their  attention to the  Lambert  stated that  o f team t e a c h i n g  no  a s a whole h a d  121 yet be  been p u b l i s h e d . no s u c h s t u d y  He a l s o p r e d i c t e d t h a t t h e r e  i n t h e next t e n t o f i f t e e n  years.  would Heathers  f o u n d no w e l l - c o n t r o l l e d s t u d i e s t h a t m e a s u r e d t h e outcomes 122 o f team t e a c h i n g . incompletely evaluated. as  He s u g g e s t e d t h a t team t e a c h i n g i s  designed,  inadequately  implemented and  S h a p l i n and O l d s d e s c r i b e team t e a c h i n g  demonstrations of preferable educational 123  research measuring  design.  1  i n the f i e l d  of education  i t i s next t o i m p o s s i b l e  without  that  are s t i l l  t o determine  so  pre-  how s u c c e s s f u l l y a programme's o b j e c t i v e s a r e b e i n g  2/J.  met.  Hillson  states that  research  designs  e x p e r i m e n t s s e t up t o measure team t e a c h i n g for  projects  practices  B a i r and Woodward a d d t o t h i s  instruments  inadequate that cisely  J  improperly  do n o t a l l o w  q u a n t i f i c a t i o n o f data which would stand 125  scrutiny  of s c i e n t i f i c  analysis.  y  o f t h e many  up u n d e r t h e  Inglow b e l i e v e s t h a t  1 21 P h i l l i p L a m b e r t , "Team T e a c h i n g i n T o d a y ' s W o r l d , " Teachers College Record, 485. 122 G l e n H e a t h e r s , " R e s e a r c h on Team T e a c h i n g , " i n S h a p l i n a n d O l d s , op. c i t . , 3 0 6 - 3 4 4 . 123 ^ S h a p l i n a n d O l d s , op. c i t . 12L.  B a i r a n d Woodward, Team T e a c h i n g  i n A c t i o n , 188.  125 School  Hillson, Organization,  Change and I n n o v a t i o n 164.  i n Elementary  the  v a r i a b l e s o f team t e a c h i n g  are too  multitudinous  to  be 126  controlled  properly  i n any  conclusive research  Joyce i n h i s review of s t a f f local  school  setting  i s often highly resistent  affecting  adversely  has  t o be  carried  out  substantial financial  create the place,  the  out  conduct  i n the  school  support  o r t o k e e p them g o i n g  Beighley  of research  d e s i r e d experimental  time t o l e a r n the  ing  u t i l i z a t i o n points  new  the  to  that  the  change,  i n any 127  area  Also,  which with-  i t i s often impossible  c o n d i t i o n s i n the  roles that  have been hampered by  out  setting.  u n t i l the  says t h a t attempts t o  attempt.  are  study  teachers  t o be and  to  first  have  had  studied.  evaluate  l a c k of d e f i n i t i o n s  team of  teach-  the  128 concept. p r o v e on  C o u n t l e s s s o - c a l l e d team t e a c h i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s c l o s e e x a m i n a t i o n t o be l i t t l e more t h a n t o k e n 129  changes o f t h e there  conventional.  i s more team t e a c h i n g  yet  most r e s e a r c h  ary  l e v e l .1 2 6 B o r g p o i n t s  Anderson at the  indicates that  elementary school  s t u d i e s have been c a r r i e d out  out  t h a t most t e a c h i n g  level,  at the  second-  teams were  I n g l o w , The Emergent i n C u r r i c u l u m , 3 0 4 . 127 'Bruce R. J o y c e , " S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n , " Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , XXXVII ( J u n e , 1 9 6 7 ) , 3 2 3 . 128 A r c h i e Fay B e i g h l e y , "The O r i g i n and Development o f E l e m e n t a r y Team T e a c h i n g i n L e w i s t o n I d a h o , " U n i v e r s i t y o f I d a h o , 1 9 6 8 , D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXXIX, No. 5-6 (November, I 9 6 8 ) , 166S-A. 129 ' A n d e r s o n , T e a c h i n g i n a W o r l d o f Change, op. c i t . , 71-108.  established on  i n 1963  team t e a c h i n g  preliminary  has  or a f t e r .  In view o f t h i s ,  s c a r c e l y moved b e y o n d t h e  stage  of  exploration.  Examples o f R e s e a r c h Research Studies  Studies  i n the  United  States  In o r d e r t o a p p r e c i a t e the i n team t e a c h i n g , studies.  research  One  i t i s of value  of the  criticisms  of  research  t o examine a few  selected  b e t t e r s t u d i e s was  done by  Lambert,  131 Goodwin and  Wiersma.  o f o n l y two  t e a m s , i t was  tion  about t h e  influencing  process  efficiency  Although  i t examined t h e  constructed  to y i e l d  much  o f team o p e r a t i o n s  and  of operation.  dynamics  The  operations informa-  factors of  h i e r a r c h i c a l team s t r u c t u r e were i n v e s t i g a t e d i n t e r m s  of  content  and  of i n s t r u c t i o n ,  achievement.  pupil  interaction,  adjustment  A number o f s o u n d r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s  were  u s e d ; p u p i l s were r a n d o m l y a s s i g n e d t o team and s e l f 130 W a l t e r B o r g , " S t u d y o f Human I n t e r a c t i o n V a r i a b l e s i n S u c c e s s f u l and U n s u c c e s s f u l T e a c h e r Teams," Utah U n i v e r s i t y , 1966. (ERIC ED010001) 131 P h i l l i p Lambert e t a l , "A S t u d y o f t h e E l e m e n t a r y T e a c h i n g Team," E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l J o u r n a l , LXVI ( O c t o b e r , 1965), 28-34. A l s o s e e "A C o m p a r i s o n o f P u p i l A c h i e v e m e n t i n Team and S e l f - C o n t a i n e d O r g a n i z a t i o n s , " J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i mental E d u c a t i o n , XXXIII ( S p r i n g , 1965), 217-224A l s o see "A C o m p a r i s o n o f P u p i l A d j u s t m e n t i n Team and S e l f - C o n t a i n e d O r g a n i z a t i o n s , " J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , L V I I (March, 1 9 6 5 ) , 211-314.  contained analysis  s e t t i n g s ; observers technique  was  i s s u e s as  the  effect  children;  and  to  were t r a i n e d ; t h e  employed t o p e r m i t  o f team s t a b i l i t y  counteract  teaching  variables,  aids.  Furthermore the  the  by  does not  teaching  and  such  interaction  university consultants study  does not  o f f e r m e a s u r e s o f how  s p e c i f y the  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom  implemented d u r i n g  of  of  are  and  t h a t many  i d e n t i f i e d , were n o t c o n t r o l l e d .  study  the  on  L i m i t a t i o n s of the  although  a study  p o s s i b l e Hawthorne e f f e c t s , a l l  o r g a n i z a t i o n s were s t i m u l a t e d new  interaction  the  study.  sure  just  with  what programme i n t h e  the As  plans  a result,  team  employed  a study  one  cannot  teaching  self-contained  out  of  and  f e a t u r e s are a c t u a l l y  what programme o f c o o p e r a t i v e  Jackson c a r r i e d  features  was  be  compared  classroom.  c o m p a r i n g a team  teach132  ing  and  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom  Iowa T e s t s  of Basic  S o c i a l and  Related  of parents  was  the  Department  covariance study and  was  Skills Sciences  given  and  i n Grades f i v e  the  California  were g i v e n .  a questionnaire  and  of Psychological Services. applied.  i n Grade seven.  T h e r e was  and  Tests  A random was  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d group r e p r e s e n t e d  J  in  sampling  interviewed  Analysis  a questionnaire  P u p i l s f o r the  six.  team t e a c h i n g  by  of follow-up group  a " s c a t t e r " of p u p i l s  132 J o s e p h J a c k s o n , " A n a l y s i s o f a Team T e a c h i n g and S e l f - C o n t a i n e d Homeroom E x p e r i m e n t i n G r a d e F i v e and S i x , " J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i m e n t a l R e s e a r c h , X X X I I (Summer, 1964), 317-  322 •  throughout  the  grades.  While r e s u l t s favoured the  t a u g h t g r o u p , t h e r e was variables size  as  o r age  not  adequate c o n t r o l  teacher a b i l i t y of  and  over  team such  methods, f a c i l i t i e s ,  class  pupils.  A study at  the  G r a d e two  l e v e l was  done by  Knox o v e r  133 a  one-year p e r i o d .  were s e l e c t e d  at  B o t h e x p e r i m e n t a l and  > y  random and  consideration  control  was  t e a c h e r v a r i a b l e when a s s i g n m e n t s were made. collected  using  California Scale  the  Achievement  for Children  Analysis  California  and  of variance  Test, the  was  Test  used.  As  given to Data  method t o  and  study the  Jacobs  attitudes  was the  Anxiety  Sage S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s i n other studies  s t r u c t u r e was not d e f i n e d and numerous v a r i a b l e s controlled. No f o l l o w - u p s t u d y was conducted. Hagen  the  of Mental Maturity,  Sarason's General  Russell  groups  used the  the  were  Test. team  not  questionnaire  of t e a c h e r s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n  133 D o n a l d M. Knox, "An E x p e r i m e n t a l S t u d y o f t h e E f f e c t o f Team T e a c h i n g P r o g r a m Upon C e r t a i n Selected V a r i a b l e s , " W e s t e r n R e s e r v e U n i v e r s i t y , 1965, Dissertation A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l X X V I I , No. 1 ( J u n e , 1 9 6 6 ) , 416-A. 1  TI  A r n o l d 0. Hagen, " P e r c e p t i o n s o f Team T e a c h i n g a s E x p r e s s e d by T e a c h e r s i n a S p e c i f i c Team T e a c h i n g S i t u a t i o n , " C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y , 1966, Dissertation Abstracts Intern a t i o n a l , X X V I I , No. 3 ( S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 6 6 ) , 992-A. 13 5 G.M. J a c o b s , "A C o m p a r i s o n o f A t t i t u d e s o f Team and Non-Team T e a c h e r s Towards V a r i o u s A s p e c t s o f T e a c h i n g , " N o r t h e r n . I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y , 1968, Dissertation Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXIX, No. 5-6 (November, 1 9 6 8 ) , 1479-A.  team t e a c h i n g .  Although the l a t t e r  researcher  f i n d i n g s t o t e a c h e r s who h a d no team t e a c h i n g a n a l y z e d them by t h e u s e o f a c h i s q u a r e t e s t , still  e x p e r i e n c e and results are  subjective. Controlled  achievement  Crandell"^  experimental studies  o u t by Burningham," " ^ 1  and B o r e n f ^  9  3  O n l y one s t u d y  o f l o w , a v e r a g e and h i g h a b i l i t y .  standardized  Sterns  achievement  tests.  Soucy, ^  7  O n l y one o f t h e s e s t u d i e s  s t u d e n t s by random s a m p l e . students  t o compare t h e  o f team t a u g h t and s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m  p u p i l s were c a r r i e d  used  compared h i s  1  assigned  compared A l l of the studies  The i n f o r m a t i o n  from  G e o r g e L. B u r n i n g h a m , "A S t u d y a n d E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e Team T e a c h i n g o f t h e F o u r t h G r a d e a t Woodstock E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , " U n i v e r s i t y o f U t a h , 1968, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l . XXIX, No. 3-4 (September, 1968), 770-A.  137 H a r v e y M. S t e r n s , " S t u d e n t A d j u s t m e n t a n d A c h i e v e ment i n a Team O r g a n i z a t i o n , " U n i v e r s i t y o f M i c h i g a n , 1968, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l XXX, No. 1 ( J u l y , I 9 6 9 ) ,  116-A.  138  L.A. S o u c y "A S t u d y t o D e t e r m i n e t h e E f f e c t s o f Team T e a c h i n g Upon A c h i e v e m e n t , S o c i a l A d j u s t m e n t a n d M e n t a l H e a l t h o f G r a d e One P u p i l s , " S y r a c u s e U n i v e r s i t y , 1966, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , X X V I I , No. 11 (May, J  ?  196?), 4175-A. 139  ^ E.W. C r a n d e l l , "An E x p e r i m e n t a l S t u d y : Team Teachi n g Compared w i t h t h e S e l f - C o n t a i n e d C l a s s r o o m O r g a n i z a t i o n i n Upper E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l G r a d e s , " Wayne S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1966, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXIX, No. 9-10 ( J a n u a r y , 1967), 2308-A. 7  " ^ ^ D o n a l d B o r e n , A C o m p a r a t i v e S t u d y o f Team and T r a d i t i o n a l Teaching Methodologies," U n i v e r s i t y o f Utah, 1969, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXIX, No. 9-10 ( M a r c h , 1968), 2293-A. M  these  s t u d i e s i s of l i t t l e  controlled  and  classrooms  were n o t  value  b e c a u s e v a r i a b l e s were  f e a t u r e s o f team t e a c h i n g specified.  or s e l f - c o n t a i n e d  It i s d i f f i c u l t  from the  f i n d i n g s b e c a u s e s a m p l e s were n o t  Analysis  o f d a t a was  Research  Studies The  very  evidence  being  present  85  One  of research having time.  c o n t r o l g r o u p but the  had  i t s e t up  d i d not  complete  p u p i l s p r i o r t o team t e a c h i n g  follow-up on t h e 1971  In the  s c h o o l s , 83  sample s t a t e d t h a t t h e y  school reported that  author's schools  done no  and  p l a n t o compare t h e  comments made by  Test  o r 98  or of  percent  research.  study with  a  Another s c h o o l t e s t e d  then  administered  of Basic  r e s u l t s with  principals  British  survey  formal  a research i t .  in  been done  Several schools tested t h e i r  Canadian Lorge Thorndike  and  of the  tests.  adequately.  Columbia  e l e m e n t a r y team t e a c h i n g  of the  selected  d e s c r i b i n g team t e a c h i n g  C o l u m b i a , g a v e no done a t t h e  to generalize  limited.  in British  literature  not  team p u p i l s in  1970-  future tests.  Some  regarding  Skills  research  follow.  - The u s u a l s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s were g i v e n but I d o n ' t know i f any c o n c l u s i o n s were drawn. - No r e s e a r c h h a s been done. - No r e s e a r c h has been done but t e a c h e r s o f l a s t y e a r ' s team f e l t t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n were g e t t i n g a more a l l round e d u c a t i o n . - I n my o p i n i o n , f a c t o r s s u c h a s t e a c h e r p e r s o n a l i t y w o u l d v a r y t o s u c h an e x t e n t as t o make r e s e a r c h studies invalid. - No r e s e a r c h has been done y e t . - I n f o r m a l l y t e a c h e r s f e e l t h a t t h i s approach works better with intermediate p u p i l s .  - No r e s e a r c h has been done y e t , but I am d e f i n i t e l y t o y i n g with the idea. - A s u r v e y done i n o u r s c h o o l r e v e a l e d t h a t p r i m a r y s t u d e n t s p r e f e r t h e i r own classroom. - R e s e a r c h i s not p o s s i b l e . - R e s u l t s o f t h e d i s t r i c t G r a d e 7 and 4 p u p i l s on t h e Canadian Lorge T h o r n d i k e T e s t o f B a s i c S k i l l s have i n d i c a t e d t h a t team t a u g h t p u p i l s a r e c o m p a r a t i v e l y high. T h e s e r e s u l t s were a n t i c i p a t e d , however, s i n c e p u p i l s come f r o m m i d d l e c l a s s b a c k g r o u n d s . - Previous t e s t i n g i n the s t a n d a r d i z e d achievement t e s t s f o l l o w e d by t e s t i n g i n team t e a c h i n g , has shown a more r a p i d p r o g r e s s i o n i n l e a r n i n g b a s i c f a c t s and a much more m a t u r e a p p r o a c h t o s c h o o l work. - No s o p h i s t i c a t e d r e s e a r c h has been c a r r i e d o u t . - One e x c u s e f o r r e s e a r c h was c a r r i e d out by t h e s c h o o l b o a r d t o p r o v e team t a u g h t p u p i l s c o u l d n o t r e a d . They p r o v e d i t . H a l f o f o u r c l a s s , when t h e y went t o G r a d e 8 , were " m a t c h e d " w i t h 3 4 p u p i l s f r o m 4 o t h e r s c h o o l s and w h i z z o p r o v e d them i n f e r i o r . ' - No f o r m a l r e s e a r c h h a s been s e t up y e t . However, t h e members o f t h e p r e s e n t teams can e a s i l y compare t h e t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n t o t h e s i t u a t i o n when e a c h had h i s own c l a s s . The team t e a c h i n g s i t u a t i o n i s p r o v i n g much b e t t e r . - To d a t e s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t i n g has n o t i n d i c a t e d t h a t team t e a c h i n g has i m p r o v e d t h e p r o g r e s s o f c h i l d r e n significantly. From t h e s e teaching  are  needed.  The  i n a c h i e v i n g an  value  of  team  F a r more s u i t a b l e r e s e a r c h  f o l l o w i n g summary o f f i n d i n g s represents  understanding  o f team  only  a  teaching  i t s validity.  Student Findings  Achievement i n the  United  Almost without on  seen t h a t the  t h e r e f o r e somewhat h y p o t h e t i c a l and  crude s t a r t and  be  r e m a i n s t o be m e a s u r e d .  procedures is  e x a m p l e s , i t can  standardized  States exception,  t e s t s has  p u p i l achievement  been f o u n d  t o be  about t h e  as  shown  same i n  t e a m t e a c h i n g programmes a s i n s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m s . Where d i f f e r e n c e s were f o u n d  i n c o m p a r i s o n s o f t h e two t y p e s  o f o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e y were s l i g h t points  out t h a t t h e f a i l u r e  ment t e s t  is  o f programmes t o i m p r o v e  implementation  t h e most i m p o r t a n t  reason  t h a t team t e a c h i n g , a s s u c h ,  indirect  relations to pupil  to t h i s the fact  areas  f o r the results  achievement.^ ^" 4  stages  likely  skill  Anderson adds  t o undergo  o f team e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n .  i n which l i v e l i e r  offerings  m e a s u r e d by s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s  capacity  forself-direction,  i n locating  achievement.  important ^  The  and d i f f e r e n t t o be d e v e l o p e d a r e  i n use, nor are p u p i l  p u p i l - t o - p u p i l working r e l a t i o n s h i p s ,  f a c t o r s with  obtained  o n l y l i m i t e d and  p e d a g o g i c a l a r r a n g e m e n t s a r e more l i k e l y  enthusiasm,  It  of cooperative teaching.  bears  that are least  changes i n t h e e a r l y  rarely  achieve-  that available t e s t s deal c h i e f l y with the  c o n t e n t s and s k i l l s  content  Heathers  s c o r e s may be due t o w e a k n e s s e s o f t h e t e s t s .  may be due t o f a u l t y Probably  and i n c o n s i s t e n t .  efficient  utilization  pupilof time,  and a n a l y z i n g i n f o r m a t i o n , and o t h e r  long-range  implications  Furthermore,  f o r p u p i l growth and  many r e s u l t s  cause s t u d i e s r e p o r t achievement  a r e m i s l e a d i n g be-  u n d e r team t e a c h i n g i n t e r m s  o f g r a d e - l e v e l g a i n s made d u r i n g t h e y e a r , w i t h o u t  indicating  "'"^Glen H e a t h e r s , " R e s e a r c h on I m p l e m e n t i n g a n d E v a l u a t i n g Cooperative Teaching," N a t i o n a l Elementary Princi-  p a l , XLIV  ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 30.  1L.2 Robert  op.  cit. ,  100.  H. A n d e r s o n , T e a c h i n g  i n a W o r l d o f Change,  what w o u l d have been t h e e x p e c t e d g a i n s lation  i n v o l v e d i n t h e study.  None o f t h e r e s e a r c h  were d e s i g n e d  t o answer q u e s t i o n s  that  features  separate  learning  students  o f team t e a c h i n g  ticated  conclusions.  Drummond  by t e a c h i n g  teams.  statistical  b e t t e r on  when f a i r l y  a t team t e a c h i n g  performance i s equal  f r o m good i n s t r u c t i o n w i t h  the greatest  and l o w a b i l i t y  levels.  there  i s no r e s e a r c h  evidence  pupil  effectiveness.  1 4  and L o v e l l . author's  experiments described  ''  1 4 4  that  standardized  m e a s u r e s a r e employed t o a n a l y s e  conclusion that  The  stated  He a d d s , u s u a l l y t h e  d i f f e r e n c e s a r e not s i g n i f i c a n t  the  1 4 6  e x p e r i m e n t s have come t o  do a s w e l l o r p e r h a p s a l i t t l e  I n s t r u c t o r i n a c r i t i c a l look  Polos  make t o w a r d  i n h i s assessment  The  high  plans  outcomes.  t e s t s when t a u g h t obtained  studies  about t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s  Reviewers o f team t e a c h i n g similar  f o r t h e p u p i l popu-  t o that gains  sophisdata.  1 4  ^  came t o  resulting  occurring at  Wigderson a l s o s t a t e d that  t h a t team t e a c h i n g  increases  S i m i l a r f i n d i n g s a r e r e p o r t e d by  1 4 7  f i n d i n g s i n r e v i e w o f team  teaching  i n A m e r i c a n l i t e r a t u r e were a l s o  similar.  1 I T  Educational  "A (October, 1 4 4  LXII  ^ H a r o l d Drummond, "Team T e a c h i n g : An A s s e s s m e n t , " D i g e s t , X X V I I ( F e b r u a r y , 1 9 6 2 ) , 7. Critical  Look a t Team T e a c h i n g , "  1961), 40.  The I n s t r u c t o r ,  ^ H a r r y I . W i g d e r s o n , Team T e a c h i n g (Washington, U.S. Department o f H e a l t h ) , (ERIC EDOT1469). 1 4  D.C:  P o l o s , op. c i t . , 72. l/j.7 K. L o v e l l , Team T e a c h i n g 1 4 6  sity  o f Leeds, 1967),  9.  (Leeds,  England:  Univer-  148  One of the e a r l i e s t reports i s that of the Norwalk Plan. For the team teaching groups progress was reported f o r 1960.  1958-  No control groups were employed and grade equivalent  gains i n Stanford Achievement Tests were compared with gains according to national norms.  Out of 48 instances of compar-  ing team teaching r e s u l t s with national norms, gains with team teaching equalled or exceeded norms i n 38 instances. Norwalk, however, should have been expected to exceed the national norms under any plan of organization because the community i s well above the national average i n socioeconomic l e v e l , education of parents, and provisions for schooling.  When, i n 1960-1961, achievement tests results were  evaluated with the use of control groups no consistent superiority was found f o r either team teaching or s e l f contained classrooms.  Out of 194 comparisons 90 favored  team teaching while 114 favored the self-contained classroom. Few of the comparisons yielded s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences.  Bair and Woodward reported that the academic  achievement of team taught schools i n the Lexington Plan, 149  as measured by achievement t e s t s , was team teaching pupils who  excellent.  Also,  had gone on to junior high school  did s l i g h t l y better s c h o l a s t i c a l l y than those from convent i o n a l schools.  Wall and Reasoner stated that with regard  to most aspects surveyed there was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference ^ S h a p l i n and Olds, op. c i t . , 327-328. 1Z  "^^Bair and Woodward, op. c i t . , 198.  between t h e  c o n t r o l and  experimental groups.  e x p o s e d t o team t e a c h i n g were t h e y s t i m u l a t e d that  the  were not  to a greater  adversely  The  affected,  neither  Lambert  reports  d e g r e e . ^""^  p r i m a r y g r a d e team s u r p a s s e d t h e i r  c o u n t e r p a r t s i n achievement, while the  children  self-contained  p u p i l s i n the  inter-  151 mediate grades d i d not. participating the  i n the  Crandell  team t e a c h i n g  found that  children  organization  excelled  l a n g u a g e a r t s a r e a s o f grammar, c a p i t a l i z a t i o n  punctuation.  Children  achieved better  i n areas of s o c i a l  Academic a c h i e v e m e n t  i n the  prehension, reading significant  assigned to  studies  areas of  v o c a b u l a r y , and  differences  self-contained  between t h e  and  and classrooms  arithmetic.  science, spelling  in  reading  com-  demonstrated  team t e a c h i n g  and  no  self-  c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m o r g a n i z a t i o n . "*"^ Ross,'*"'' B r a d l e y , - ^ 4 155 156 Knox, " and S t e r n s a l s o f o u n d no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s 3  y  between team t e a c h i n g  and  self-contained  classroom  groups.  150 H.R. W a l l and R.W. R e a s o n e r , "Team T e a c h i n g : A D e s c r i p t i v e and E v a l u a t i v e S t u d y o f a Programme i n t h e P r i m a r y G r a d e s , " Mount D i a b l o U n i t e d S c h o o l D i s t r i c t , C o n c o r d , C a l i f o r n i a , 1963, 94 (ERIC ED027083). 151 Lambert e t a l , "A C o m p a r i s o n o f P u p i l A c h i e v e ment i n Team T e a c h i n g and S e l f - C o n t a i n e d Organizations," op. c i t . 152 C r a n d e l l , op. c i t . 153 CL. R o s s , "An E x p e r i m e n t i n t h e R e o r g a n i z a t i o n of I n s t r u c t i o n i n the F i r s t Grade," U n i v e r s i t y of Tennessee, 1963, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXIV ( A u g u s t , I963) "^^P.A. B r a d l e y , " I n d i v i d u a l I n s t r u c t i o n T h r o u g h Cooperative Teaching," National Elementary P r i n c i p a l , CLII  (May, 1964), 46-49. 155  Knox, op. c i t . "^ ^ S t e r n s ,  op. c i t .  On  the  other  found that  hand, J a c k s o n ,  pupils  i n the  157  Soucy,  team t e a c h i n g  significantly  better.  K l a u s m e i r and  Wiersma f o u n d t h a t  affected,  ability  low  team t e a c h i n g , English  and  reported  ability,  but  In  studying  as w e l l  high  u n d e r team  average a b i l i t y that  Burningharn  achieved  ability  ability  159  groups,  g r o u p s were  in English  not  under  groups d i d b e t t e r  in  t e a c h i n g . K e l l y  p u p i l s d i d b e t t e r u n d e r team  p u p i l s of high  as  various  average a b i l i t y  studies  and  experiments  pupils did better  that  social  that  teaching,  and  158  mental a b i l i t y ,  those designated  low  overachievers  mental  and  under-  161 achievers  were not  B o r e n f o u n d no low  ability  pupils  significant  g r o u p s but  did better  compared  a f f e c t e d by  critical  organizational  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  stated that  a v e r a g e and  i n some s u b j e c t s . thinking,  B i s c h o f f and  In the  pattern. achievement high one  E n n s , no  d i f f e r e n c e s were f o u n d between c o n t r o l and  of  ability study  that  significant  experimental  163 groups.  157  J  > f  Jackson,  op. c i t .  158 S o u c y , op. c i t . 159 Burningharn, op. c i t . ^ H e r b e r t J . K l a u s m e i r and W i l l i a m W i e r s m a , "Team and A c h i e v e m e n t , " E d u c a t i o n , LXXV (December, 1 9 6 5 ) , l 6  Teaching 238-242.  J o h n W. K e l l y , "An A n a l y s i s and E v a l u a t i o n o f a C o o r d i n a t e d M a s t e r - T e a c h e r Programme i n S o c i a l S t u d i e s and S c i e n c e a t t h e F i f t h G r a d e L e v e l , " Fordham U n i v e r s i t y , 1967, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , X X V I I , No. 9-10 ( A p r i l , 1 9 6 8 ) , 3560-A. 1 6 1  162 B o r e n , op. c i t . l £>3  —  F.H. B i s c h o f f and F. Enns "A Team T e a c h i n g Canadian A d m i n i s t r a t o r , VII (October, 1967), 1-4.  Project,"  In the  author's survey  elementary  schools  concerning  achievement  teachers well  as  of the include -  -  felt  that  of B r i t i s h  o f s t u d e n t s was  i n the  comments made by the  Columbia the  p u p i l s being  those taught  o f team t e a c h i n g  self-contained  teachers,  the  number o f r e p l i e s  small.  team t a u g h t  in  I n most  d i d at  least  classroom.  p r i n c i p a l s and  cases as  Some  pupils  following.  A c h i e v e m e n t seems h i g h but s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s have not y e t been g i v e n (teacher). A h i g h s t a n d a r d o f work c a n be m a i n t a i n e d even w i t h c h i l d r e n moving f r o m t e a c h e r t o t e a c h e r and g r o u p t o group ( t e a c h e r ) . I f e e l I am l e a r n i n g as much as I am s u p p o s e d t o i n t h i s team but not as much as t h e o t h e r G r a d e S e v e n s are (pupil). P u p i l s who were team t a u g h t u n s u c c e s s f u l l y two y e a r s ago have not y e t r e c o v e r e d and do not a c h i e v e as w e l l as o t h e r s (principal). We f e e l c h i l d r e n a r e g e t t i n g a more a l l - r o u n d e d u c a t i o n (teachers). T h e r e t e n d s t o be a l o s s o f i n t e r e s t on t h e p a r t o f p u p i l s when i n a l a r g e g r o u p s i t u a t i o n ( t e a c h e r ) . M e a s u r e d o b j e c t i v e l y , t h e p u p i l s have made s i g n i f i c a n t g a i n s i n achievement ( p r i n c i p a l ) . T e s t i n g has shown t h a t team t a u g h t p u p i l s show a more rapid progression i n learning basic facts (principal). I n l a n g u a g e a r t s I t h i n k I am d o i n g b e t t e r t h a n i n a normal classroom ( p u p i l ) . The s c o r e s o f team t a u g h t p u p i l s a r e comparatively high (principal). One s t u d y c a r r i e d out i n t h i s s c h o o l has shown t h a t team t a u g h t p u p i l s do not do as w e l l i n r e a d i n g (principal). T e s t i n g has not shown t h a t team t e a c h i n g has i m p r o v e d the progress of the c h i l d r e n s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( p r i n c i p a l ) . T h e r e i s some c o n c e r n a b o u t t h e a c a d e m i c p r o g r e s s o f some p u p i l s , but we have no way o f knowing w h e t h e r t h e y w o u l d have done b e t t e r i n a r e g u l a r c l a s s r o o m situation (teacher). Remedial p u p i l s are p r o g r e s s i n g with d i f f i c u l t y i n the team s i t u a t i o n and w o u l d be b e t t e r i n a r e g u l a r c l a s s room ( t e a c h e r ) .  Because o f t h e v a r i e t y o f f a c t o r s i n v o l v e d i n evaluating pupils, ever,  how team t e a c h i n g  i t i s impossible  has a f f e c t e d t h e achievement o f  to give  any c o n c l u s i v e  answer.  How-  i f one o f t h e m a j o r p u r p o s e s o f t h i s a p p r o a c h i s t o  improve t h e q u a l i t y o f i n s t r u c t i o n , t h e s e f i n d i n g s would appear t o i n d i c a t e that  Student  this  purpose has not y e t been  achieved.  Adjustment  Findings  i n the United Of  States  concern t o education  i s the e f f e c t  team  teaching  o r g a n i z a t i o n may have on p u p i l s ' p e r s o n a l - s o c i a l a d j u s t m e n t . To  date,  research  evidence that adjustment. to hold  s t u d i e s have i n no i n s t a n c e  cooperative In f a c t  teaching  i s harmful t o p u p i l s '  some s t u d i e s have f o u n d team  have been u s e d  i n evaluating  achievement.  lack  The common method u s e d  i f they enjoyed being  experimental usually  of research i s t o simply  by a team.  i n s t r u m e n t s t o measure i t .  have most  on  student  ask t h e  There i s a failure  A l s o , when  and c o n t r o l g r o u p s a r e u s e d , c o n t r o l s a r e  inadequate.  influenced  approaches  adjustment  o f o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s o f adjustment and a  t o use a p p r o p r i a t e  not  taught  in  The r e s e a r c h  student  o f t h e same w e a k n e s s e s t h a t were t r u e  pupils  teaching  advantages over t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom  promoting p e r s o n a l - s o c i a l development. that  obtained  Findings  by t h e f a c t  a causal  that  from t h e s t u d i e s a r e  organization  f a c t o r i n p u p i l adjustment  probably  p e r se i s r e a l l y at a l l ,  but t h a t  many e l e m e n t s must be children  are  or  are  taken  not  i n t o a c c o u n t when we  happy i n  o r any of  plan  of  organization,  some s t u d e n t s and  Lovell ing  Heathers s t a t e s that  other  f o u n d no  had  any  lessens  the  h a v e come t o  effect  on  similar  p r o b a b l y team improves the  adjustment  evidence whatever t o  adverse  why  school.  R e v i e w e r s o f team t e a c h i n g conclusions.  examine  adjustment  of  suggest  teaching,  others.  that  pupils' social  and  team  teach-  emotional  165 development. experiments basis  of  Goodlad p o i n t s  J  challenge  adult  seems w e l l  personalities.  established that  atmosphere w i t h i n  at  as  comfortable  limited  settings."^ Findings  l a r w i t h most reports Shaplin  held  teaching  theories  about  which p u p i l s are  as  the  to  Anderson says t h a t i t  team o r g a n i z a t i o n  an  and  team  t h e ways c h i l d r e n a d j u s t 166  offering least  that  c e r t a i n widely  p u p i l s e c u r i t y and  different  out  happy as  do  i s capable likely  pupils  of  to  feel  i n more  7  on  student  adjustment  pupils favoring  the  are  a l l highly  team a p p r o a c h .  simi-  Drummond  t h a t s t u d e n t s g e n e r a l l y f a v o r what has been t r i e d . "LO^Glen l e a t h e r s - , " R e s e a r c h on Team T e a c h i n g . " In and O l d s , op. c i t . , 334. 165 y  L vell, 0  op.  cit. ,  33.  166 graded op.  J o h n I . G o o d l a d and R o b e r t E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , op. c i t .  cit. ,  "^^Robert 101.  H.  H.  Anderson, Teaching  ^"^Drummond, op.  cit. ,  7.  A n d e r s o n , The i n a World  of  NonChange,  Anderson i n r e p o r t i n g new  conditions  on  the  Franklin Project  o f team t e a c h i n g  had  stated that  themselves created  the  no  169 problems of p u p i l adjustment another report  that  there  or morale.  were s i g n s  He  that  added  in  certain children 17  find  greater  s t i m u l a t i o n and  A n d e r s o n , H a g s t r o m and team t e a c h i n g opinion  teaching  Robinson conclude t h e i r  stating that  the  teams.  report  on  overwhelming weight  of  b o t h c h i l d r e n and t h e i r p a r e n t s i s 171 e n t h u s i a s t i c f o r team t e a c h i n g . A r e p o r t on t h e N o r w a l k P l a n compares s c o r e s on t h e C a l i f o r n i a A s p e c t s o f P e r s o n a l i t y 172  Test  as  by  security within  e x p r e s s e d by  f o r s t u d e n t s u n d e r team t e a c h i n g .  significant Adjustment  gains but  were made i n P e r s o n a l  not  validity  p u p i l s out  since  of f i v e  being  About  control t e s t were  Students'  studying  a t t i t u d e s toward  i n more t h a n one  a member o f a g r o u p l a r g e r t h a n a r e g u l a r  four  out  of f i v e  felt  that  Total  O v e r - a l l , approximately  expressed favorable  teacher,  and  no  d i f f e r e n t forms of the  summarized.  h a v i n g more t h a n one and  Since  of f i n d i n g s i s questionable.  a t t i t u d e s were a l s o four  Adjustment  i n S o c i a l Adjustment.  g r o u p s were u s e d and used, the  Statistically  t h e y had  gotten  room,  class.  t o know  one  teacher ing  as169w e l l as i n a r e g u l a r c l a s s . About n i n e out o f t e n R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , " T h r e e E x a m p l e s o f Team T e a c h i n A c t i o n , " op. c i t . , 65. 170 R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , "Team T e a c h i n g , " op. c i t . , 53171 A n d e r s o n , H a g s t r o m and ^^Heathers,  op.  cit. ,  R o b i n s o n , op.  332.  cit.,  1-3.  felt ing is  that they  made a s many o r more f r i e n d s u n d e r team  a s when t h e y were i n t h e given  on t h e  Findings  suggest  adjustment  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom.  of p u p i l s with  t h a t team t e a c h i n g  c o n t r i b u t e t o the adjustment  teach-  special  i s at l e a s t  o f withdrawn or  Data  problems.  as apt  to  aggressive 173  children also  as  i s the  s t a t e s t h a t p u p i l s who  elementary  experienced  s c h o o l a d j u s t e d more r e a d i l y  Seventy-six and  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom.  percent  of the  The  report  team t e a c h i n g to  i n the  junior high  questionnaires i n a survey  Reasoner r e p o r t e d t h a t p u p i l  r e a c t i o n t o the  school. by  shift  Wall  to 17A.  different  teachers  had  been e i t h e r  M o r e o v e r , a n x i e t y a s m e a s u r e d by no  statistically  Personality  significant  showed a g a i n  of attendance  t h e r e were  i n t h e team t a u g h t  school.  "seem t o a d j u s t q u i c k l y t o t h e teachers  i n s t e a d o f one.  j o i n more a c t i v i t i e s ; interesting  than  California but  less  several  The  i n confidence  In the  children  or e n t h u s i a s t i c .  psychological tests  rise.  significant. dropouts  area  positive  most o f a l l , 175  previously."  ^  not  Test  slightly found  On  the  find  and  s c h o o l more  o t h e r hand,  Jackson  r e p o r t e d p a r e n t a l o p i n i o n s d i v i d e d i n t h a t : the  child's  I b i da.b,o u t 333a d j u s t m e n t was the  teacher  l 7 3  that  having  They make more f r i e n d s they  of  statistically  Lambert idea of  showed  same a s u n d e r a s i n g l e  plan,  191  Wall  and  R e a s o n e r , op. c i t .  175 P. L a m b e r t , "Team T e a c h i n g f o r t h e Elementary S c h o o l , " E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p , X V I I (November, I 9 6 0 ) , SS.  the c h i l d perhaps the  received  about  even l e s s . ^ ^  as much a t t e n t i o n  a s he  ever d i d ,  Sociometric tests also revealed that  7  i n c r e a s e i n number o f s t u d e n t s and  friendships  appear  to offer  experienced  i n the  i n t e g r a t e d homeroom e n v i r o n m e n t .  maladjusted  and  isolated  less  the m o b i l i t y  social  compatibility  children  team t e a c h i n g , t h o u g h  than The  seem t o f a c e i n c r e a s e d s o c i a l  d i s e q u i l i b r i u m u n d e r t h e team p r o g r a m . reported that  of  i n the  sixth  some were n o t  J a r v i s and  grade  felt  Fleming  positive  enthusiastic.  asked which o r g a n i z a t i o n t h e y would p r e f e r next  about  When  year  the 177  pupils  chose  team t e a c h i n g o v e r t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d  Lambertand others i n a c o n t r o l l e d t h e p r i m a r y and  classroom.  study reported that  i n t e r m e d i a t e teams had  minimal  both  problems  1 7 8  a d j u s t i n g t o t h e team o r g a n i z a t i o n . S i m i l a r f i n d i n g s are 179 180 r e p o r t e d by Knox and K e l l y . Knox a d d s , t h a t a l t h o u g h no  significant  it  was  quietly  observed and  d i f f e r e n c e s were f o u n d that  team t a u g h t  efficiently.  "^^Jackson,  to exist  between  groups,  p u p i l s worked much more  T h i s statement  i s supported  by  the  op. c i t .  177 ' ' G a l e n M. J a r v i s and Roy C. F l e m i n g , "Team T e a c h i n g a s S i x t h G r a d e r s See I t , " E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l J o u r n a l , LXVI ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 5 ) . 1  ing  tion  7 8  Lambert e t a l , "A Team," op. c i t . 179 Knox, op. c i t .  Study  of the Elementary  " ^ ^ " P u p i l s , P a t t e r n s and P o s s i b i l i t i e s : o f Team T e a c h i n g i n P i t t s b u r g h , " op. c i t . ,  Teach-  A Descrip198.  P i t t s b u r g h Report which s a i d t h a t students m a n i f e s t e d a g r e a t e r d e s i r e t o l e a r n and  d i d more s e r i o u s work and  In c o n t r a s t , C r a n d e l l r e p o r t e d teaching  that c h i l d r e n i n the team  classrooms were found t o express more concern over  t e s t s , a need to f e e l more a c a d e m i c a l l y f o r teacher  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  which f a v o r e d two  a b l e , and  Sterns  a l s o found  signifi-  s c h o o l r e l a t i o n s h i p of students 1 do  the s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c o n t r o l groups.  researchers  reported  increased  discipline  Adams i n d i c a t e d d i s c i p l i n e problems occurred grade but not the f o u r t h and others  a desire  r e c o g n i t i o n , much more f r e q u e n t l y than c h i l d r e n  i n s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classrooms. cant  study.  s i x t h grades.  problems. i n the  ^  Only  second  Lambert  and  s t a t e d that i n t e r n s had  s i g n i f i c a n t l y more d i s c i p l i n e 185 problems than experienced teachers on the team. Findings  in British  Columbia  In g e n e r a l , team t e a c h i n g ,  i n the s c h o o l s  by the author, r e c e i v e d very f a v o u r a b l e students.  Of the 228  or 79 percent 1  p r i n c i p a l s and  surveyed  response from  teachers  the  replying,  s t a t e d that the p u p i l s ' r e a c t i o n to team  180 teach-  d-i  A O X  Kelly,  op. c i t .  "'"^Crandell, op. c i t . 1 83 Qf S t e r n s , op. c i t . 1 8/J_ Andres S. Adams, "Operation Co-Teaching D a t e l i n e . " Oceano, C a l i f o r n i a , The Elementary School J o u r n a l , LXII (January, 1962), 203^2l2T 185 ^Lambert et a l , op. c i t .  ing  was f a v o u r a b l e .  unfavourable  8 or 4 percent  Only  and 30 o r 13  percent  p u p i l s had d i f f i c u l t y  Of t h e 143  teachers  difficulty  of the teachers  i n adjusting.  responding  t o questions  situation,  the r e p l i e s  Ninety-four  8 or 6 percent  adjustment  about  discipline  of the teachers  difficulties. i n t h e team  o f p r i n c i p a l s and t e a c h e r s  of the p r i n c i p a l s  felt  three  of the teachers  percent  felt  felt  was w o r s e i n c o m p a r i s o n t o o n l y 15 who f e l t  t h i s t o be s o .  ever, a l s o s a i d 39 p e r c e n t  of the teachers  principals. felt not  they  felt  about  situation  of the p r i n c i p a l s principals,  how-  t h e d i s c i p l i n e was b e t t e r ;  F u r t h e r m o r e , a b o u t 36 p e r c e n t  knew each p u p i l  2  Only  a s compared t o 25 p e r c e n t  and 33 p e r c e n t  of the  of the teachers  b e t t e r ; 33 p e r c e n t  know e a c h p u p i l a s w e l l ;  each p u p i l  percent  was  Fifty-  the d i s c i p l i n e  More t e a c h e r s t h a n  that they  teaching  the situation  t h i s t o be t h e c a s e .  of the teachers  In  differed.  a b o u t t h e same a s i n t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m . percent  o r 29  s a i d t h e p u p i l s had l i t t l e  Only  s t a t e d t h a t p u p i l s had g r e a t  54 p e r c e n t  asked i f  i n a d j u s t i n g t o team t e a c h i n g 41  i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y h a d no d i f f i c u l t y .  o r 66 p e r c e n t  About  of the p r i n c i -  r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n had mixed  f e e l i n g s a b o u t team t e a c h i n g .  percent  i t was  said that the p u p i l s '  Seven o r 3 p e r c e n t  r e a c t i o n was i n d i f f e r e n t . p a l s and t e a c h e r s  said that  felt felt  they d i d they  knew  t h e same i n team t e a c h i n g a s i n t h e s e l f -  contained  classroom.  regarding  pupil  Comments made by t e a c h e r s  adjustment  and p r i n c i p a l s  included the following.  Some p u p i l s f o u n d r e l a t i n g t o t h r e e t e a c h e r s a f r u s t r a t i n g experience. We f i n a l l y a s s i g n e d them t o one t e a c h e r and f o r t h r e e o r f o u r months t h e y r e m a i n e d only with her. F o r some, t h i s s h o u l d have c o n t i n u e d a l l year. Some s t u d e n t s f i n d t h e s i z e o f t h e room r a t h e r t h a n t e a m t e a c h i n g was d i f f i c u l t . I n t h e f i r s t y e a r we h a d some p r o b l e m s w i t h c h i l d r e n ' s d i s t r a c t i b i l i t y . T h i s seems t o c o r r e c t i t s e l f w i t h most p u p i l s . Some c h i l d r e n c a n n o t a d j u s t t o t h e amount o f movement i n an open a r e a and a r e h a p p i e r i n a r e g u l a r c l a s s r o o m . When a s c h o o l i s n o t d e s i g n e d f o r team t e a c h i n g i t can p l a c e a g r e a t e r demand f o r s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e on e v e r y student. T h i s makes many unhappy d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d o f adjustment. Team t e a c h i n g has r e d u c e d t h e number o f c h i l d r e n b e i n g r e f e r r e d because of b e h a v i o r problems. T e a c h e r s seem t o g e t a l i t t l e c l o s e r t o t h e c h i l d r e n and t h u s r e d u c e t h e p r o b l e m s o f t h e c h i l d who i s l o o k i n g f o r a t t e n t i o n . The more t e a c h e r s a c h i l d has t h e more a d a p t a b l e he seems t o become. Next y e a r a c l o s e d room w i l l be i n c o r p o r a t e d f o r s t u d e n t s who c a n n o t f u n c t i o n a h u n d r e d p e r c e n t i n t h e open a r e a . The a t t i t u d e s o f p u p i l s t o w a r d s work seem t o h a v e i m p r o v e d but t h e i r work h a b i t s have d e t e r i o r a t e d . Team t e a c h i n g u s i n g a v a r i e t y o f g r o u p i n g s i s no panacea. Many c h i l d r e n , a t a l l l e v e l s , a r e u n a b l e t o cope w i t h r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e i r own a c h i e v e m e n t . I n o b s e r v i n g 90 c h i l d r e n o v e r a 3 y e a r p e r i o d , a b o u t one t h i r d h a v e p r o b l e m s . A d j u s t m e n t p r o b l e m s h a v e o c c u r r e d t o some o f t h e o l d e s t p u p i l s , p a r t l y b e c a u s e t h e y h a v e a l r e a d y had s i x o r s e v e n y e a r s i n a t r a d i t i o n a l s c h o o l , but m o s t l y b e c a u s e t h e p a r e n t s have been r e l u c t a n t t o a d j u s t . Team t e a c h i n g may be g o o d f o r some c h i l d r e n but o t h e r s tend to get l o s t at times i n l a r g e group s e s s i o n s . C h i l d r e n m o s t l y r e a c t e d h a p p i l y t o team t e a c h i n g and l o v e d t h e f r e e movement. P u p i l s have become much more s e l f - r e l i a n t . T h e r e h a s b e e n much l e s s p u p i l - t e a c h e r c o n f l i c t bec a u s e c h i l d r e n c a n i d e n t i f y w i t h more t h a n one p e r s o n . T h i s i s an e x c i t i n g p l a c e t o l e a r n and t h e s t u d e n t s a r e " t u n n e d on." C h i l d r e n seem t o e n j o y h a v i n g more t h a n one r e g u l a r teacher. A s u r v e y i n t h e s c h o o l showed t h a t p r i m a r y c h i l d r e n p r e f e r r e d t h e i r own c l a s s r o o m w i t h "my" teacher. The t e a c h e r s and t h e i r c h i l d r e n were a b l e t o go a l o n g way t o w a r d d e v e l o p i n g a r a p p o r t , c o n c e r n and concept of s h a r i n g which c r o s s e d the u s u a l c l a s s lines.  - The c h i l d r e n a p p e a r happy and w e l l - a d j u s t e d . They l i k e s c h o o l , c l a s s r o o m d i s c i p l i n e p r o b l e m s seem t o have d e c r e a s e d and p l a y g r o u n d b e h a v i o u r h a s i m p r o v e d , compared with o f f i c e d i s c i p l i n e records of these c h i l d r e n l a s t year. L e a d e r s h i p , i n d e p e n d e n c e and s e l f - c o n t r o l a p p e a r t o be g r o w i n g . P a r e n t s seem s a t i s f i e d and no " s c h o o l t e n s i o n " p r o b l e m s have b e e n r e p o r t e d . Many o f t h e  s c h o o l s who  cooperated  team p u p i l s w r i t e l e t t e r s t o team t e a c h i n g . one  t e a c h e r and  f r i e n d s and  had  that  working  ficulty.  i n groups.  more p e o p l e own  nice they  The  said  survey  had  giving their liked  having  their reaction more  They e n j o y e d  l e s s t i m e was  wasted.  only t h i n g s the  e a c h o t h e r when i n  children  d i d not  and  t h a t t e a c h e r s sometimes q u a r r e l l e d .  o f some o f t h e  pupils  a r e most  interesting  and  and  dif-  l i k e were  f a c t s t h a t o f t e n t o o many b o d i e s were moving a r o u n d a t time  being  more i d e a s w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r  could help  than  They s a i d t h e y made more  t o work w i t h .  and  t h a t t e a c h e r s had  i t was  author  In g e n e r a l c h i l d r e n  a b l e t o work on t h e i r They f e l t  to the  i n the  The  the  one  comments  revealing.  - I l i k e team t e a c h i n g b e c a u s e i n many ways I l e a r n more. B o t h t e a c h e r s have d i f f e r e n t i d e a s . They put t h e i r i d e a s t o g e t h e r and t e a c h them t o us so we l e a r n more i n one p e r i o d . - I have a l o t more f r i e n d s t h i s y e a r . - I l i k e team t e a c h i n g b e c a u s e when one t e a c h e r i s s i c k t h e o t h e r t e a c h e r cqn t e l l t h e s u b s t i t u t e what t o do. - I n September I d i d n ' t l i k e team t e a c h i n g b e c a u s e I wasn't u s e d t o i t . - I t h i n k team t e a c h i n g i s a g o o d i d e a b e c a u s e we have l e a r n e d more t h i s y e a r t h a n a l l l a s t y e a r p u t t o g e t h e r . - I am n o t v e r y i m p r e s s e d w i t h team t e a c h i n g . - Team t e a c h i n g i s n o t t h e b e s t , but i t ' s f a i r l y g o o d . I t ' s q u i t e hard to f o l l o w . - The f i r s t day o f s c h o o l I t h o u g h t team t e a c h i n g was g o i n g t o be a d r a g , but a f t e r a w h i l e I g o t u s e d t o it. - I l i k e two t e a c h e r s b e c a u s e i f one i s mad t h e r e i s s t i l l t h e one t h a t ' s n i c e . But I h a t e h a v i n g l i t t l e  -  b r a t s running a l l over. I w o u l d r a t h e r h a v e few t h a n seventy. I t h i n k team t e a c h i n g i s p r e t t y g o o d . The teachers g e t more work and so do we but i t ' s p r e t t y g o o d anyway. I l i k e i t b e c a u s e i t seems e a s i e r but r e a l l y i s n ' t . I l i k e i t b e t t e r than l a s t year. I l i k e i t but I d o n ' t l i k e w r i t i n g on my k n e e . Team t e a c h i n g seems t o be w o r k i n g a l l r i g h t but I k e e p g e t t i n g m i x e d up. We d o n ' t w a s t e so much t i m e s i t t i n g a r o u n d . While one t e a c h e r i s s e t t i n g up t h e f i l m p r o j e c t o r , t h e o t h e r s t a k e care o f our groups. I l i k e team t e a c h i n g b e c a u s e i f I f o r g e t how t o do s o m e t h i n g I can ask t h e o t h e r t e a c h e r . When one t e a c h e r s a y s t o do work and one s a y s t o do a f u n t h i n g , we a l w a y s do a f u n t h i n g . I n S a s k a t o o n we had f o u r w a l l s a r o u n d us b u t h e r e we have room t o have f u n . T h i s y e a r t h e t e a c h e r s seem more l i k e f r i e n d s t h a n teachers. I w o u l d r a t h e r be back i n our o l d s e t up s u r r o u n d e d by b a r r i e r s . T h i s new a r e a i s t o o p u b l i c , t h o u g h i t d o e s c u t down t a l k i n g among u s . I t h i n k I am g a i n i n g t h e a r t o f b e i n g r e s p o n s i b l e . I t i s b e t t e r t o have a few a t one t a b l e t h a n a l o t so t h e y won't t a l k . T h e r e i s n ' t a s much f o o l i n g a r o u n d t h i s y e a r . I d o n ' t t h i n k t h a t i t makes any d i f f e r e n c e i f t h e r e ' s team t e a c h i n g o r n o t b e c a u s e y o u o n l y t h i n k o f one t e a c h e r as " y o u r " t e a c h e r .  Findings  thus i n d i c a t e that  much i n f a v o u r the  novel  to the  o f team t e a c h i n g .  aspect  o f team t e a c h i n g ,  How  the whole, are much o f t h i s  and  how  a c t u a l team method r e m a i n s t o be  Parental  Attitudes  Findings  i n the  United  Research able  p u p i l s , on  majority  team t e a c h i n g .  i s due  much o f i t i s  to due  measured.  States  studies  of parents The  very  c o n s i s t e n t l y show t h a t hold  favourable  a  consider-  a t t i t u d e s toward  f i n d i n g s a r e , however, g e n e r a l l y  not  sufficiently  specific  or detailed  o f team t e a c h i n g were c h i e f l y It  tion  Jackson  f o r having  some a d d i t i o n a l way,  conventional ing  the school  approach.  programme.  overwhelming  i n that: the c h i l d r e n b e n e f i t t e d  experiences  were a s c o m p l e t e a s i n t h e team  teach-  P a r e n t a l o p i n i o n s were d i v i d e d i n t h a t : t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s r e m a i n e d t h e same.  degree of i n t e r e s t Beighley  administra-  c h i l d r e n i n a new  t e a c h i n g , the c h i l d r e n enjoyed  parent-teacher  a n d o f p u p i l m o t i v a t i o n was  A  higher  identified. ^ 1  a l s o r e v e a l e d overwhelming acceptance o f t h e  programme. to  with  attitudes reflect  r e p o r t e d t h a t p a r e n t a l o p i n i o n s were  a c c e p t a n c e o f team t e a c h i n g in  the parents'  f a c t o r s as cooperation  or g r a t i f i c a t i o n  features  responsible f o r these a t t i t u d e s .  i s u n c e r t a i n t o what e x t e n t  such h a l o  t o i n d i c a t e what  Parents  gave c r e d i t  f o r t h e programme's  f a c t o r s made p o s s i b l e by e a c h p u p i l h a v i n g  teacher,  including teacher  specialization,  teaching  m e t h o d s , more o b j e c t i v i t y  success  more t h a n  one  more v a r i e d  concerning  p u p i l s and  1 $7 lessons.  The P i t t s b u r g h p r o j e c t , w h i c h was  primarily cultural  i n neighbourhoods s u f f e r i n g and s o c i o e c o n o m i c  favourable  depressing  c o n d i t i o n s , r e p o r t e d not only  p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s but important  school-community  186  T  1  from  conducted  partnership.  Educationally  gains  i n the  supportive  ,  Jackson,  op. c i t .  do  ' A r c h i e F a y B e i g h l e y , "The O r i g i n a n d Development o f E l e m e n t a r y Team T e a c h i n g i n L e w i s t o n , I d a h o , U n i v e r s i t y o f I d a h o , 1968, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXIX, No. 5-6 (November, 1968), 1668-A. :  6  agencies  and  groups w i t h i n the  butions to the c h i l d r e n than  s c h o o l s and  community made g r e a t e r  t o the t o t a l  p r e v i o u s l y , t h e r e was  between t h e p a r e n t s  and  the  development  better  s c h o o l s , and  contri-  of  the  communication  t h e r e seemed t o  be  188 h i g h e r morale i n the  s c h o o l communities.  reported  t h a t i n G r a d e s Two  favoured  team t e a c h i n g , 19 189  p e r c e n t were o p p o s e d . Lexington felt  Plan found  and  B a i r and t h a t over  80  their  p h y s i c a l and  percent  social  with  s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s , working  of the  areas.  project  like  their  76  Only  s i x out 190  of the respondents  c h i l d r e n to continue  u n c e r t a i n , and room.  percent  13  T h r e e out  percent  the  parents  N i n e out  i n s m a l l g r o u p s and  levels.  18  of  room t o room, w o r k i n g  f a v o u r a b l e toward l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n . Jose  parents  c h i l d r e n ' s needs i n t h e  o r b e t t e r , f a v o u r e d moving f r o m  a p p r o p r i a t e achievement  of the  Plan  Woodward r e p o r t i n g on  ten,  at  percent  Norwalk  p e r c e n t were u n c e r t a i n , and  t h a t team t e a c h i n g met  academic, emotional,  F i v e 63  The  o f t e n were  In the  7  said they  i n t h e p l a n , 20  p r e f e r r e d the  working  San would  percent  were  self-contained class-  o f f o u r were s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s  academic p r o g r e s s .  Four  out  of ten f e l t  their children's  a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s c h o o l were b e t t e r , w h i l e one i n 10 f e l t l88 191 i l s , nP oatt t a e sr n g soo and t h e s e a t t i t u d" eP su p were d . P o s s iS bi im li il ta ir e sf .i n d iA n gD se s ca r i ept i o n o f Team T e a c h i n g i n P i t t s b u r g h , " op. c i t . , 198. 189 S h a p l i n and O l d s , op. c i t . , 336. 190 Baipi.and Woodward, op. c i t . , 211. S h a p l i n and  O l d s , op.  cit. ,  335.  reported  by Adams,  192  Soucy  193  however, s t a t e s t h a t " p a r e n t favour  and  Burningharn. 194  Crandell,  a t t i t u d e was n o t f o u n d t o  e i t h e r t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d o r t h e team t e a c h i n g p a t 195  tern  a s a means o f c o n d u c t i n g  elementary  education."  teachers surveyed F i n d i n g s Of i n 228 B r i t ip sr hi n cCioplaulmsb i and a author,  172  o r 75 p e r c e n t  said that the reaction  t o team t e a c h i n g was f a v o u r a b l e . the  respondents  indicated  said  as being  Only  19  t e a c h e r s and p r i n c i p a l s .  of parents  or 8 percent of  i t was u n f a v o u r a b l e .  indifferent  by t h e  Parents  by 49 o r 22 p e r c e n t  Eighteen  or 8 percent approach.  showed a n u n f a v o u r a b l e  attitude the  o f p u p i l s was a f f e c t e d . that  Teachers  and p r i n c i p a l s  where p a r e n t s were f a v o u r a b l y i n c l i n e d  teaching, the public school  improved.  relationship  192  Adams, op. c i t .  193 S o u c y , op. c i t . 194 Burningharn, Crandell,  op. c i t .  op. c i t .  parents  adjustment  both  felt  t o w a r d s team  and g e n e r a l tone  t h e team by b e c o m i n g  aides.  that  Where  Many p a r e n t s who h a d a f a v o u r a b l e  t o w a r d s team t e a c h i n g , h e l p e d  of the  said  p a r e n t s had mixed f e e l i n g s about t h i s or i n d i f f e r e n t  were  of the attitude teacher  Findings  i n the It  i s evident  team t e a c h i n g f u t u r e use. few  of the  tion  United  are  States t h a t the  d e c i s i v e f a c t o r s i n i t s success  In the research  light  of t h i s  whose a t t i t u d e s a r e  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as t h e i r background, area or i n - s e r v i c e given  of the  Very l i t t l e  age,  and i t s  i t i s remarkable specific not  how  informa-  describe  i n terms of  the  such  length of s e r v i c e , educational  of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n ,  roles i n teaching roles.  No  teams,  indication  is  i n f o r m a t i o n has on  the  been a s s e m b l e d t o show t h e  recruitment  and  r e t e n t i o n of  effect  out-  teachers. surprisingly,  of teachers  favourable these  reported  toward  a t t i t u d e s o f n o n p r o f e s s i o n a l members o f t e a m s .  Not majority  They do  preparation for t h e i r  o f team t e a c h i n g standing  fact,  s t u d i e s have o b t a i n e d  about t e a c h e r s ' a t t i t u d e s .  teachers  and  a t t i t u d e s of teachers  who  a t t i t u d e s and  b e c a u s e most a r e  have w o r k e d on teams elect  i n g makes on them. v a t i o n s about  Nearly  a l l teachers  sharing p u p i l s with  r e s e r v a t i o n s appear t o melt  after  Shoresman r e p o r t e d t h a t t e a c h e r a d a p t a b i l i t y were e n h a n c e d by  Even  undergo a r a t h e r  p e r i o d i n a d j u s t i n g to the  demands team admit  reserthese  months.  p r e s t i g e , morale  relieving  but  severe teach-  initial  other teachers four or f i v e  the  express  t o remain i n teams.  v o l u n t e e r s , however, a p p a r e n t l y  stressful  volunteers,  teachers  and of  routine  c h o r e s and  by  increasing their  o t h e r hand, i n d i c a t e d t h a t  status.  Davis,  c e r t a i n c a t e g o r i e s of  on  the  teachers 197  react  negatively to t h e i r  Administrators teaching  are  Pittsburgh  team members.  t h e most a c t i v e p r o p o n e n t s o f  according  Institutional  r o l e s as  t o the  National  Programme o f t h e  Education  team  P r o j e c t on 198  Public Schools.  Project stated that with  their  the  The  individual talents  r e c o g n i z e d , t e a c h e r s were s h o w i n g more e n t h u s i a s m f o r t h e i r work and were making f a r g r e a t e r use o f t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l 199 creative talents. given  a f t e r the  of ten teachers felt  they  first  effect  of operation  were much h a p p i e r  classroom.  felt  two  had  thay  there  on  was  no  l e s s freedom.  were l e a r n i n g more t h a n i n t h e All  ten  f e196 lt  they  stated that  than they  felt  Seven f e l t  were m e e t i n g s t u d e n t s '  had  the  about  more  respect,  their  self-contained  in  take  they  change i n t h i s  out  Eight  worked  t h e i r freedom t o  Jose  six  i n team t e a c h i n g .  i n making d e c i s i o n s , t h r e e  freedom, f i v e  p r o j e c t i n San  In r e s p o n s e t o a q u e s t i o n  o f team t e a c h i n g  initiative  felt  year  from the  were w o r k i n g much h a r d e r  self-contained the  A report  7 J  students  classroom.  p s y c h o l o g i c a l needs  R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , " O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r E d u c a t i o n : S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n and D e p l o y m e n t , " Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , XXXIV ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 4 ) , 457. 1 9 7  and  of  Ibid.  19&\' I b i d . , 258. 199  ' " P u p i l s , Pa " P u p i l s , P a t t e r n s and P o s s i b i l i t i e s : o f T e a m - T e a c h i n g i n P i t t s b u r g h , " op. c i t . , y 7  tion  A Descrip--19#.  as w e l l o r b e t t e r than contained did  not  classroom,  know t h e i r  teachers, before. was  students  students'  met  felt and  fact  behavior that  three  evidence  t h a t team t e a c h i n g  needs i n the  that four f e l t According was  to  felt  nine  about the  i t was  Lexington  t o support  self-  they  same  communication w i t h  Woodward r e p o r t i n g on t h e little  these  as w e l l .  classroom  Seven t e a c h e r s  relatively tion  had  d e s p i t e the  as good as b e f o r e ,  B a i r and  they  as  parents  better. programme  or r e f u t e the  promoted b e t t e r m o r a l e o r  found  conten-  greater  201 i n c e n t i v e to s u p e r i o r performance.  I t was  however, t h a t  elementary school teachers  had  c a p a c i t y t o t o l e r a t e and  a greater  environmental  and  working  and  discovered, school  officials  adapt t o a v a r i e t y of  c o n d i t i o n s than  customarily  202 assumed.  O t h e r c l a i m s made by  B a i r and  Woodward  about  teachers' a t t i t u d e s are: t e a c h e r s f e e l t h a t , as a team, t h e y know p u p i l s b e t t e r and can p r o v i d e b e t t e r f o r r e s o l v i n g p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t s ; they enjoy working i n groups of v a r i o u s s i z e s and u s i n g a v a r i e t y o f t e c h n i q u e s ; t h e y f e e l t h e y i m p r o v e t h e i r t e a c h i n g t h r o u g h teamwork; t h e y b e l i e v e team t e a c h i n g h e l p s i n m e e t i n g i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n p u p i l s ; they l i k e having teacher a i d e s — t h e y recognize that cooperative teaching places exceptional demands on them but w i l l i n g l y work l o n g e r h o u r s . They l i k e t h e c a r e e r a d v a n t a g e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h team t e a c h ing such as o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r promotion, f o r s a l a r y i n c r e m e n t s , and f o r t h e s p e c i a l s t a t u s o f team l e a d e r ship. However, some t e a c h e r s a r e n o t i n c l i n e d t o o r s u i t e d t o , teamwork and p r e f e r t h e r e l a t i v e i s o l a t i o n and autonomy o f t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m . 2 0 3  200 S h a p l i n and O l d s , op.  201 B a i r and Woodward, op. 202 I b i d . , Ibid.,  183.  213-214.  c i t . , 337-338. cit. ,  192.  Douglass  found t h a t  directly  i n t h e team t e a c h i n g programme s u p p o r t e d t h e  enthusiastically  g e n e r a l l y t h o s e who  but t e a c h e r s who  not a t a l l sure t h e y wished C r a n d e l l a l s o found  that  had  had  participated  only observed  to involve  i t were  themselves.  teachers' attitudes  f a v o u r e d t h e team t e a c h i n g c o n c e p t  concept  over the  generally self-contained  205 classroom.  ^  Hagen, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g  t h e g e n e r a l optimum o f t h e team s t a f f  to note, found  decreased  course of the two-year i n v e s t i g a t i o n . are the f i n d i n g s attitudes  of Jacobs.  o f b o t h team and  He  the r o l e  Few  d i f f e r e n c e s were f o u n d  n a l response  and  differences  the h i g h degree  the  of the teacher tended  non-team t e a c h e r s were s e p a r a t e d i n t o e d u c a t i o n a l background  significant expressed  non-team t e a c h i n g t o w a r d  c u r r i c u l u m , and significant  i n the  Most  states that  t o be  sub-groups "In view  f o u n d among o t h e r g r o u p s  o f agreement  children, similar.  e v e n when team  experience.  of response  that  and  according to of  attitudi-  of teachers  of the teachers i n  207 this  s t u d y , r a t h e r t h a n any  Chamberlin l e m was  reported that  that  difference,  i s of  significance."  t h e most f r e q u e n t l y m e n t i o n e d  of teachers being unable  prob-  t o work t o g e t h e r  208 harmoniously. Bunyan p o i n t s o u t , however, t h a t d i f f e r e n c e s M a l c o l m P. D o u g l a s s , "Team T e a c h i n g F u n d a m e n t a l Change o r P a s s i n g F a n c y ? " op. c i t . , 2 9 . 205 ^ C r a n d e l l , op. c i t . 206 Hagen, op. c i t . 207 Jh aa cm obe sr , l iop. i t . c i t . , 138. C n , cop. u  T  u  between team t e a c h e r s while  a r e d e s i r a b l e and t h a t  i t does n o t c a u s e c o n f l i c t ,  conformity,  i s a debilitating  factor  209 in  t h e team a p p r o a c h t o an o b j e c t i v e g o a l .  supported  by E l l i s o n  and o t h e r s who  T h i s view i s  state that  absolute 210  team c o m p a t i b i l i t y  i s not e s s e n t i a l  Findings i n B r i t i s h  teaching. said  by t h e a u t h o r  Seventy p r i n c i p a l s  were  Only  the attitude  6 or 8 percent  satisfied  felt with  of the principals  Four or 5 percent  team t e a c h i n g were  however, have f e l t  hampered  by weaker members.  older teachers  Some t e a c h e r s  indifferent.  Teachers  on p l a n n i n g  dis-  or those  of outstanding  dissatisfied  do n o t u n d e r s t a n d  spend e x t r a time  said  stated  t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s who were  ability,  temperament  approach  o f some o f t h e i r team t e a c h e r s was u n -  i n teaching a b i l i t y .  a p p r o a c h who  team  o f t h e sample  t h e team's a t t i t u d e t o w a r d team t e a c h i n g was  Principals  weak  elementary  e n t h u s i a s t i c about  o r 83 p e r c e n t  f a v o u r a b l e toward t h e approach. that  i n t h e 85  t h a t t h e team t e a c h e r s ' a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d t h i s  was f a v o u r a b l e . that  teaching.  Columbia  In g e n e r a l , t h e t e a c h e r s schools surveyed  t o team  because they a r e  new t o t h e team  i t , teachers unwilling to  and t e a c h e r s  o f independent  were a l s o i n d i c a t e d a s f r e q u e n t l y h a v i n g  ^L.W. Bunyan, Team T e a c h i n g : B u r n a n d P r i n t i n g Company, 1 9 6 5 ) , 64. 20  Ellison  e t a l , op.  cit.  A Report  (Calgary  unfavourable  a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d team t e a c h i n g .  t e a c h e r s were f o u n d Principals also  t o team t e a c h i n g .  p o i n t e d out t h a t i n f l e x i b l e  that  had d i f f i c u l t y  last  long  in  t o be r e s i s t a n t  i n t e r a c t i n g with  i n t h e team a p p r o a c h .  o r 61  conflicts  i n evidence.  other a d u l t s d i d not  percent  i n t h e s c h o o l who  case.  Only  said  percent  attitude.  Twenty-five  principals  o r 30  were  percent were  t o w a r d team t e a c h i n g .  team t e a c h i n g . Two  prin-  s a i d t h a t o t h e r t e a c h e r s h e l d an  The a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were a l m o s t  were.  no  t o be t h e  that teachers i n the s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classrooms  indifferent  a l l i n favour of  S e v e n t y - t w o o r 85 p e r c e n t  only reacted unfavourably  said that  and f i v e  they  s t a t e d they  indifferent. The m a j o r i t y o f team t e a c h e r s , 90 o r 63  felt the  principals.  Forty-three  o f t h e sample s t a t e d t h i s  7 or 9 percent  unfavourable  of the  with-  were n o t i n v o l v e d i n  team t e a c h i n g g e n e r a l l y approved o f i t . o r 51  or those  p e r c e n t , however, s a i d t h a t t h e r e were  Teachers  cipals  teachers  Personality conflicts  teams were r e p o r t e d by 28 o r 34  Fifty-one  Traditional  t h a t t h e y worked a l o t h a r d e r s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom.  worth  i t .  Only  five  worked l e s s h a r d . t h e work  i n team t e a c h i n g t h a n i n  Most f e l t  the r e s u l t s  teachers or 4 percent  Thirty-eight  percent,  were  stated that  t e a c h e r s o r 27  percent  they felt  l o a d t o be a b o u t t h e same. Teachers'  f e e l i n g s were m i x e d a s t o w h e t h e r o r n o t  they  knew e a c h p u p i l b e t t e r .  cent  s a i d they  pupils o r 33  i n the percent  knew each p u p i l  they  d i d not  same number f e l t  t h e r e was  of  had  k n o w l e d g e you  regular  how  w e l l they  102  o r 72  d i f f e r e n c e between t h e  met  percent,  were q u i t e c l e a r ,  on t h e  the amount  team o r i n t h e  compared t o t h e  s t a t e d that the  about t h i s  fact  to  teachers,  needs  of  situation  t h a t most team t e a c h e r s  problem.  staff  as  case.  that annual  or  52  Twenty-six p r i n c i p a l s  staff  are  enthus-  changes c r e a t e  Forty-four principals  Comments i n d i c a t i n g attitudes  individual  i n t h e team t e a c h i n g  approach, annual  s t a t e d t h i s t o be t h e said  Most team  regards  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom.  Despite the  considerable  however, w i t h  each p u p i l ' s needs.  p u p i l s were b e t t e r met  percent  Forty-six teachers  know them a s w e l l and  o f each p u p i l  their  classroom. Opinions  iastic  no  per-  on t h e team b e t t e r t h a n  s e l f - c o n t a i n e d classroom. felt  o r 36  Fifty-one teachers  c h a n g e s were not  t t e a c h e r s ' and  a  a  percent or  31  problem.  principals'  i n c l u d e the f o l l o w i n g :  - Team t e a c h i n g has been a s t i m u l a t i n g and rewarding e x p e r i e n c e i n v i e w o f t h e many e x c e l l e n t programmes we d e v e l o p e d ( t e a c h e r ) . - Team t e a c h i n g has been a n o v e l e x p e r i e n c e , e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e I'm a f i r s t y e a r t e a c h e r ( t e a c h e r ) . - I e n j o y team t e a c h i n g . The more I do i t t h e b e t t e r I like i t (teacher). - A l l t e a c h e r s i n v o l v e d were w i l l i n g t o t e a c h i n s u c h a s i t u a t i o n again ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - Team t e a c h i n g means more work, l o n g e r h o u r s and a g r e a t e r s a t i s f a c t i o n and a c c o m p l i s h m e n t i n t e a c h i n g (teacher). - I am v e r y p l e a s e d w i t h t h e a t t i t u d e t e a c h e r s t a k e t o w a r d team t e a c h i n g . Some o f them do a v e r y g o o d  j o b o f a t a s k t h a t , a t t i m e s , i s most d i f f i c u l t and frustrating (principal). - Most e n j o y a b l e y e a r y e t ( t e a c h e r ) . - T h i s i s a v e r y s u c c e s s f u l team. They a r e c o m p e t e n t , happy and v e r y demanding o f t h e p r i n c i p a l ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - Team t e a c h i n g has n o t been t o o s u c c e s s f u l i n t h i s district. S i n c e 1969 no one i n t h i s s c h o o l has b e e n i n t e r e s t e d , p o s s i b l y because i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d anyone i n t h i s d i s t r i c t who has worked i n a team o r open a r e a s i t u a t i o n who a f t e r one y e a r w a n t s any p a r t of i t ( p r i n c i p a l ) . Principals' help to  clarify  teaching  they  enjoyed  longer than survey  what t h e  elementary  significant  comments a b o u t  t o note  present  situation  staff  that although  year.  changes  i s i n the  s c h o o l s of B r i t i s h Columbia.  team t e a c h i n g , n o t one  annual  It i s  most team t e a c h e r s  many s t a y e d w i t h  S t a t e m e n t s made i n t h e  team  said  their  team  author's  i n c l u d e d the f o l l o w i n g :  - Next y e a r w i l l l i k e l y be t h e f i r s t t i m e we've e v e r had t h e same team f o r two s u c c e s s i v e y e a r s . - S t a f f changes c r e a t e a c o n s i d e r a b l e problem. In 196S-1969 teams were s h a t t e r e d 5 out o f 6. In 19691970 h a l f o f t h e teams were new t o t h e open a r e a and two members were new t o t e a c h i n g . The situation  1970-1971 was t h e same a s 1969-1970.  - A n n u a l s t a f f c h a n g e s were a p r o b l e m i n t h e p a s t but not now. - Enough " c o r e " t e a c h e r s were l e f t f r o m l a s t y e a r t o continue without interruption. - T h i s has been a b i g p r o b l e m . L i t t l e opportunity i s g i v e n t o b u i l d teams and s e l e c t replacements. - S t a f f c h a n g e s has been no b i g p r o b l e m t h e p r e s e n t two teams a r e a n x i o u s t o combine n e x t y e a r . - T e a c h e r s new t o t h e s c h o o l h a v e a d a p t e d t o o u r p r o cedures very w e l l . - T h i s p r o b l e m i s n o t g r e a t but c a r e f u l s e l e c t i o n must be made when a v a c a n c y a r i s e s . - Annual s t a f f changes have c r e a t e d a c o n s i d e r a b l e problem. The team h a s c h a n g e d b e c a u s e o f r e t i r e m e n t and r e l e a s e o f s t a f f . I t h a s s e t t l e d down now and h a s t h e m a k i n g s f o r r e a s o n a b l e permanency. - The s t a f f has r e m a i n e d f a i r l y c o n s t a n t a l t h o u g h c h a n g e s have s o m e t i m e s been r e q u e s t e d .  - T h e r e were v a s t s t a f f c h a n g e s e v e r y y e a r . Over f o u r y e a r s o n l y t h r e e o f f o u r t e e n team t e a c h e r s have s t a y e d on t h e s e c o n d y e a r . None have s t a y e d on f o r a t h i r d year. - So f a r t h i s has not been a p r o b l e m . The team has r e m a i n e d t h e same f o r two y e a r s . - We have had c o n t i n u i t y . O n l y one member out o f t h r e e changed each y e a r . - S t a f f changes c r e a t e a c o n s i d e r a b l e problem. We w o u l d have l i k e d t o e s t a b l i s h a team o f f o u r t e a c h e r s i n s t e a d o f two. S t a f f c h a n g e s f o r September 1971 w i l l a g a i n c u r t a i l team work. - S t a f f changes a r e a v e r y g r e a t problem. One member l e a v i n g f r o m a team o f f o u r d e s t r o y s what has been developed over the year. The o n l y p l u s i s t h e experience of the teachers that continue.  T e a c h e r Competence and  Efficiency  Findings  States  i n the  United  E v e n i n s c h o o l s t h a t have been engaged i n team ing to  f o r a considerable  i n d i c a t e that greater teacher  results one  time t h e r e  from t h i s type  made by  i s no  conclusive  competency o r  Claims,  S h a p l i n , t h a t team t e a c h i n g  provides  for specialization  i n teaching  ization  l e a d s t o improvement  and  of i n s t r u c t i o n  that  evidence  efficiency  of o r g a n i z a t i o n .  vehicle  teach-  such as  the  a natural such  special-  as w e l l as  more  211 effective  use  of t a l e n t ,  research  on  research  aimed at working  personnel  and  clarify  yet  been p r o v e n .  p a r a p r o f e s s i o n a l s on teams has  proving  e x p o s e d t o them. not  have n o t  out  that they  extent  defensive  minimal r o l e s f o r such do  not  Furthermore, research  t o what  been  Most  harm c h i l d r e n who evidence  a t hand  team e f f e c t i v e n e s s depends on  are does the  on t h e c o m b i n a t i o n structure that  o f t h e team.  i t i s entirely  happy s o c i a l l y little.  making up t h e team o r on t h e  Educators  sometimes f a i l  p o s s i b l e t o have a team  compatible  Success  analysis, learning  of persons  people  who  of  are accomplishing i n the  very final  o n l y on t h e b a s i s o f t h e amount o f  i t produces. Some s c h o o l s have r e p o r t e d a r i s e  both  realize  composed  o f t h e team t e a c h i n g v e n t u r e ,  c a n be j u d g e d  to  experienced  Pittsburgh  and i n e x p e r i e n c e d t e a c h e r s  i n the q u a l i t y on t e a m s .  of  The  project states that:  r e l i e v e d o f many n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l c h o r e s , t h e y h a v e more t i m e t o t e a c h , t o t h i n k t h r o u g h and p l a n t o g e t h e r what t h e y a r e g o i n g t o t e a c h , t o d e v e l o p new and e f f e c t i v e ways o f t e a c h i n g , and t o know and h e l p t h e c h i l d r e n they teach. By w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r i n teams t h e y are developing p r o f e s s i o n a l partnerships of r e a l value. E d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p i s l i k e w i s e b e c o m i n g more d y n a m i c , and l i n e s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n between a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and s t a f f a r e b e i n g s t r e n g t h e n e d . i  Wall  and R e a s o n e r f o u n d  that  t e a c h e r s working  instructional  t h a t t h e most t h e y  i n a team s e t t i n g  programme t h a t  2  c o u l d s t a t e was  can p r o v i d e  an  compares f a v o u r a b l y w i t h  that  213 of a conventional school. no d i f f e r e n c e s were  found  Ellison  and o t h e r s r e p o r t t h a t  i n p r e s e n t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n and  instructional  s u p e r v i s i o n between t h e team t a u g h t and S e l f pi L classroom groups. Y e t one o f t h e m a j o r c l a i m e d  contained  212 tion  " P u p i l s , P a t t e r n s and P o s s i b i l i t i e s : A D e s c r i p o f Team T e a c h i n g i n P i t t s b u r g h , " op. c i t . , 19S. 2 1  ^Wall  and R e a s o n e r , op. c i t . ,  94-95.  t e a c h i n g procedures.  E l l i s o n concludes  h i s study  by s a y i n g :  It i s evident t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two schools d i d not appear g r e a t l y t o a f f e c t t h e p r a c t i c e s w i t h i n them. P u t t i n g s e v e r a l t e a c h e r s i n charge o f a l a r g e group o f students i n a l a r g e open area d i d not appear t o have major consequences f o r t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t y there. Team t e a c h i n g  i s based on the i d e a t h a t t a l e n t i s  wasted, the t e a c h e r f r u s t r a t e d , and education watered down when a l l t e a c h e r s , r e g a r d l e s s o f background and a b i l i t y , a r e treated alike.  Team t e a c h i n g  should, t h e r e f o r e , provide a  h i e r a r c h y o f t e a c h e r s with d i f f e r e n t s k i l l s and competences. It  i s o f i n t e r e s t t o note t h a t Polos s t a t e s that many team  t e a c h i n g p r o j e c t s a v o i d t h i s phase of team t e a c h i n g  "going  215 on the f a l s e premise t h a t a l l t e a c h e r s a r e a l i k e . " had  Borg  s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s and r e p o r t s t h a t the vast m a j o r i t y of  teams have e i t h e r no o f f i c i a l l e a d e r or have a chairman who conducts meetings but has l i t t l e  or no a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  216 authority.  L o v e l l stated that l i t t l e  was heard o f t h e  view t h a t team t e a c h i n g provided a form o f o r g a n i z a t i o n i n which experienced by being  and competent t e a c h e r s  designated  could be rewarded  as master teacher and g i v e n  f i n a n c i a l remuneration.  extra  "In the schools v i s i t e d team  teachers  were o f t e n o f equal s t a t u s , and even i f there was a team l e a d e r or s e n i o r t e a c h e r he d i d not always get e x t r a payment P o l o s , op. c i t . , 11. 2 1 5  projects ficult  employing h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e s t h a t  to r e c r u i t ,  identify,  and  provide  p e r s o n s needed i n l e a d e r s h i p  and  specialist  stated  it is  training for roles.  difthe  Fischler  that:  To d a t e , a f t e r f i v e y e a r s o f one p r o j e c t , i t i s s t i l l impossible to f i n d personnel to f i l l adequately the r o l e s o f S e n i o r T e a c h e r and Team L e a d e r . The m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s do not h a v e t h e d e g r e e o f competence n e e d e d i n two a r e a s , and, i n f a c t some not e v e n ' i n one. They l a c k k n o w l e d g e o f t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d a s w e l l as k n o w l e d g e o f t h e way c h i l d r e n l e a r n . I n some c a s e s , i t i s a l s o d i f f i c u l t to f i n d a leader with the a b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s and d e v e l o p h a r m o n i o u s r e l a t i o n ships. Most c r i t i c a l o f a l l i s t h e i n a b i l i t y o f a team l e a d e r , s e n i o r t e a c h e r , o r team i n ^ i t s e n t i r e t y t o become a n a l y t i c a l i n i t s a p p r o a c h . 2 1 8  These data suggest t h a t group of peers r a t h e r hierarchy fore,  be  levels  within able  the  to  by  than having team.  serve  of r e c o g n i t i o n  attempted  earlier  most teams p r e f e r t o  the  The  improve  Dr.  D.  are  not  teacher  function  i n t h i s way  new  authority  life,  the  217  because of peer teachers  o f w o r k i n g and,  seek t o  218  setting.  Lovell, Fischler  there-  intermediate as  q u a l i t y of  was  op. and  Bunyan, op.  cit. ,  7  21.  Shoresman, op. cit. ,  teaching  supervision.  and often  administrators unable  s t r u c t u r e t h e i r work back  219 a more t r a d i t i o n a l  not,  teams.  L o r t i e f o u n d , however, t h a t  cope w i t h t h e  team may  of providing  or a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  i n team t e a c h i n g  trained  a  a definite administrative  Some e d u c a t o r s b e l i e v e t h a t will  o p e r a t e as  3-4.  cit  to into  Subjective  evidence,  on t h e w h o l e , s u p p o r t s  conviction that apprentice teachers d u c t i o n t o the members t h a n of p r a c t i c e and  by  p r o f e s s i o n by  in-service  s e r v i n g on teams a s  participating  teaching.  Carlin  education  obtain a better  i n the  intro-  junior  conventional  stated that teacher  seemed t o be  the  activities education  considerably  enhanced  220 by  t h e team o r g a n i z a t i o n .  Altman added t o t h i s  students  on teams a p p e a r e d t o g e t  than  c o n v e n t i o n a l programme and  the  that  involved i n teaching appeared t o  sooner  overcome  221 sooner merely p l a y i n g the Findings  teacher  In B r i t i s h  Columbia the f i n d i n g s r e g a r d i n g  competency and  efficiency  and  p r i n c i p a l s have y e t On  t h e r e was  time  subjective.  an  improvement  Teachers and  teachteachers  proven. teachers  i n the  u s e d and  and  quality  principals  more p u r p o s e f u l , t h e  the  felt  of i n s t r u c t i o n .  quality  seemed t o be more w i l l i n g  would ask  greater  o f team  c l a i m s made by  c u r r i c u l u m more c o o r d i n a t e d ,  more e f f i c i e n t l y  difficulty  been  i n s t r u c t i o n was  b e t t e r , the  as a r e s u l t  None o f t h e  the whole, both  that the  higher.  teacher.  Columbia  are very  ation  of  in British  ing  stated  role  that They  present-  instructional  o f s e a t work t o admit  to  o t h e r team members f o r a d v i c e .  It  220 * P h i l i p M. Teaching," Education, u  221  Wisconsin  C a r l i n , "A C u r r e n t A p p r a i s a l o f Team LXXXV ( F e b r u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 319.  B u r t o n E . A l t m a n , " M i c r o Team T e a c h i n g , " S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 6 S (ERIC E D Q 2 3 6 3 2 ) .  was, t h e r e f o r e , f e l t and  eliminated failure  more c o m p e t i t i v e conscious  classroom, this  improved load, by  s t a n d a r d was  surveyed,  instruction  felt  more q u i c k l y .  of the e f f o r t s  principals of  t h a t t h e team a p p r o a c h b u i l t  on  success  I t a l s o seemed t h a t a  s e t up when e a c h t e a c h e r i s  of others.  Of t h e 228 t e a c h e r s  115 o r 50 p e r c e n t  felt  that the  and  quality  i n team t e a c h i n g , a s compared t o t h e r e g u l a r  was  improved.  Only  n o t t o be t h e c a s e . i n s t r u c t i o n was  felt  18 o r 8 p e r c e n t  o f t h e sample  The g r e a t e s t d e t r i m e n t t o be t h e e x t r e m e l y  p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t s and t h e s h i r k i n g  to  h e a v y work  of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  some t e a c h e r s . It  was  also felt  by t h o s e  surveyed  fostered greater professionalism. skills  and t a l e n t s was  teachers their  surveyed,  s c h o o l were  strengths, s k i l l s team t e a c h e r s resource out  shared with t i o n with not  Of t h e 228 p r i n c i p a l s  152 o r 66 p e r c e n t  T h i s a p p l i e d not only t o o u t s i d e t h e team u s e d  i n t e a c h e r s and t h a t t h e s e  a g r e a t e r number o f p u p i l s .  otherwise  teachers  T h e r e was  Frequent  found.  Complementary  staff  that they  learned a great  a l s o a g r o w t h and improvement  brings  consultainsights  members h e l p e d I t was  felt  d e a l f r o m each i n weaker  as  c a n be  o t h e r team members seemed t o p r o v i d e many  make t h e s c h o o l programme more c o m p l e t e . most  use o f t e a c h e r s '  Many i n d i c a t e d t h a t team t e a c h i n g  qualities  and  i n d i c a t e d t h a t teams i n  a b l e t o make t h e f u l l e s t and i n t e r e s t s .  teaching  B e t t e r use o f t e a c h e r s '  but a l s o t o t e a c h e r s  people.  the best  made.  t h a t team  team  to  by other.  members. area,  Furthermore, i f a teacher  the s k i l l s  Principals  said  h a d a d e f i c i e n c y i n some  o f a n o t h e r member c o u l d f i l l that through the sharing  of ideas  n i q u e s teams t e n d e d t o be more a g g r e s s i v e , o r i e n t e d and v e r s a t i l e teachers. felt  team t e a c h i n g  beginning that  teachers  66 o r 28 p e r c e n t i n their  acquire  classroom  of the respondents  s c h o o l was a b l e t o h e l p  professional s k i l l ,  many  felt  i t c o u l d be an e x c e l l e n t i n - s e r v i c e e x p e r i e n c e .  teachers  felt  individual  that  they  were much more c o g n i z a n t  d i f f e r e n c e s a n d met t h e i r  h u n d r e d and two t e a c h e r s dicated this that  t o be s o .  individual  team t e a c h i n g  specialty teachers  o r 72 p e r c e n t  a s compared t o t h e r e g u l a r  felt  One p r i n c i p a l ,  that  special  ating  out t h a t  instead of a l l teachers  the subject  Many t e a c h e r s  said  effectively i n classroom.  s u b j e c t s were b e t t e r  however, p o i n t e d  said  Since  subject  both p r i n c i p a l s and  t i m e s weakens t h e team c o n c e p t when o n l y subject  or 7 percent  planned t h e i r  i t i s t o be e x p e c t e d t h a t  One  o f t h e sample i n -  O n l y 10 t e a c h e r s  of the teachers  Team  of p u p i l s '  needs b e t t e r .  p u p i l n e e d s were met l e s s  112 o r 79 p e r c e n t  the  and t e c h -  initiative  than the s e l f - c o n t a i n e d  Although only  that  t h e gap.  taught.  specialization at one t e a c h e r  instructing  teaches  and e v a l u -  under t h e guidance o f t h e s p e c i a l i s t . that  e v a l u a t i o n was i m p r o v e d a n d much more  v a l i d when c o n d u c t e d by a team r a t h e r t h a n an  individual  teacher. Team t e a c h i n g  i n British  Columbia  elementary  schools,  i n most which  c a s e s , d i d not  experienced  and  provide a form of o r g a n i z a t i o n i n competent  o n l y two  s c h o o l s was  increase  for leaders reported.  earlier,  only 6 of the  ical  structure.  sample h a d  no  differential  staffing  In f a c t ,  8 5 s c h o o l s had  l e a d e r on t h e i r teams.  teams seem t o be u n a b l e r e c o g n i t i o n and  as  with  a  pointed  teams w i t h  had  the  role  to provide  very  enthusiastic  lost  t o teams when t h e y  and are  a hierarchof  the  of chairman.  Because  intermediate levels  competent  complaint  of is  teachers are frequently  promoted.  Comments made by t h o s e efficiency  out  I n s c h o o l s where t h e r e  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a u t h o r i t y , one  that  In  salary  S i x t y - f o u r s c h o o l s or 75 percent  were l e a d e r s t h e y m a i n l y  p e t e n c e and  t e a c h e r s were r e w a r d e d .  surveyed  included those  about t e a c h e r  com-  that follow:  - A l l t e a c h e r s a g r e e d t h a t t h e team e x p e r i e n c e h a d e n r i c h e d t h e i r t e a c h i n g a b i l i t y and t h a t t h e y w o u l d n e v e r t e a c h i n t h e same way a g a i n i f t h e y r e t u r n e d to a s i n g l e classroom ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - A more competent s t a n d a r d o f work was s e t up i n t h e team s i t u a t i o n where each t e a c h e r i s c o n s c i o u s o f the e f f o r t s of the others ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - Many n o v e l a c t i v i t i e s have b e e n c a r r i e d on t h a t boost the experience of t e a c h e r s ( t e a c h e r ) . - Team t e a c h i n g e n a b l e s t e a c h e r s who have a s p e c i a l t y t o make t h e b e s t use o f t h e i r t a l e n t s ( t e a c h e r ) . - We f e e l we a r e much b e t t e r t e a c h e r s and human b e i n g s b e c a u s e o f team t e a c h i n g ( t e a c h e r ) . - Language a r t s i s much r i c h e r b e c a u s e o f t h e s h a r i n g of areas of experience (teacher). - The b e s t f e a t u r e o f team t e a c h i n g i s t h e s h a r i n g o f i d e a s which h e l p s t o improve p r e s e n t a t i o n , t h e q u a l i t y o f s e a t w o r k and t h e p u r p o s e f u l n e s s o f instruction (principal). - Team t e a c h i n g a l l o w s t h e a b i l i t i e s and s k i l l s o f each t e a c h e r t o be s h a r e d w i t h more c h i l d r e n ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - The c h i l d r e n b e n e f i t f r o m w o r k i n g w i t h and among t o p t a l e n t e d people (principal).  - Team t e a c h i n g i s a n e x c e l l e n t i n s e r v i c e e x p e r i e n c e for beginning teachers (principal). - E a c h team member seems t o s t r e n g t h e n t h e o t h e r by s i m p l y b e i n g t h e r e t o back h e r up ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - Team t e a c h e r s have a much b e t t e r knowledge o f t h e needs o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d (principal)- T e a c h e r s l e a r n f r o m t h e s t r e n g t h s o f o t h e r members (principal). - E v a l u a t i o n and p a r e n t c o n f e r e n c e s a r e i m p r o v e d b e cause t h r e e t e a c h e r s a r e i n v o l v e d w i t h each c h i l d (principal). - Team t e a c h i n g p r o v i d e s a new avenue f o r t e a c h e r s t o assess t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r approach t o t e a c h i n g . Close s c r u t i n y t h r o u g h o n e ' s own a n d a n o t h e r ' s e y e s c a n improve t e a c h e r s ' p r o f e s s i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s (principal). - The q u a l i t y o f i n s t r u c t i o n h a s i m p r o v e d and t e a c h e r s a r e more w i l l i n g t o e x p e r i m e n t (principal). - C o m p l i m e n t a r y s t a f f members a s s i s t t o make t h e programme more c o m p l e t e ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - T h e r e c a n be a t e n d e n c y f o r one t e a c h e r t o e x p e c t o t h e r s t o do what she ought t o be d o i n g (principal). - Team t e a c h i n g r e i n f o r c e s t h e p o s i t i v e a p p r o a c h o f t e a c h e r s and h e l p s t o n e g a t e t h e w e a k n e s s e s o f team members (principal). - The o u t s t a n d i n g , e n t h u s i a s t i c team members g e t p r o moted and we l o s e them ( p r i n c i p a l ) . It  i s obvious  they  from these  are doing  statements  a better teaching  Measurable r e s u l t s ,  t h a t most t e a c h e r s  j o b i n t h e team  feel  situation.  however, h a v e n o t y e t i n d i c a t e d t h i s t o  be s o .  Team  Planning  Findings  i n the United Writers  States  i n the f i e l d  o f team t e a c h i n g g i v e  a b l e a t t e n t i o n t o team p l a n n i n g . that  daily  s e s s i o n s be h e l d d u r i n g  all  members o f t h e team.  ing  i n planning  Accurate  are d i f f i c u l t  consider-  I t i s g e n e r a l l y recommended school time  attended  by  m e a s u r e s o f team f u n c t i o n -  t o o b t a i n b e c a u s e r e p o r t s by  team members a r e a p t t o be i n c o m p l e t e Furthermore,  as suggested  a s p e c t s o f teamwork less  significant  that  and  by H e a t h e r s , are r e a d i l y  than q u a l i t a t i v e  unreliable.  the q u a n t i t a t i v e  m e a s u r e d a r e a p t t o be  aspects that  are hard t o  measure. Most r e p o r t s a g r e e t h a t poses  many p r o b l e m s .  conflicts  t h e a r e a o f team p l a n n i n g  Olson says that  because o f schedule  and o u t s i d e demands, many teams do n o t have s u f 222  ficient  o p p o r t u n i t y f o r communal p l a n n i n g and  Fischler  agrees with t h i s  evaluating.  v i e w and s t a t e s t h a t  "one o f t h e  m a j o r p r o b l e m s i s a r r a n g i n g a d e q u a t e l y f o r team p l a n n i n g and  d e c i s i o n making on a team b a s i s a s w e l l 223  individual ject  level."  reported that  because o f l a c k most  Polos working friction  of time  developed  a s on an  on t h e C l a r e m o n t  among team t e a c h e r s  f o r proper planning.  teams have been a r r a n g e d a r o u n d  pro-  existing  ^  He a d d s t h a t  time  schedules,  c o n s e q u e n t l y many team members t e a c h a s many i f n o t more 225 hours  than  before. 2  and  2  Similar  findings  a r e r e p o r t e d by Trump  6  Chamberlin.  Heathers  found that  9 0  percent  of the  l e s s o n s t a222 u g h t by 25 teams s u r v e y e d were p l a n n e d by i n d i v i d O l s o n , "We C a l l I t Team T e a c h i n g , But I s i t R e a l l y T h a t ? " op. c i t . , 1 2 . 223 ^Fischler  2 8 5 .  op. c i t . , 7 1 J . Trump, "Some Q u e s t i o n s and Answers f o r S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n , " op. c i t . , 1 9 C h a m b e r l i n , op. c i t . , 1 3 8 .  2 2 4  Polos,  22fLloyd  Improving  and Shoresman, op. c i t . ,  ual  teachers  cussed  by  which that  A l s o most o f t h e  teams d u r i n g t h e i r  coordination although  working alone.  of personnel  planning  and  operated.  227  t o o much a t t e n t i o n was  p a i d by  and  s c h o o l r o u t i n e m a t t e r s as  and  instruction.  T h e r e was  curriculum ideas. between t h e  and  and  resources,  overall  plans  Woodward  under  agreed  little  curriculum  sharing  also imperfect  the  to  teams t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  opposed t o  too  T h e r e was  planners  s e t up  Bair  dis-  sessions related  o r g a n i z a t i o n of  teams r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e y  individuals  topics  p e r s o n s who  of  planning  promising  communication  executed  plans.  228 Team m e e t i n g s were n o t Borg s t a t e d t h a t  data  showed t h a t a t t h e fifth  of the  Nearly  always p r o d u c t i v e from the  and  daily  r e p o r t e d no  team p l a n n i n g  teams h e l d t h e i r  r e g u l a r schedule.  survey  o n l y about  o n e - t h i r d r e p o r t e d w e e k l y s e s s i o n s and  percent  run.  Utah S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y  elementary school l e v e l  teams r e p o r t e d  well  one-  sessions. 30  another  Only o n e - t h i r d of  planning  sessions during  regular  school  made an  a n a l y s i s of the  content  of  the  229 hours.  Warfel  teams' p l a n n i n g majority  of t h e i r  teams u s e d t h e function.  sessions.  He  found  t h a t two  three  teams u s e d  time i n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e concerns.  s m a l l e s t amount o f t i m e f o r t h e  The  the three  communication  s t u d e n t s i n p l a n n i n g was limited. 227P aB rr ut ci ec i pR.a t iJ oo ny c eby , " S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n , " op. c i t . , 327. 228 B a i r and  Woodward, op.  B o r g , op. c i t  23.  cit• ,  194.  Teams d i d n o t employ t h e l a r g e g r o u p i n s t r u c t i o n a l effect  economies o f t e a c h i n g  of planning aides  time appeared  time.  during  Only a s i n g l e  period to occasion  t h e s c h o o l day.  Teacher  d i d not g i v e a d d i t i o n a l time t o p r o f e s s i o n a l s s i n c e ,  according  to the teachers,  the help given  by a i d e s  was 230  diverted  f r o m t h e team t o t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e s c h o o l .  Teams o f l i k e tage  gender, according  i n that the individuals  t o Jackson,  have an a d v a n -  s p e n d much more t i m e  other's  company and s o l e n d t h e m s e l v e s t o much 231 d i s c u s s i o n o f e v e n t s a n d programme. Findings  i n British The  s i m i l a r t o those  of the United  that  difficult  together and  f o r planning.  States.  ents ideas  Teachers  t o g e t a l l t h e team  cases  reported  members  T h e r e was a l a c k o f t i m e f o r p l a n n i n g a s a team.  Frequently  s e s s i o n s were hampered by p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t s and  disagreements over  felt  C o l u m b i a were i n many  i t t o o k much l o n g e r t o make p l a n s  planning  informal  Columbia  findings i n British  i t was v e r y  i n each  said  that  i d e a s and b a s i c p h i l o s o p h y .  i t was d i f f i c u l t  o f the group. t o be w a s t e d  seemed w i l l i n g  t o p u t up w i t h  respond-  t o change t h e e s t a b l i s h e d  On o c c a s i o n s  on i r r e l e v a n t  Many  precious  matters.  these  planning  t i m e was  Teachers,  however,  difficulties  f o r t h e sake  'J E. W a r f e l , "An A n a l y s i s o f Team P l a n n i n g o f T h r e e I n s t r u c t i o n a l Teams i n an E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , " C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y , 1961, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , X X V I I I , No, 11-12 ( M a y - J u n e , 1 9 6 8 ) , 483 6-A Z  U  231 Jackson,  op. c i t .  of  such advantages as:  operative skills  i d e a s and t e c h n i q u e s ; c o -  evaluation; efficient  and i n t e r e s t s ;  in-service  quicker  experience;  better teacher less  sharing  use o f teachers'  implementation  better planning;  team t e a c h e r s  provided  t o be h e l d  the  strain  outside  team p l a n n i n g  Well  aides  over  involved  i nclassroom  bers not  planning  time.  surprising  that  bers.  Seventy-nine  subject  the  specialty  schools.  greatest  only  schools  sur-  T e a c h e r s who were  o f the  5 8 percent  not  though, had  o f the  individually. team p l a n n i n g  team  jointly  teachers  it i s  teachers by team mem-  planned  their  T h i s means t h a t many o f t h e are  lost  t o a major p o r t i o n  In c o n t r a s t t o f i n d i n g s i n the  p e r c e n t a g e o f team p l a n n i n g  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e concerns but t o o v e r a l l  d e c i s i o n s and e v a l u a t i o n .  team mem-  above f a c t s  o f the  work was p l a n n e d  percent  advantages o f j o i n t  to  o f the  increasing  Fifty-one percent,  As a r e s u l t  classroom  their  p l a n n i n g and  l a r g e g r o u p m e e t i n g s w h i c h g a v e some o f t h e  that  the  that  i n s t r u c t i o n were u s u a l l y b u s y h e l p i n g  or small groups.  stated  of  felt  o r i n t e r n s a n d s o were u n a b l e t o  e x t r a time through t h e i r use.  daily  Of t h e 1 4 3  s e s s i o n s , however,  half  schedule  individuals  o f work l o a d ;  o f school hours thereby  on t e a c h e r s .  v e y e d h a d no t e a c h e r  preparation;  curriculum.  well f o r cooperative  Many o f t h e  had  better  7 2 or 5 0 percent  surveyed,  team s i t u a t i o n evaluation.  o f new i d e a s ;  m o r a l e ; more even d i s t r i b u t i o n  d u p l i c a t i o n ; and a c o o r d i n a t e d  strengths,  Students,  United  t i m e was n o t  States, devoted  curriculum  as i n the  United  States,  rarely  took part  British flict  i n team p l a n n i n g .  Columbia  d i d not  between t h e  made up  their  physical  own  of the  school.  taught  outside the  where t e a c h e r s inflexible extend  general,  i t was  study;  easier;  the  o r do felt  and  less  stated there and  too  special  A few  areas  school  i t was the  of continuous  s u c c e s s f u l team p l a n n i n g  easy  to In  individual-  progress  u s e d more  T e a c h e r s and  with  schedules  were more c o o r d i n a t e d ;  Comments r e g a r d i n g  schools,  need a r o s e .  was  teachers  had  efficiently;  principals depended  adequate s c h o o l time f o r i t , t e a c h e r  compatibility.  rest  also  not  available for  equipment was  the  difficulty  t h a t t h r o u g h team p l a n n i n g more t i m e was  strongly that  had  p r o j e c t s as  d u p l i c a t i o n occurred.  being  rigidly,  They s t a t e d t h a t  implementation  specialist  more f r e e t i m e ;  consider  team d i d a p r o b l e m o c c u r .  specialized  con-  teams  O n l y i n s c h o o l s where team t e a c h e r s  were more f l e x i b l e ; ized  Most  to  in  great  music p e r i o d s t o f i t i n w i t h  time t a b l e s .  periods  o n l y had  surveyed  any  team s c h e d u l e s .  t i m e t a b l e s and and  schools  s t a t e t h a t t h e r e was  s c h o o l and  education  The  on  cooperation  team p l a n n i n g  included  the f o l l o w i n g : - F i n d i n g t i m e t o meet f o r t h e many p l a n n i n g s e s s i o n s was a l w a y s a p r o b l e m . We u s u a l l y f o u n d e a r l y m o r n i n g s e s s i o n s were t h e most c o n v e n i e n t ( t e a c h e r ) . - The c l o s e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t i m e t a b l e s o f t e n s t i f l e d s p o n t a n e o u s e x t e n s i o n o f l e s s o n s b e c a u s e one had t o c o n s i d e r a n o t h e r t e a c h e r and more c h i l d r e n (teacher). - Team t e a c h i n g r e q u i r e s a l o t o f p l a n n i n g and communication. One c a n n o t j u s t t e a c h o f f t h e c u f f . This r e q u i r e s more t i m e but a l s o g i v e s much b e t t e r r e s u l t s (principal).  - The c o o r d i n a t i o n o f l e s s o n p l a n n i n g does t a k e a g r e a t deal of preparation. I t a l s o makes i t more d i f f i c u l t f o r s u b s t i t u t e t e a c h e r s who a r e u n f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e method ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - I t has n o t been p o s s i b l e t o p r o v i d e t h e t e a c h e r s w i t h school time f o r planning. T h i s n e c e s s i t a t e s manyl o n g e v e n i n g and a f t e r s c h o o l p l a n n i n g s e s s i o n s (principal). - P e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t s make team p l a n n i n g d i f f i c u l t . - One o f t h e m a j o r d i f f i c u l t i e s e n c o u n t e r e d by t h e g r o u p s was f i n d i n g t i m e t o meet and p l a n . T h e r e was a d r a m a t i c i n c r e a s e i n t h e numbers o f p l a n n i n g meetings. M e e t i n g s were h e l d o f t e n i n t h e e a r l y m o r n i n g b e f o r e s c h o o l , a t r e c e s s , a t noon, a f t e r s c h o o l (teacher). - We d i s c u s s o b j e c t i v e s and p r o b l e m s a t q u i c k i n f o r m a l m e e t i n g s when p r o b l e m s a r o s e and i n e v e n i n g - l o n g s o c i a l s e s s i o n s we c r i t i c i z e d our p r o g r e s s and a l t e r e d o r c o n f i r m e d our p l a n s . We a l s o met f r e q u e n t l y w i t h o u r t e a c h e r a i d e s who were v e r y a c u t e i n s p o t t i n g p r o b l e m s and w e a k n e s s e s ( t e a c h e r ) . - In even a modest a t t e m p t a t t e a m - t e a c h i n g , g r o u p planning time i s e s s e n t i a l . T h i s y e a r o u r team has met a f t e r s c h o o l e v e r y T h u r s d a y u n d e r t h e l e a d e r s h i p of the p r i n c i p a l . P r o b l e m s a r e d i s c u s s e d and g r o u p s o l u t i o n s a g r e e d upon. A l s o , the teaching assignments f o r t h e n e x t week a r e a r r a n g e d and a t i m e - t a b l e d e v e l o p e d and p o s t e d i n t h e s t a f f room f o r a l l t h e t e a c h i n g s t a f f t o know t h e room a s s i g n m e n t f o r e a c h week. T h e s e p l a n n i n g s e s s i o n s can be l e n g t h y , but we f e e l a l l p r o b l e m s must be a i r e d and s o l v e d by t h e team (teacher). These r e s u l t s suggest  that hard  made by  teaching  allocating and  data  may  ambiguous enough  are  needed r e g a r d i n g  how  I f a team s p e n d s v e r y  responsibilities  i s done by  t o team t e a c h i n g  m i x e d and  teams.  individual  teaching  are  individuals,  fail  to  develop.  and  plans  are  much t i m e  i f much  potential  to  re-  planning  gains  accruing  Findings  i n the One  ing  i s that  this  United  States  o f the major advantages claimed i t facilitates  aspect  flexible  instruction, Conviction size  does seem t o be  the  of those  ability  doing  pupils  determined  of those  questions  availability  and  i n terms of the  youngsters  f r o m one  answered t h e s e  building  the t e a c h i n g .  team t e a c h i n g r a i s e about the  relative  s m a l l group a c t i v i t i e s  of group i s best  taught,  grouping.  o f team o r g a n i z a t i o n i s l i m i t e d  remains i n c o n c l u s i v e as t o the  by  being The  and  ity  study.  up,  however, t h a t  the  nature  the  o f what i s  and  the  competence  flexibility  and  freedom  validity  criteria  for  of instruments  and  grouping,  to  evaluate  about the t r a n s f e r R e s e a r c h has  of  not  of yet  questions.  stated that  exaggerated.  school-time,  available  independent  group t o another.  the  are r e v e a l i n g .  c l a i m s f o r enormously i n c r e a s e d  of p u p i l grouping  often  on  of l a r g e group  F i n d i n g s r e g a r d i n g p u p i l redeployment Shaplin  when  and  taught  teach-  Research  merit  about t h e  criteria,  f o r team  and  The  teacher  assignment  basic restraints  number o f p u p i l s ,  and  are  flexibil-  i n teams i s t h e amount  t h e number o f  of  teachers.  T h e s e f a c t o r s u s u a l l y r e m a i n u n c h a n g e d i n team o r g a n i z a t i o n 232 as  compared w i t h  o r d i n a r y s c h o o l arrangements. ^ •  I t i s not  232 J u d s o n T. S h a p l i n , " C o o p e r a t i v e T e a c h i n g : D e f i n i t i o n s and O r g a n i z a t i o n a l A n a l y s i s , " N a t i o n a l E l e m e n t a r y P r i n c i p a l , XLVV ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 18.  surprising therefore, to find great  preponderance  groupings habits  Anderson s t a t i n g  o f team t e a c h i n g i s s t i l l  that "the done i n c l a s s  o f 20-30, a l t h o u g h t h i s may be due more t o t h e  o f t e a c h e r s and t h e i n f l u e n c e  of the a r c h i t e c t u r a l 233  environment Olson  than t o v a l i d  theories of educational grouping."  p o i n t s out t h e f l e x i b l e  grouping  i s not o f t e n  found.  G r o u p s f r e q u e n t l y a r e s e t up on some a c r o s s - t h e - b o a r d such  as g e n e r a l achievement  find  themselves  tion.  i n just  The t y p i c a l  or a b i l i t y  about  and p u p i l s  t h e same g r o u p f o r a l l i n s t r u c -  team t e a c h i n g s c h e d u l e  l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n which advance and t a k e s  level,  basis,  i s usually  provides only f o r planned  far in  p l a c e a t t h e same t i m e week a f t e r  week.  S e m i n a r g r o u p s o f 12-15 p u p i l s a r e r a r e and so i s i n d e p e n d e n t study.  Borg  grouping basic fit  found  technique  percent  t h e most f r e q u e n t l y e n c o u n t e r e d  i n v o l v e d exposure  programme w i t h  this  that  some a d j u s t m e n t  programme t o p u p i l s  each  Norwalk S t u d y  i n rate  of different  o f t h e teams s u r v e y e d  t i o n with  o f a l l p u p i l s t o t h e same and c o n t e n t t o  ability.  Only  reported individualized 23 5  p u p i l moving a t h i s own r a t e . r e p o r t e d t h a t most  s m a l l group  five  instruc-  Heathers'  v  instruction  occurred  i n t h e c u r r i c u l u m a r e a s o f r e a d i n g and a r i t h m e t i c , 233 ^ R o b e r t H. A n d e r s o n , "Some T y p e s o f C o o p e r a t i v e T e a c h i n g i n Current Use," N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l , X L I V ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 26. C . O l s o n , "We C a l l T h a t ? " op. c i t . , 12. 2 3 4  Really  I t Team T e a c h i n g ,  But I s I t  23 5 ^ W a l t e r B o r g , " S t u d y o f Human I n t e r a c t i o n V a r i a b l e s i n S u c c e s s f u l a n d U n s u c c e s s f u l T e a c h e r Teams," U t a h U n i v e r s i t y , 1966, 27 (ERIC ED01001).  which are the tion  occurs  adds t h e pate  areas  o f i n s t r u c t i o n where s m a l l g r o u p  i n other  fact  types  of s t a f f  t h a t most t e a c h e r s  organization.Trump  are  i n s m a l l group d i s c u s s i o n s .  instruc-  not  trained to  partici-  They want t o t e a c h  a  group  237 same a s  t h e y would a group o f 30.  o f 15  the  study  of e f f e c t i v e n e s s of l e a r n i n g through v a r i o u s s i z e s  team d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p s f o u n d had  no  total  effect  on t h e  the  c h i l d r e n working alone.  a conventional 0.8  school  percent  instruction,  84  o f an  school  percent  i n s t r u c t i o n t o o k up percent  found  and  less  In the percent  of the  school  conventional  25  percent  in  opinion  i n l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n .  medium g r o u p  percent.  I t was  between p u p i l s  presentation of information  Joyce,  and  i n l a r g e group  time,  12.5  private talk  and  R.  spent  they  open-area s c h o o l l a r g e group  teacher  Bruce  Gilbert  i n the  i n medium g r o u p , and  12.5  more t e a c h e r  Ellison,  reported that  s m a l l group a c t i v i t y  t h a t t h e r e was  2 3 6  size  the  o p e n - a r e a team t e a c h i n g  o f t h e t i m e was  s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n .  75  of  Where d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t  Ratsoy i n a comparison with  in a  d i s c u s s i o n group  r e t e n t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n among  population.  favoured  that the  Rich  Thus l e s s t i m e  "Staff Utilization,"  op.  also  and or  was c i t . , 327.  237 J . L l o y d Trump, "Some Q u e s t i o n s and Answers About S u g g e s t i o n s f o r I m p r o v i n g S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n , " NASSP B u l l e t i n , XLV ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 1 ) , 21. ^ L e o n o r e May R i c h , "The E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f I n d i v i d u a l and Team A s s i g n m e n t F o l l o w i n g Mass P r e s e n t a t i o n i n S o c i a l S t u d i e s i n G r a d e s F o u r , F i v e and S i x , " B o s t o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1968. D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXIX, No. 12 ( J u n e , 1 9 6 9 ) , 4389-A. 2 3  devoted  t o s m a l l group a c t i v i t y  presentation  i n t h e team t a u g h t  and  more t i m e  s c h o o l than  to  teacher  i n the  convention-  239 al  school.  I f team t e a c h i n g r e s u l t s  i n s t r u c t i o n then the be  considered.  i n mainly  large  group  o b s e r v a t i o n s o f F r a e n k e l and  Gross  should  They s t a t e t h a t  many t h i n g s t h e y have  observed  makes them s u s p i c i o u s a s t o w h e t h e r o r n o t teams a r e  maximally  e f f e c t i v e with a l l a b i l i t y  levels.  factual  material  chance f o r immediate  presented without  as i n l a r g e group l e c t u r e s , students of l e s s e r ments.  Students  effective noted  use  that  ability  may  be  Large  less  amounts o f  feed-back,  effective  with  t h a n more c o n v e n t i o n a l a r r a n g e -  of l e s s e r a b i l i t y  of i n d i v i d u a l  study  may  not  periods.  be  p r e p a r e d t o make  " I t should  team t e a c h i n g , a s p r e s e n t l y d e s c r i b e d and  be  designed,  2L.0  seems e s p e c i a l l y  geared  to middle  adds t o t h i s t h e f a c t  that  any  the  c o n c l u s i o n s about  t h e r e i s no  students." evidence t o  optimum s i z e  pose of l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n . about  class  Lovell warrant  of groups f o r the  There  i s a l s o no  pur-  agreement  the frequency w i t h which l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n  should  2U be h e l d .  According to Polos the s i z e  the f i n a l  39  o f g r o u p does n o t , i n  a n a l y s i s m a t t e r , but i n s t e a d what r e a l l y m a t t e r s i s M. E l l i s o n , L . L . G i l b e r t and T.W. Ratsoy, "Teacher B e h a v i o r i n Open-Area C l a s s r o o m s , " C a n a d i a n A d m i n i s t r a t o r , V I I I ( F e b r u a r y , 1969), 17-21. Let's  J.K. F r a e n k e l and R . J . G r o s s , "Team T e a c h i n g : Look B e f o r e We L e a p , " E d u c a t i o n D i g e s t , X X X I I ( O c t o b e r ,  1966), 50.  2 4 1  Lovell,  op.  c i t . , 8.  the purpose  of i n s t r u c t i o n .  s m a l l e r groups t h e same  way.  Research  or l a r g e r groups  242  The  findings  shows no b e n e f i t s  s i n c e t e a c h e r s t e a c h them on c h i l d r e n ' s a t t i t u d e s  grouping  are s i m i l a r  Fleming:  children  but most  c h i l d r e n h a v e r e s e r v a t i o n s about  groups  based  t o t h o s e e x p r e s s e d by J a r v i s  a r e c a s u a l about  on t h e l a c k  from  and  moving f r o m g r o u p large  to  to  group  instructional  o f o p p o r t u n i t y t o communicate w i t h  teachers.  Findings  British  Columbia  Of t h e 228  principals  Columbia,  approach ible  in British  in their  grouping.  130  o r 57  p e r c e n t s t a t e d t h a t t h e team  s c h o o l was  O n l y 14  and t e a c h e r s s u r v e y e d i n  able to provide well  respondents or 6 percent s a i d  were u n a b l e t o p r o v i d e f l e x i b l e though grade  grouping s u c c e s s f u l l y .  most p u p i l s were a s s i g n e d t o teams on t h e b a s i s level  o r age,  multi-aged.  of the time the time percent  q u i t e a few teams were n o n - g r a d e d  Students g e n e r a l l y  instructional  ized  for flex-  spent  time i n i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  i n s m a l l group  i n l a r g e group  o f t h e sample s a i d t h a t  instruction.  Two  J a r v i s and  study, and  and  25-50 p e r c e n t 10-25  t h e y d i d not use  percent of  cit. ,  individual-  t h e i r team d i d not  22.  F l e m i n g , op.  of  Only 6 t e a c h e r s or 5  teachers said that  242 P o l o s , op. c i t  Al-  50-75 p e r c e n t o f t h e  instruction,  instruction.  they  39-  use  small  not  use  United  g r o u p i n s t r u c t i o n and  3 teachers  l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n . States,  where one  might  classroom. science,  were m a i n l y u s e d also  arithmetic,  any  social  studies  used a l l types of grouping only  one  and  i s a team o f two  only  l a r g e group i n s t r u c t i o n a l l year.  dicated that  the  basis  they  teachers  changed s m a l l  and  In  The  and  need.  ability  emotional maturity,  In other  g r o u p i n g was  c h i l d r e n who  Most t e a c h e r s  groups f r e q u e n t l y to  small  g r o u p a r e a s and regarding  quiet  Many t e a c h e r s the  areas f o r i n d i v i d u a l study.  p u p i l redeployment  used  in-  groups  included  the  on  group-  dependthe  said that lack  of  o r when  Other bases f o r s m a l l  g r e a t l y hampered by  teams schools  i n t e r e s t , a c h i e v e m e n t , and  t o work i n d e p e n d e n t l y .  flexible  In-  some s c h o o l s  i n g were c o m p a t i b i l i t y , d e g r e e o f s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e , ability,  studies,  e x t r e m e example  seventy  P u p i l s were u s u a l l y a s s i g n e d of a b i l i t y  regular  in social  subject.  type of grouping.  arithmetic,  i n language a r t s ,  science.  i n every  did  the  presentations.  mainly used  this  necessary.  used i n the  audio-visual  i n s t r u c t i o n was  in  i n l a n g u a g e a r t s and  L a r g e g r o u p s were m o s t l y u s e d  dividualized  teams u s e d  S m a l l g r o u p s , as  e x p e c t them t o be  m u s i c , a r t and  i n d i c a t e d they  of  their  small  Comments  following:  - Team t e a c h i n g has r e s u l t e d i n f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g among our p u p i l s a b o u t t w o - t h i r d s o f whom a r e on an i n d i v i d u a l i z e d programme ( t e a c h e r ) . - A l a c k o f p r e s s u r e i s e x e r t e d on c h i l d r e n who a r e a b l e and w i l l i n g t o be s e l f - d i r e c t e d ( t e a c h e r ) . - I n team t e a c h i n g more o p p o r t u n i t i e s a r e g i v e n f o r i n d i v i d u a l s and s m a l l g r o u p s t o work on a l t e r n a t e programmes ( t e a c h e r ) . - I n o u r team t h e r e i s f l e x i b i l i t y o f g r o u p i n g so t h a t t h e n e e d e d s k i l l s can be t a u g h t ( t e a c h e r ) .  There i s g r e a t f l e x i b i l i t y of g r o u p i n g and r e grouping ( p r i n c i p a l ) . F l e x i b i l i t y of g r o u p i n g has improved i n d i v i d u a l i z e d instruction (principal). Grade l e v e l i s not a c o n t r o l l i n g f a c t o r . The whole group i n the open a r e a i s thought of as one c l a s s with several teachers. We do not c o m p l e t e l y a c h i e v e t h i s g o a l , p a r t l y because of the l i m i t i n g f a c t o r of m a t e r i a l s t o work w i t h ( p r i n c i p a l ) . Our team i s non-graded w i t h ample p r o v i s i o n f o r nonacademic a c h i e v e r s t o f i n d i n t e r e s t and s a t i s f a c t i o n i n a m o d i f i e d programme. They are t r e a t e d as a u n i t and d i v i d e d i n t o g r o u p i n g s f o r d i f f e r e n t s u b j e c t s (teacher). I am not so concerned or e n t h u s i a s t i c about team t e a c h i n g as I am about i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n . Our p r e s e n t t e a c h e r s are doing l e s s l a r g e group t e a c h i n g but p r o v i d i n g more i n s t r u c t i o n f o r s m a l l e r groups ( p r i n c i p a l ) . About 80-13 5 p u p i l s i n Grade 5-7 team f o l l o w t h e i r own s c h e d u l e s i n p e r i o d s 1-5 i n a 7 p e r i o d day. These p u p i l s are i n f o r m e d of s k i l l groups b e i n g conducted and may a t t e n d i f t h e y f e e l t h e need or may be r e q u i r e d t o a t t e n d i f the t e a c h e r s t h i n k i t necessary. F i f t y - f i v e p u p i l s are on a r e g u l a r s c h e d u l e f o r p e r i o d s 1-5 i n a r i t h m e t i c , language a r t s , and social studies. In p e r i o d s 6-7 p u p i l s a t t e n d a r t , s c i e n c e , p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n , h e a l t h and music c l a s s e s (principal). I n my o p i n i o n my most s u c c e s s f u l team i n v o l v e s two t e a c h e r s and s i x t y Year One c h i l d r e n . I n language a r t s and a r i t h m e t i c t h e y have developed v e r y e f f e c t i v e needs g r o u p i n g . The t e a c h e r s a l t e r n a t e the t y p e s of groups t h e y t e a c h each week. Grouping i s v e r y f l e x i b l e and I f e e l t h a t t h e s e c h i l d r e n have r e a l l y r e c e i v e d the b e n e f i t s of team t e a c h i n g ( p r i n c i p a l ) . We have a l e a r n i n g c e n t r e s approach w i t h 16 c e n t r e s . C h i l d r e n do 5 per day of a p p r o x i m a t e l y h a l f an hour each. I n the a f t e r n o o n we have l o n g e r group a c t i v i t i e s (teacher). As you n o t i c e we have done team t e a c h i n g on a l a r g e group b a s i s a l l y e a r as t h i s was our f i r s t y e a r . Next y e a r we p l a n t o i n d i v i d u a l i z e more and have s m a l l e r groups i n language a r t s and a r i t h m e t i c (teacher). P u p i l s are a b l e t o get more i n d i v i d u a l h e l p by the use of t e a c h e r a i d e s and s m a l l groups ( t e a c h e r ) . P u p i l s i n our team have the o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r o g r e s s at t h e i r own r a t e and branch out toward t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s . They have a g r e a t e r freedom of movement and t i m e t o t a l k or d i s c u s s . They have i n d i v i d u a l c o n f e r e n c e s and s m a l l group i n s t r u c t i o n ( t e a c h e r ) .  - A team o f 3 o r 4 t e a c h e r s c a n b e t t e r accommodate f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g where w i t h i n a g r o u p 100 c h i l d r e n t h e r e i s a w i d e r a n g e o f l e a r n i n g r a t e s and a b i l i t i e s , (principal). - The a b i l i t y t o b r e a k down t h e g r a d e d s y s t e m by m u l t i g r a d e d teams i s a g r e a t b e n e f i t ( p r i n c i p a l ) . Although ible  g r o u p i n g , much e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n and  redeployment fuller  Team  n e e d s t o be  understanding  research of  of  flex-  pupil  done i f e d u c a t o r s a r e t o o b t a i n a  of i t .  Costs  Findings  i n the United States Research  mation nel  teams a r e making more and more use  on  costs.  r e p o r t s on team t e a c h i n g o f f e r Drummond n o t e d t h a t  f o r a g i v e n group  cost  the purchase  Lambert  observed that  cause  o f team  However, i n c r e a s e d c o s t s may  o f n e e d e d equipment team t e a c h i n g was  stated that greater  different  t h e new  person-  and  building  o u t l a y o f f u n d s , n o r do t h e y  facilities.  effect  arise  materials.  more e x p e n s i v e  p a t t e r n s i n themselves  the  differential  o f more v a r i e d t y p e s o f c u r r i c u l u m m a t e r i a l s ,  p l a n n i n g t i m e , and  infor-  be h i g h e r t h a n  c l a s s r o o m , even w i t h  f o r team members.  through  cost  o f s t u d e n t s need not  of the s e l f - c o n t a i n e d  salaries  the  little  2 4  do n o t  ''  be-  additional Lobb  require  great s a v i n g s .  2 4 6  pi;  Drummond, "Team T e a c h i n g : 2 4 5  Lambert, L o b b , op.  "Team T e a c h i n g cit. ,  51.  An  A s s e s s m e n t , " op. c i t .  f o r Today's  World,"  Hayes r e p o r t s t h a t percent quoted  the Pittsburgh project  above r e g u l a r p u p i l  costs.  ^  The same f i g u r e i s  by B a i r a n d W o o d w a r d , B o u t w e l l  Mitchell  reported that  specifically  planned  15  c o s t s about  2 2 f 9  and  Lovell.  i n a number o f s c h o o l s t h a t  2 5 0  h a d been  and c o n s t r u c t e d f o r team t e a c h i n g  a r r a n g e m e n t s , t h e c o s t o f p l a n t s compared t o t h e m i d d l e 251 range Both  expenditure f o r equivalent sized A n d e r s o n and H e a t h e r s  agree  that  more t o i n i t i a t e b u t once e s t a b l i s h e d 252 contained others  classroom  in their  organizations.  controlled  service units.  y  team t e a c h i n g c o s t s c o s t s t h e same a s s e l f 253 '  experimental  Lambert a n d study  o f team t e a c h -  teams la mo otf t cr or i n g f o was u n d ta h t s tt heeq ui an ls t t r uoc t t ihoen ac lo s tc o s oh f et thher eeex p e ir m ee snptoanld 2 54 ing  teachers of self-contained  School  Public  classrooms.  Relations Association  The N a t i o n a l  i n i t s r e p o r t on  2 2L 7  ^ ' C h a r l e s H. H a y e s , "Team T e a c h i n g i n C u l t u r a l l y D e p r i v e d A r e a s . " N a t i o n a l E l e m e n t a r y P r i n c i p a l , XLIV ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 61T '. B a i r and Woodward, op. c i t . , 184. 249 What  W.D. B o u t w e l l , "What's H a p p e n i n g i n E d u c a t i o n ? i s Team T e a c h i n g ? " P.T.A. M a g a z i n e , L V I I (May, 1963),63^ ^ L o v e l l , op. c i t . , 8. 250 2  ]  M i t c h e l l , "Housing C o o p e r a t i v e Teaching 251"D.P. T Programmes," N a t i o n a l E l e m e n t a r y P r i n c i p a l , X L I V ( J a n u a r y ,  1 9 6 5 ) , 54.  252  ing ing  A n d e r s o n , "Team T e a c h i n g , " op. c i t . , 54. 253 ^ H e a t h e r s , " R e s e a r c h on I m p l e m e n t i n g and E v a l u a t C o o p e r a t i v e T e a c h i n g , " op. c i t . , 3 2 . 2 54 Lambert e t a l , "A S t u d y o f t h e E l e m e n t a r y TeachTeam," op. c i t . , 3 1 .  Differential  Staffing  s t a t e s that the  Walnut H i l l s  Elementary  differential  staff  School,  salaries  total  school  costs  where team t e a c h i n g  are used, are  for  and  l e s s than  those  255 for  a conventional  Findings  in British Of t h e  in  British  85  team t e a c h i n g 60  o r 71  elementary schools  percent  Many r e s p o n d e n t s , however, s t a t e d t h a t t h e Many i t e m s were r e q u i r e d by  money was  not  available.  indicated  that the  c o s t s were l o w e r . facilities  of the  teachers  Seventeen schools  c o s t s were h i g h e r Since  costs are  i t i s of value or  23  percent  to  and  Thirty-six  were b a r e l y a d e q u a t e .  T h i s means t h a t  area  teams were hampered by of school  costs  or  26  included the  but  percent that  out  physical said  approximately  poor f a c i l i t i e s .  should  teams  related to  percent  of  the  cost  o r 21  that the  cost  was  none s a i d  closely  t i e s were i n a d e q u a t e .  the  the  once more p o i n t  said  surveyed  s t a t e d that the  i n r e l a t i o n s h i p t o non-team t e a c h i n g  h a v e been more.  cal  Columbia  Columbia,  team t e a c h i n g same.  school.  the  physi= that  33  facilithey h a l f of  Comments i n  the  following:  - The crowded c o n d i t i o n s d e t r a c t f r o m t h e l e a r n i n g environment. C e r t a i n l y , at times, present teaching c o n d i t i o n s a r e a s o u r c e o f a n x i e t y and f r u s t r a t i o n f o r t h e t e a c h e r s now o p e r a t i n g i n t h e open a r e a . I t i s our c o n s i d e r e d o p i n i o n t h a t w i t h a minimum o f e x p e n d i t u r e , c h a n g e s c o u l d be made w h i c h w o u l d p e r m a n e n t l y enhance t h e l e a r n i n g and t e a c h i n g c o n d i t i o n s 255 ^National School Public R e l a t i o n s A s s o c i a t i o n , D i f f e r e n t i a l S t a f f i n g i n S c h o o l s : E d u c a t i o n , U.S.A. S p e c i a l Report (Washington, D.C: N a t i o n a l School P u b l i c R e l a t i o n s A s s o c i a t i o n s , 1 9 7 0 ) , 19-22.  ' PERSONNEL D E S I G N - -WALNUT HI LIS* C O M M U N I T Y ELEMENTARY S C H O O L  ;  CHERRY CREEK SCHOOLS Metropolitan Denver, Colorado  J U L Y , 1969  COMMON  CONVENTIONAL  Full  125-150 S t u d e n t s -  ooooooo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  ooooooo  o boooo o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  A L P H A  1 Resource Teacher  $ 8,119  1 Physical Ed. Teacher 8,119 1 Music Teacher  8,119 $24,357  ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  COMPARISONS  Cost  Teachers Aides - 5,000 $ 175,499 Figure  56  2 5 6  A Comparison o f Costs a t Walnut H i l l Elementary S c h o o l and a C o n v e n t i o n a l S c h o o l 2 5 6  I b i d . , 21.  ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo oooo.'.'ooooeooooo oodotisoooooooos ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo  OVERALL  Personnel  ;  ^ Students  OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  WH  $ 8,119 x 3 -$ 24.357- ;,  Students  oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo ooooooooooo oooo joooooooooo  ooooooooooooooo  Cost $8,119 x6 =$48,714  $ 8,119 x 18 = $ 146,142  ^  oooo ooooooooooo  125-150  ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo  TOTAL COST  125-130  G A M M A  © •  HILLS  School  0  © 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  WALNUT  ©  © 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  SERVICES  241 $136,482  ©  B E T A 125-150  Students  ooooooooooooooo  ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo  1 TEAM LEADER  8,000 7,000  1 BEGINNING TEACHER 1 INTERN C U . TYPE  6,300 1,500  1 INTERN C.SiC. TYPE  3,000  1 5-HR. TEACHER A I D E  1,575  1 UNPAID REGULAR STUDENT  -0-  TEACHER  Conventional  $175,499  10,000  1 TEACHER  1 H I G H SCHOOL STUDENT  18  $  1 TEACHER  -0-  $37,375  TOTAL COST $ 37,375 x3 =$112,125 $ 8,119 x 3 =  24,357  $ 136,482  i n t h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e s c h o o l (team p r o p o s a l ) . - We a r e b a d l y hampered by h a v i n g t o o p e r a t e i n a gym (teacher). - We a r e hampered by t h e s m a l l n e s s o f s p a c e and l a c k of study areas ( t e a c h e r ) . - We a r e hampered by l a c k o f b a c k - u p rooms and p o o r l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s (teacher). - The team i s hampered s e v e r e l y by l a c k o f f a c i l i t i e s . I f e e l I am v e r y l u c k y t o have a s t a f f w h i c h w o r k s so w e l l u n d e r a d v e r s e c o n d i t i o n s ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - We a r e hampered t o a d e g r e e b e c a u s e o f t r y i n g t h e new a p p r o a c h i n a t r a d i t i o n a l p h y s i c a l s i t u a t i o n — o n l y one w a l l was removed and we a r e s t i l l u s i n g d e s k s i n s t e a d of t a b l e s ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - F l e x i b i l i t y i s hampered b e c a u s e o f l a c k o f f a c i l i t i e s and c a r p e t s ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - Team t e a c h i n g has been a i d e d by t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a new 4 pod open a r e a w i t h l i g h t i n g , c o l o u r and equipment o u t s t a n d i n g • ( p r i n c i p a l ; * - Our main p r o b l e m h a s been o v e r c r o w d i n g . Our p l a n t i s w e l l d e s i g n e d f o r team t e a c h i n g but s p a c e i s o f v i t a l importance. We a r e an open a r e a w i t h no open a r e a (teacher). - L i m i t e d f a c i l i t i e s and b u d g e t s h a v e had a d e t r i m e n t a l effect (principal). - T h e r e i s not enough t i m e o r money t o do a good j o b (principal). - L i m i t e d b u d g e t s h a v e been a p r o b l e m ( p r i n c i p a l ) .  Team T e a c h i n g Findings  As  i n the  a C a t a l y s t f o r Change United  States  Many e d u c a t o r s benefits a school that  such a p l a n  search various  has  for  tional  i s a catalyst this  of the  greatest  the  i s apt  to  better  is  re-  but  topic.  Heathers  expose  materials, f o r purchasing  f o r developing  No  o f team t e a c h i n g  v i e w s on  team t e a c h i n g  curricular  e q u i p m e n t , and  f o r needed changes.  aspect  express s i m i l a r  installing  improving  one  d e r i v e s f r o m i n t r o d u c i n g team t e a c h i n g  been done on  authors  stated that  believe that  needs  instruc-  instructional  techniques felt  through  that  about  in-service teacher  team t e a c h i n g  class size  curriculum  education.  Anderson  h a d s t i m u l a t e d much f r e s h t h i n k i n g  and o r g a n i z a t i o n , g r o u p i n g  decisions, division  practices, basic  o f t h e w o r k l o a d among  teachers,  2 58 and  t h e bases o f p u p i l w e l f a r e .  I n 1964,  ?  Anderson  pointed  out t h a t team t e a c h i n g p r o j e c t s f r e q u e n t l y combine c o o p e r a t i v e t e a c h i n g , t h e u s e o f n o n p r o f e s s i o n a l a i d e s , n o n g r a d i n g and t h e  259 use  o f new t e c h n o l o g y .  tecture  i n many p a r t s  '  Sargent  noted that  o f the country  school  a p p e a r e d t o be  archiconsider2 60  ably  i n f l u e n c e d by t h e demand f o r f l e x i b l e  A report  on t h e Norwalk P l a n  claimed  and v a r y i n g  space.  t h a t team t e a c h i n g h a d  vbeen i s u a la mc aa t i en ns tt r ufcotri oimprovement n a l t e c h n i q uie n s ,c u a t ae lr yi ta il cs , a g r rnidc utleuamc,h e ra u d i o operation. all  give  2 6 1  Becker,  2 6 2  C a rr ll i n  2 6 3  and B i s c h o f f and E n n s  2 6  ^  similar testimonials.  2 57 ating  H e a t h e r s , " R e s e a r c h on I m p l e m e n t i n g C o o p e r a t i v e T e a c h i n g , " op. c i t . , 3 2 .  and E v a l u -  2 58  A n d e r s o n , "Team T e a c h i n g , "  op. c i t . , 52.  259 Staff  Anderson, " O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Character o f E d u c a t i o n : U t i l i z a t i o n a n d D e p l o y m e n t , " op. c i t . , 4 5 5 - 4 5 6 . S h a p l i n and O l d s , op. c i t . , 216-240. 2 6 0  2 6 l  LXXI  Harry  (June, 1962), 2 6 3  325.  Ibid.,  A. B e c k e r , "Team T e a c h i n g , "  Carlin,  44.  op. c i t . ,  352-353.  B i s c h o f f and E n n s , op. c i t . , 3 - 4 .  Instructor,  Of t h e 85 p r i n c i p a l s w h e t h e r o r n o t team t e a c h i n g innovations  h a d been a c a t a l y s t  said that  s t a t e d that as a r e s u l t  only  the reverse  teaching ary  first  schools  as a r e s u l t  the p r i n c i p a l s  material  In other  ideas  innovated  team  About 25  took i n many percent  and o t h e r  s i n c e team t e a c h i n g was begun. teaching  and s p e c i a l i z a t i o n ,  particularly  music, a r t and s c i e n c e developed o f t h e team's a c t i v i t i e s .  by t h e team were l a t e r  classrooms.  c h i l d r e n throughout  tried  at a l l  I n many by t e a c h e r s  More f r e e d o m and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  t h e s c h o o l was t h e outcome i n many  The u s e o f p a r e n t  teams a n d t h e n  was a d o p t e d  i n d i c a t e d t h a t more t e c h n o l o g y  cooperative  conventional  cases.  schools  Secondary  t h e team and l a t e r  o f t h e team a p p r o a c h .  grade l e v e l s as a r e s u l t  the  progress.  F l e x i b l e grouping  p h y s i c a l education,  cases  have  teaching  One s c h o o l r e p o r t e d t h a t  worked w i t h  a i d s were u s e d  Frequently  for  established, others  s p o r t s , m u s i c , a r t , drama and o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s .  classes also.  in  principals  I n q u i t e a few s c h o o l s team  occurred.  regular  in  Several  i t had  r e s u l t e d i n an i n t e g r a t i o n o f e l e m e n t a r y a n d s e c o n d -  school teachers  of  that  Enthusiastic teachers  t o n o n - g r a d i n g and c o n t i n u o u s  just  f o r other  e n c o u r a g e d i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n w i t h i n t h e team b u t a l s o  throughout the school. led  said  i t had n o t .  o f one team b e i n g  were a d d e d i n f o l l o w i n g y e a r s . not  t o the question of  i n t h e s c h o o l , 47 o r 56 p e r c e n t  37 o r 44 p e r c e n t  and  responding  spread  aides also often f i r s t throughout  the school.  started i n Comments  - Team t e a c h i n g i n o u r open a r e a h a s o v e r f l o w e d i n t o t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m complex so t h a t c o o p e r a t i v e t e a c h i n g and p l a n n i n g now e x i s t s a t a l l levels. - Team t e a c h i n g h a s n o t been a c a t a l y s t f o r o t h e r i n n o v a t i o n s i n t h e s c h o o l , b u t i t h a s made t e a c h e r s more open t o i m p l e m e n t i n g i d e a s f o r c o n t i n u o u s p r o g r e s s , f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g and i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n . - The most o b s e r v a b l e a t t r i b u t e o f o u r programme h a s been t h e s h a r i n g o f i d e a s . T h i s h a s l e d t o many interesting innovations. - Team t e a c h i n g has h e l p e d i n o u r f o r m u l a t i o n o f behavioral objectives. I t has p r o b a b l y enlarged t h e c o n c e p t t h a t i t i s what t h e c h i l d knows t h a t c o u n t s n o t j u s t what g r a d e he h a p p e n s t o be assigned t o . - O t h e r t e a c h e r s i n t h e s c h o o l a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n team t e a c h i n g and f r e q u e n t l y c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e a c t u a l programme. Teachers i n conventional c l a s s e s are t r y i n g some o f t h e t e c h n i q u e s d e v e l o p e d by t h e team. - As a r e s u l t o f team t e a c h i n g , t e a c h e r s a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y r e a d y t o exchange s u b j e c t s and s p e c i a l i z e t o a greater extent. - A l l teams have a f f e c t e d o t h e r s w i t h r e g a r d s t o grouping, f i e l d t r i p s , m a t e r i a l usage, c o o r d i n a t i n g s u b j e c t m a t t e r and i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n . - Y e s , a s a r e s u l t o f team t e a c h i n g n o n - g r a d i n g and i n s t r u c t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s w i l l be s l o w l y i n t e g r a t e d into the school. - An e n t h u s i a s t i c v o l u n t e e r programme h a s r e s u l t e d . - Team t e a c h i n g h a s been a c a t a l y s t f o r change i n t h a t a l l t h e s t a f f now seem s o l d on t h e i d e a o f c o n t i n u o u s progress. - I m a g i n a t i v e t e a c h i n g o f t e n r e s u l t s f r o m team e f f o r t s . - As an outcome o f team t e a c h i n g f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g i s used i n the primary grades; the s t a t i o n s approach i s u s e d i n G r a d e 5; a n d more t e c h n o l o g y i s u s e d .  Team T e a c h i n g  Findings  Implementation  i n the United  States  R e s e a r c h e r s have g i v e n team t e a c h i n g weakness  plans  i n research  the process  s c a r c e l y any a t t e n t i o n . studies since, u n t i l  of implementing This  i s a major  problems o f  implementation have been s o l v e d , t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f outcomes i s of l i m i t e d value.  Most s t u d i e s d e s c r i b e the g e n e r a l  f e a t u r e s o f team t e a c h i n g and proceed on the assumption t h a t they have been f u l l y implemented.  Heathers s t a t e d t h a t "a  good case can be made f o r t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t none o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l plans c u r r e n t l y being t e s t e d i n American s c h o o l s has y e t been f u l l y implemented i n any l o c a l i t y . " ' 2 6  5  Research i s t h e r e f o r e needed t o develop instruments and procedures t h a t measure the extent t o which each f e a t u r e o f team t e a c h i n g has been placed i n e f f e c t .  Researchers must  a l s o determine how o f t e n team t e a c h i n g i s adopted due t o urgent  pressures t o copy changes made elsewhere, the c o n v i c -  t i o n t h a t t h e programme has proven i t s worth, or the b e l i e f t h a t t h e best way t o judge a programme's value f o r one's O  A A  s c h o o l i s through l o c a l t r y o u t . Reports l i s t  numerous f i n d i n g s on the v a r i o u s  a s p e c t s o f implementing team t e a c h i n g but these a r e u s u a l l y summary statements without  supporting  data.  One o f t h e  major problems l i s t e d i s inadequate p r e - p l a n n i n g .  Lambert  s t a t e d t h a t s e t t i n g up a good i n s t r u c t i o n a l team r e q u i r e s a great d e a l o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l work and vast amounts of O  A  planning.  *"7  '  Roberts f e l t  t h a t t e a c h e r s p l a n n i n g t o become  265  ^Heathers, "Research on Team Teaching," S h a p l i n and Olds, op. c i t . , 3 1 2 . 2 6 6  in  I b i d . , 321.  Lambert, "Team Teaching S c h o o l , " op. c i t . , 88.  f o r the Elementary  part  o f a team n e e d p r i o r  experience  i n curriculum  develop-  268 ment and s t u d y  i n group dynamics.  school  principals  stated that  a year  was n e c e s s a r y  discovered  the  however, t h a t  of f i n a n c i a l  Borg  r e l a t i v e l y few  support  considered  Forty-two percent  Thirty-two  percent  said that  planning  was p o s s i b l e a n d f i f t y - o n e  planning  t o o k p l a c e a f t e r t h e team was  percent  very said  was g e t t i n g teams t o d e f i n e t h e i r thirty-six  percent  objectives.  of the schools  of  t o do little  that 270  most  operating.  Another major problem i n implementing  that  up t o  a n d c o n s u l t a t i o n among 269  h a d no f u n d s a v a i l a b l e t o pay t e a c h e r s  pre-planning.  that  period, probably  f o r adequate p r e - p l a n n i n g .  schools  reported  i t came i n t o o p e r a t i o n .  i n h i s survey,  programmes h a d t h e t y p e necessary  a long  f o r planning  members o f a team b e f o r e  Lovell  felt  team  teaching  Borg  reported  this  t o be a n  271 obstacle.  Simendinger a l s o p o i n t s  definition  o f t h e team t e a c h i n g  causes o f major problems d u r i n g  out t h a t  "the lack o f  p r a c t i c e was one o f t h e the f i r s t  delineated  year  a s was  poorly  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , plus a lack o f understanding of G.M. R o b e r t s , "Case S t u d i e s 272 o f Two N o n g r a d e d E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l Programmes," U n i v e r s i t t h e p h i l o s o p h y u n d e r l y i n g t h e a p p r o a c h . " y o f T e n n e s s e e , 1964, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , XXV (November, 1964) 2 6 9  2 7 <  Lovell,  op. c i t . , 48.  ^ B o r g , op. c i t .  The welding together of a team unit i s another problem.  Cunningham reported that the problem of finding persons  with the combination of knowledge and s k i l l to f u l f i l l  a  273  team's requirements were extensive. that " d i f f i c u l t y  Simendinger writes  lay i n the time and personality  required to weld i n d i v i d u a l teachers sharing u n i t . " ^ " 27  into one  factors  cooperative,  Other reports indicate that the  annual turn over among elementary teachers  causes  large difficulty  i n team organization. Other problems reported i n implementing team teaching included the d i f f i c u l t y team teaching,  adjusting  for team teaching,  of adapting available  space to  to peer scrutiny, preparing  students  lack of resource people and necessary  equipment, dread of the unfamiliar, and the problem of curriculum reconstruction.  The Lexington Plan contains  several  275  valuable chapters on implementing team teaching.  Chapters  by Anderson, Granis and Sargent i n the Shaplin and Olds volume also offer numerous g u i d e l i n e s .  2 7 6  Useful information  on problems and solutions i s also found i n reports by administ r a t o r s i n the Wisconsin Improvement Programme and the Norwalk Plan.  273  Luvern L. Cunningham, "Essential Components of Teaching Teams," Canadian Administrator, I I , No. 8 (May, 1 9 6 5 ) , 36. 27A  ^Simendinger, op. c i t . , 49275 Bair and Woodward, op. c i t . , 3 6 - I 8 7 . 2 7 6  S h a p l i n and Olds, op. c i t . , 123-269-  I n t h e 85 e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s C o l u m b i a , team t e a c h i n g  was  reasons.  o r 27 p e r c e n t  teaching  I n 22 s c h o o l s  surveyed  implemented f o r a v a r i e t y o f  grew f r o m c o n s i d e r a t i o n s  o f t h e sample team  o f s p a c e and s c h o o l  Sometimes o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r team t e a c h i n g and  at other  enabled  team t e a c h i n g  t o take  place.  team t e a c h i n g  was  open a r e a s .  One  said  were  principal  introduced  more c l a s s r o o m s .  small the as  a space t h a t  a classroom.  a d d i t i o n s , two  they  t h a t h i s s c h o o l was begun i n o r d e r  resulted.  c l a s s r o o m s were b u i l t i t necessary  responses  o f t h e sample t h e y  had i n i t i a t e d  indicated that had i n i t i a t e d  o f t h e sample t h e s c h o o l I n many c a s e s ,  take  In another  case  h a d t o be u s e d  I n q u i t e a few  without  a wall  Such  teachers  t h e i r wishes.  team t e a c h i n g ,  i n 13 s c h o o l s  new  between  t o cooperate.  i n team s i t u a t i o n s a g a i n s t  a s k e d t o i n d i c a t e who  to  so  so l a r g e and i n so  t o r n down and a gymnasium  found  and open  of providing  p o l i c i e s have r e s u l t e d i n q u i t e a few  placed  percent  was  way  were u n m a n a g e a b l e .  Team t e a c h i n g  them and t e a c h e r s  cipals'  t h a t team t e a c h i n g  Teams, however, were  o l d s c h o o l was  being  exist,  Many p r i n c i p a l s i n -  a s an i n e x p e n s i v e  team t e a c h i n g  off shift.  building  were s e e n t o  f o r c e d by t h e b u i l d i n g o f new  Another r e p o r t e d  overcrowded t h a t pupils  layout.  t i m e s a l t e r a t i o n s were made t o b u i l d i n g s w h i c h  dicated that  areas  in British  When  prin-  o r 16  percent  i t , and i n 12 s c h o o l s  o r 15  board had.  however, t e a c h e r s  have r e q u e s t e d  that  team t e a c h i n g schools teaching  be i m p l e m e n t e d .  stated this  t o be s o .  s y s t e m was  T h i r t y o r 36  percent  Four s c h o o l s  found that  the organization that  from the e d u c a t i o n a l  philosophies  continuous  individualized  progress,  unplanned s t a f f  cooperation  i n t o team t e a c h i n g special was  introduced and  to give  Frequently  formalized  Sometimes i t  b a s i c work i n a  subject,  s t u d i e s and s c i e n c e , t o a l l c h i l d r e n i n  schools  to t r y i t .  so t h a t  logically  be made o f t h e  of teachers.  i n d i c a t e d t h a t team t e a c h i n g  a f t e r members o f t h e s t a f f  requested  started  social  Several  c l a s s e s was  a team  non-grading,  instruction.  so t h a t more u s e c o u l d  a l s o begun a s an a t t e m p t  a grade.  of the s c h o o l —  across  i n t e r e s t s and a b i l i t i e s  particularly  followed  of the  saw  I n a few c a s e s  audio-visual aids  could  was  i t i n other l a r g e groups  be more  areas were  economically  used. In t h e m a j o r i t y ledge  or experience  l i t e r a t u r e , was complained  extremely l i t t l e  o f team t e a c h i n g ,  used  or a v a i l a b l e .  of a lack of information  team t e a c h i n g  practical  or from  P r i n c i p a l s and on how  know-  teachers  a philosophy  of  i s a c t u a l l y c a r r i e d out.  Difficulties were  of schools  associated with  i n d i c a t e d by t h e 85 p r i n c i p a l s  as  team  implementation  being:  L a c k o f p l a n n i n g t i m e b e f o r e and d u r i n g i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( 1 2 ) , l a c k o f t r a i n i n g f o r team t e a c h i n g ( 4 ) , l a c k o f i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t team t e a c h i n g ( 6 ) , l a c k o f t e a c h e r s ' c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e programme ( 6 ) , l a c k o f w i l l i n g and a b l e t e a c h e r s ( 6 ) , i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y o f team members ( 1 0 ) , p o o r f a c i l i t i e s ( 5 ) , l a c k o f m a t e r i a l s and equipment (2) and b e i n g on v i e w and open t o c r i t i c i s m o f visitors(2).  In some s c h o o l s t h e s e staff hiring.  difficulties  arose  T e a c h e r s were h i r e d  at the d i s t r i c t  started  a s c o m p l e t e s t r a n g e r s on a team.  teacher  conflicts  evolved.  or long delays before  Many teams f e l t  select  their  before  the start  frustrated  own members.  Little  level  and  This resulted i n a team  finally  because they  c o u l d not  opportunity to select  o f t h e s c h o o l y e a r meant  be no m e e t i n g s t o p l a n , c o o r d i n a t e in  through p o l i c i e s of  that there  teams  could  or r e c o n c i l e d i f f e r e n c e s  philosophy, Money g r a n t s g i v e n t o 6 4 o r 76  not  f o r team t e a c h i n g percent  implementation  of the schools.  were  S i x or 8  percent  o f t h e s c h o o l s were g i v e n money g r a n t s .  Five or 6  percent  o f t h e s c h o o l s s a i d t h e y were g i v e n v e r y  small  for  m a t e r i a l s and e q u i p m e n t .  that  they  visits  requested  A l t h o u g h many s c h o o l s  money f o r i n - s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g ,  in  indicated including  t o o t h e r s c h o o l s , o n l y s i x s c h o o l s r e c e i v e d enough t o  p r o v i d e an a d e q u a t e programme. that  grants,  These s i x s c h o o l s  t h e y were a b l e t o p l a n a y e a r  British  pre-planning majority  a h e a d , v i s i t team  Columbia and/or t h e U n i t e d  short t r i a l  p e r i o d s o f team t e a c h i n g .  planning  after  schools  S t a t e s , a n d s e t up A few s c h o o l s met f o r  d u r i n g t h e summer months w i t h o u t  did their  reported  pay, but t h e  team t e a c h i n g  was  implemented. The 85 p r i n c i p a l s ful  implementation  surveyed i n d i c a t e d that  o f team t e a c h i n g  success-  depended upon:  C o m p a t i b i l i t y o f team m e m b e r s ( 3 1 ) ; c o o p e r a t i o n o f team members ( 2 2 ) ; a d e q u a t e f a c i l i t i e s and m a t e r i a l s (17);  team members b a s i c agreement on p e r s o n a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l p h i l o s o p h y ( 1 8 ) ; e n e r g e t i c , e n t h u s i a s t i c and i m a g i n a t i v e t e a c h e r s ( 1 4 ) ; h a r d w o r k i n g , w i l l i n g and c o m m i t t e d t e a c h e r s ( 1 6 ) ; f l e x i b l e and v e r s a t i l e t e a c h e r s (5); competent and p r o f e s s i o n a l t e a c h e r s ( 9 ) ; support of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n (7); c a r e f u l s e l e c t i o n o f team members (5); adequate time f o r p l a n n i n g b e f o r e , d u r i n g and a f t e r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n (6); w i l l i n g n e s s of teachers t o compromise ( 4 ) ; a d e q u a t e p a r a - p r o f e s s i o n a l s ( 4 ) ; c o n t i n u o u s r e - e v a l u a t i o n and a s s e s s m e n t ( 4 ) ; p r o p e r p u p i l s e l e c t i o n ( 4 ) ; good l i a i s o n w i t h p a r e n t s ( 2 ) ; g o o d l e a d e r s h i p ( 2 ) ; c o m p l e m e n t a r y s t r e n g t h s and s k i l l s i n team members ( 2 ) ; f l e x i b l e g r o u p i n g ( 1 ) ; and a s e n s e o f humour ( 1 ) . The mentation  f o l l o w i n g comments r e g a r d i n g team t e a c h i n g  were made by t h e  imple-  principals.  - Two t e a c h e r s r e q u e s t e d p e r m i s s i o n t o p l a n a team approach. T h e s e t e a c h e r s h a d worked c l o s e l y t o g e t h e r , but i n s e p a r a t e c l a s s e s , f o r two y e a r s . Few difficult i e s were e n c o u n t e r e d ; o n l y t h o s e o f f i n d i n g money t o p u r c h a s e s p e c i a l t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g m a t e r i a l s . - We were l e f t w i t h l i t t l e c h o i c e when an eight-room open a r e a a d d i t i o n was b u i l t t h r e e y e a r s ago. Some d i f f i c u l t i e s d e v e l o p e d when t e a c h e r s who had f o r y e a r s t a u g h t i n s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s r o o m s had t o t e a c h i n t h e open a r e a . - Two open a r e a s were b u i l t and t e a c h e r s a s s i g n e d t o them. I t was a " s i n k o r swim" s i t u a t i o n . By some g e n t l e arm t w i s t i n g new t e a c h e r s have been a d d e d who showed a c o m p a t i b i l i t y and i n t e r e s t i n t h e a r e a . - I n o u r s c h o o l , p r o s p e c t i v e t e a c h e r s were g i v e n t o u r s o f e x i s t i n g open a r e a s . S u i t a b l e s t u d e n t s were selected. A f o u r c l a s s r o o m a r e a was m o d i f i e d by removing w a l l s . Some s p e c i a l equipment was p r o v i d e d . D i f f i c u l t i e s arose because l a c k of s p e c i f i c s t a f f t r a i n i n g resulted i n i n i t i a l purposeless a c t i v i t y . - T e a c h e r s i n t h e s c h o o l had s u c h c o m p l e m e n t a r y s t r e n g t h s that they recognized these themselves. Team t e a c h i n g grew f r o m i n i t i a l p l a t o o n i n g . The d i f f i c u l t i e s o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n were p h y s i c a l o n e s . - Team t e a c h i n g was S c h o o l B o a r d i n i t i a t e d . The a s s i g n m e n t f o r t h e p r i n c i p a l was, "Make t h e open a r e a work." - I n o r d e r t o t a k e p u p i l s o f f s h i f t , t h e p u p i l s and t e a c h e r s were put i n t o an open a r e a b u i l d i n g . Five t e a c h e r s and 130 p u p i l s were p l a c e d i n a b u i l d i n g p r e v i o u s l y u s e d f o r 2 c l a s s e s , a l i b r a r y and a special class.  - I t was d e c i d e d by t h e S c h o o l B o a r d t o b u i l d some open a r e a s . Any t e a c h e r i n d i c a t i n g an i n t e r e s t was hired. The r e s u l t s have been p o o r . There should h a v e b e e n more c a r e f u l s t a f f s e l e c t i o n and more s t a f f i n v o l v e m e n t and p l a n n i n g . - Two c l a s s e s i n o u r new s c h o o l were d e s i g n e d w i t h a f o l d i n g w a l l between them. T e a c h e r s were e n c o u r a g e d t o work t o g e t h e r . - T e a c h e r s w i t h s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s were w i l l i n g t o t a k e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r subject matters l i k e a r t , s c i e n c e , music or p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n . T h i s l e d t o team p l a n n i n g and c o o p e r a t i o n . - The t e a c h e r s who d e s i r e d team t e a c h i n g s t u d i e d and p l a n n e d f o r a b o u t 15 months. - Team t e a c h i n g was i n t r o d u c e d t o f i t i n w i t h t h e continuous p r o g r e s s system i n t h i s s c h o o l . - Team t e a c h i n g was e n c o u r a g e d by t h e d i s t r i c t s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , t h e e l e m e n t a r y s u p e r v i s o r and t h e principal. These f i n d i n g s schools  in British  team i m p l e m e n t a t i o n r e s e a r c h and  seem t o i n d i c a t e  Columbia as t h o s e  Researchers  team t e a c h i n g i s a d o p t e d how  facilities,  and  due  United States.  how  Much  done i f we  are  s h o u l d d i s c o v e r how  t o p r e s s u r e t o copy  o f t e n t o cope w i t h  existing  and  skills.  When r e a s o n s  a t i o n are  c l e a r e r , the  success  f o r and  often  crowded  methods o f  o f a team may  to  changes  o f t e n t o make more e f f e c t i v e u s e  teachers'  guaranteed.  i n the  elementary  as many p r o b l e m s w i t h  e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n n e e d s t o be  s o l v e these problems.  elsewhere,  are having  that  of  implement-  more e a s i l y  be  IMPLICATIONS AND  RECOMMENDATIONS  From t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of team t e a c h i n g and a n a l y s i s of t h e r a t h e r l i m i t e d r e s e a r c h on team t e a c h i n g , i m p l i c a t i o n s may be drawn. t o develop  certain  Since i t takes a number of years  and implement a team p r o j e c t t o t h e p o i n t where  i t s o b j e c t i v e s ( i f such o b j e c t i v e s have been drawn up i n t h e first  place) might be r e a l i z e d , i t i s probable  that current  p r o j e c t s i n B r i t i s h Columbia have not been i n o p e r a t i o n long enough t o permit a p p r o p r i a t e e v a l u a t i o n .  Almost a l l accomplish-  ments i n team t e a c h i n g i n t h i s province and the United still  belong  t o t h e design stage.  States  None of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l  models o f team t e a c h i n g have y e t been f u l l y implemented.  It  i s t h e r e f o r e premature and unwise t o advocate widespread d i s s e m i n a t i o n and adoption  o f team t e a c h i n g i n B r i t i s h  Columbia. To date, many team plans have been adopted on the b a s i s o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e f f i c i e n c y , popular the glamor g i v e n them by p u b l i c i t y .  expediency and  In education one should  not condone change merely because i t i s f a s h i o n a b l e .  Dis-  c r i m i n a t i o n should be made between what i s worthwhile and what i s a f a d .  The f a c t t h a t r e s e a r c h shows t h a t c h i l d r e n  are not hurt by team t e a c h i n g i s encouraging,  but should one  not ask t h a t there be some v a l i d evidence  t h a t i t i s bene-  f i c i a l t o most c h i l d r e n r a t h e r than s l i g h t l y b e n e f i c i a l to some c h i l d r e n before adopting  the plan?  Furthermore t h e r e  are many complex problems a s s o c i a t e d with team t e a c h i n g which are not  o f f s e t by s u p e r i o r l e a r n i n g outcomes, b e t t e r  well-being I f we  of p u p i l s , more t e a c h e r  are to modify present  competence or  emotional  efficiency.  p a t t e r n s of t e a c h i n g and  expend  t a x d o l l a r s t o do i t , we must have c l e a r o b j e c t i v e s and p o s i t i v e evidence  f o r our a c t i o n s .  Much of the  r e v o l t stems from the f a c t t h a t educators  taxpayer  cannot show t h a t  • i n c r e a s e d s c h o o l budgets have i n c r e a s e d the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of schools.  To date, team t e a c h i n g has not proven i t s worth. It i s a l s o important  Columbia r e a l i z e t h a t present  t h a t educators  in British  methods of i n s t r u c t i o n  and  o r g a n i z a t i o n have been judged inadequate f o r no sound There i s nothing  i n c o n v e n t i o n a l l y organized  precludes teaching  students  schools that  i n those ways which have been  a s s o c i a t e d with the concept of team t e a c h i n g . one  reasons.  of the advantages g i v e n f o r team t e a c h i n g  For  example,  i s that i t  tends t o make the teacher r e t h i n k many of the b a s i c i s s u e s with respect to c u r r i c u l u m and methods, and t h a t t h e r e i s a tendency f o r him t o take more care over l e s s o n p r e p a r a t i o n . However, t h e r e i s no reason why  such r e t h i n k i n g and  improved  l e s s o n p r e p a r a t i o n should not take p l a c e i n a more t r a d i t i o n a l organization.  Also such g o a l s as independent study,  group d i s c u s s i o n , use of modern i n s t r u c t i o n a l t o o l s , use  small of  resource people and f l e x i b l e s c h e d u l i n g can a l s o be in a conventional s e t t i n g .  reached  Probably these g o a l s w i l l  be  f u r t h e r e d i n today's s c h o o l s whether or not team t e a c h i n g i s implemented.  Moreover, i f independent  study and  individual  a t t e n t i o n are major g o a l s of team t e a c h i n g , they can probably be c a r r i e d out b e t t e r at home than at s c h o o l . It appears t o be t h a t one of the b a s i c reasons f o r increasing interest  i n team t e a c h i n g i n the elementary  of B r i t i s h Columbia  i s a r e s u l t of the growing  s u b j e c t matter.  schools  interest in  One wonders i f t h i s emphasis on academic  achievement i s good.  Undue pressure i s being put on  at i n c r e a s i n g l y e a r l i e r ages.  children  Preoccupation with o r g a n i z a -  t i o n , with moving t e a c h e r s and c h i l d r e n and s u b j e c t s about, has, i n a d d i t i o n , d i v e r t e d many educators from f a c i n g up t o the hard t a s k of improving  instruction.  An o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p l a n , such as team t e a c h i n g , o f f e r s o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r conducting i n s t r u c t i o n but does not, i n i t s e l f , guarantee  any i n s t r u c t i o n a l outcomes.  The  tendency  has been t o c l a i m t h a t team t e a c h i n g i s the answer t o the most g e n e r a l and all-encompassing problems:  overcrowding,  the  improvement of i n s t r u c t i o n , the f l e x i b l e grouping of p u p i l s , and the proper u t i l i z a t i o n of t e a c h e r t a l e n t .  Much team  t e a c h i n g has, as a r e s u l t , been o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r the sake of organization.  I t i s t r u e that team t e a c h i n g does o f f e r an  e f f e c t i v e v e h i c l e f o r i d e n t i f y i n g these problems,  f o r study-  i n g them, f o r seeking s o l u t i o n s t o them but i t has so f a r ,  as p o i n t e d out i n Chapter I I I , s o l v e d few in  of them.  Educators  B r i t i s h Columbia should understand c l e a r l y t h a t t h e r e i s  nothing magic about team t e a c h i n g . and grouping  Just making c l a s s e s l a r g e  t e a c h e r s w i l l not produce more e f f e c t i v e  learning. I f more team t e a c h i n g p r o j e c t s are undertaken i n t h i s province  i t should be with the f u l l understanding  be achieved  and what shortcomings are inherent  A l s o educators prematurely.  of what  can  i n the s t r u c t u r e .  must guard a g a i n s t implementing team t e a c h i n g There i s a need to prepare the way  f o r change.  C u r r e n t l y many s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s are i n i t i a t i n g team t e a c h i n g without  a d e l i b e r a t e e f f o r t t o c a r e f u l l y s e l e c t team members,  prepare t e a c h e r s and p u p i l s , develop a s u i t a b l e c u r r i c u l u m , p r o v i d e adequate f a c i l i t i e s ,  or educate the p u b l i c .  Univer-  s i t i e s w i l l have t o i n t r o d u c e a programme t h a t t r a i n s t e a c h e r s who p r es en t,  d e s i r e to team teach.  f a c u l t i e s of education  In B r i t i s h Columbia, at  do not  o f f e r such a programme.  These shortcomings have r e s u l t e d i n hasty and f i c i a l team t e a c h i n g  o f t e n super-  developments.  Without p r e c i s e d e f i n i t i o n and  f u l l understanding  team t e a c h i n g , schools i n t h i s p r o v i n c e run the r i s k missing  i t s purpose e n t i r e l y .  become a hollow  form without  f a c e the d i f f i c u l t instrument  Team t e a c h i n g substance.  problem of c l a r i f y i n g  of organized  can  of  of  easily  Team t e a c h i n g must i t s goals.  As  an  i n s t r u c t i o n i t must a l s o be r e f i n e d .  Teams should be able t o e x p l a i n a c c u r a t e l y what they  do,  Research All  those  design  planning  i n t o the  operation the not  should  be  an  integral  team t e a c h i n g  programme.  research  seek s u p e r f i c i a l  should  During  should  be  utility,  which w i l l  programme.  rationale for curriculum,  planning run.  should  be  and  be  a sound  e a r l y years  to  evaluate  staffing  aspects  personnel  and  team  controlled studies e v a l u a t i o n as  each y e a r .  L a t e r when c o n t r o l l e d e x p e r i m e n t a l  research  appropriate  i t must be  clear,  particular  described,  polations operations  v a r i a b l e s are  i s on  specific  of research i n the  new  and  approaches to  is  that  controlled, that  and  that  any  extra-  team  potential flexibility  possibilities studies.  of  carefully  applied only to  The  Economic Development, i n i t s study, of Innovation,  and  questions,  same manner.  provides  Challenge  aims are  isolated  f i n d i n g s are  team t e a c h i n g classical  conclusion  s t r u c t u r e under i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s  that  concentration  that  at the  planning  during  made s u r e  and  are  progresses,  the  implementation  team  should  Competencies i n  on  research  of  It  attempt  grouping,  placed  teaching.  then r e t a i n those  developed before  Emphasis s h o u l d  build  should  d e g r e e s o f q u a l i t y and  and  the  o f team  developmental.  a n s w e r s but  improve the  part  f o r both  The The  innovative  Committee  Schools  of  and  for the  states:  Team t e a c h i n g , l i k e a few o t h e r u n s h a c k l i n g innovations, confounds current s t a b l e r e s e a r c h e s ; i n t r o d u c e s p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r d e v e l o p i n g new, l o n g - t e r m s y n t a c t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s ; and p r o m i s e s t o r e d i r e c t s t a b l e i n q u i r y . For example, team t e a c h i n g r e v e a l s so many v a r i a b l e s i n t h e  t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g environment t h a t most s t u d i e s comparing d e p a r t m e n t a l i z a t i o n and s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s e s , so r e l i g i o u s l y r e p o r t e d i n our e n c y c l o p e d i c reviews o f l i t e r a t u r e , are r e v e a l e d t o r e s t i n t h e context of a d i f f e r i n g conception o f "school."277 Other measures than s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s , which have been the c h i e f y a r d s t i c k t o date, must be developed.  They w i l l have  t o take i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n such v a r i a b l e s as : i n t e r e s t shown i n s u b j e c t s , changed m o t i v a t i o n of p u p i l s , consequences o f d i f f e r e n t  s i z e d groups, a t t i t u d e s t o s c h o o l g o a l s ,  degree o f c o o p e r a t i o n among s t a f f members, optimum s t a f f team s i z e i n d i f f e r e n t areas o f the c u r r i c u l u m , p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s , and t e a c h i n g methods.  Many of the techniques  employed i n i n d u s t r i a l psychology,  c y b e r n e t i c s , and market  s u r v e y i n g could be a p p l i e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e s t a f f practices i n schools. ficient  utilization  At present, s c h o o l s do not have s u f -  s t a f f t r a i n e d f o r r e s e a r c h , f a c i l i t i e s and time t o  t e s t team t e a c h i n g . important  In the f u t u r e , however, some of the  problems t h a t should be s t u d i e d a r e :  1. What c o n s t i t u t e s a t e a c h i n g team? 2. What a r e t h e b a s i c elements t h a t i d e n t i f y t h i s approach and d i f f e r e n t i a t e i t from other t e a c h i n g methods? 3. What i s the purpose o f the team approach? 4.  What a r e the requirements  f o r a team teacher?  5. What i s the best s i z e f o r a t e a c h i n g team? 6. What are the d e f i n i t e advantages of f l e x i b l e grouping of students?  t  he  Research and P o l i c y Committee, The Schools and Challenge o f Innovation (New York: CED, 1969), 100.  7. How does team t e a c h i n g r e a l l y a f f e c t methods of instruction? 8. What t e s t s must be d e v i s e d , and how, so t h a t one can a c c u r a t e l y measure i f students b e n e f i t from team teaching? 9. What i s t h e best way t o prepare teaching?  t e a c h e r s f o r team  10. What changes i n e d u c a t i o n a l c l i m a t e a c t u a l l y do take p l a c e when groups of t e a c h e r s work together? 11.  Can teams use t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s i n p e r s o n a l i t y and t e a c h i n g s t y l e s i n such a way as t o c a p i t a l i z e on d i f f e r e n c e s i n c h i l d r e n ' s p e r s o n a l i t i e s and l e a r n ing s t y l e s ?  12.  Why do so many t e a c h e r s and t h e o r e t i c i a n s i n educat i o n r e s i s t h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e s i n teams?  13.  What s i z e o f group should be used f o r what purposes?  14. What a r e the v a r i o u s stages o f development through which a s c h o o l s t a f f ought t o proceed i f an e x c e l l e n t team o r g a n i z a t i o n i s e v e n t u a l l y t o emerge? 15. What c u r r i c u l u m r e v i s i o n s must be made so s u b j e c t s l e n d themselves t o team teaching? 16.  How does the team o b t a i n adequate time f o r p l a n n i n g and e v a l u a t i o n ?  17.  What i s the best way t o handle the complex problem of human r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n teaching?  Unless  r e s e a r c h improves and u n l e s s i t answers some of these  q u e s t i o n s , the r e s u l t w i l l inadequately al  continue t o be a p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f  implemented and inadequately  tested instruction-  changes. The  d e c i s i o n as t o whether team t e a c h i n g should be  c o n t i n u e d , d i s c o n t i n u e d or even propagated i s not y e t dictated.  Present  r e s e a r c h , and a survey  promise no easy answers.  such as the author's  Educators who i n t e n d t o experiment  with  team t e a c h i n g  that  most  with  the  problems of f a c i l i t i e s ,  a catalyst  ing  c o u l d be  the  most  agent.  Many o f t h e  i n the  and  grouping.  c h a n g e s , as  conventional  school  fact  pioneering  c h a n g e s , team  i n C h a p t e r I I I , team t e a c h i n g  but  teach-  pointed  out, .  are not.  o f t e n tends t o  As  open  school to further innovation: i n school b u i l d i n g design,  personnel and  the  also  scheduling  i s needed t o a c c o m p l i s h  achieved  indicated up  draw encouragement f r o m t h e  s c h o o l s u s i n g team t e a c h i n g a r e  If  c o u l d be  might  utilization,  programmed of the  understand continue  instruction.  schools  have e x p r e s s e d  teaching  methods, t e a c h e r  And  f u r t h e r , i t i s apparent  involved, while  approval  of the  striving  the  experiment  for  team a p p r o a c h .  some o f i t s s h o r t c o m i n g s and  with  education  i s shown by  yet the  that  improvement,  That  they  are w i l l i n g  to  following  comments. - Team t e a c h i n g i s o n l y a v e h i c l e t o e x p l o i t t h e f u l l p o t e n t i a l of a teacher. I t s t i l l depends on t h e p e o p l e y o u have d o i n g t h e j o b , t h e number o f s t u d e n t s , t h e amount o f s p a c e , and t h e team o b j e c t i v e s ( p r i n c i p a l ) . - We a r e e v a l u a t i n g o u r programme a l l t h e t i m e . In c o n s e q u e n c e i t i s c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g so t h a t i t i s now q u i t e d i f f e r e n t f r o m what i t was a t t h e b e g i n n i n g . We a r e s t i l l n o t s a t i s f i e d t h a t we a r e d o i n g t h e a b s o l u t e b e s t f o r o u r s t u d e n t s but we f e e l we a r e a t l e a s t heading i n the r i g h t d i r e c t i o n (teacher). - I see a g r e a t f u t u r e f o r team t e a c h i n g but i t w i l l take time. I t t a k e s y e a r s t o change an e d u c a t i o n a l approach (teacher). - Team t e a c h i n g h a s t h e a d v a n t a g e o f b e i n g l i k e l i f e i t s e l f , c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g and a d a p t i n g . It i s c a p a b l e o f b e i n g d e f i n e d i n a l m o s t a s many ways as t h e r e a r e teams and s i t u a t i o n s . It i s a refreshing, s t i m u l a t i n g and c h a l l e n g i n g e x p e r i e n c e and, w i t h t h e r i g h t k i n d o f p e o p l e , a v e r y s a t i s f y i n g one. It i s not a panacea f o r a l l e d u c a t i o n a l i l l s ( t e a c h e r ) .  In c o n c l u s i o n out  t h a t we  provide to  are  now  one  may  agree with  r e a d y " t o move f o r w a r d  better conditions for instruction  d e v e l o p more f l e x i b l e  encourage expertness  i n an and  teaching  and  p r o f e s s i o n , and  to  on t h e  bring  b a s i c c h a n g e s i n c u r r i c u l u m w h i c h seem so  sary.  Team t e a c h i n g  takes  i t s place  which are  to  for learning,  concentrate about  of resources  point  attempt  organizations, to recognize  i n the  kind  S h a p l i n and  necessary  among t h e s e  to  neces-  developments  278 as  a way  takes  place  quality and  of organizing  f o r change."  or problems are  of personnel  attacked  involved, their  Whether o r n o t depends l a r g e l y commitment t o  on  change the  education,  t h e wisdom w i t h w h i c h t h e i r t a l e n t s a r e e m p l o y e d . 278 J . S h a p l i n , "Team T e a c h i n g , " S a t u r d a y R e v i e w , X L I V (May 20, 1 9 6 1 ) , 70.  BIBLIOGRAPHY  SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY  Books  General A n d e r s o n , R o b e r t H. Teaching i n a World H a r c o u r t , 1966.  o f Change.  New  York:  B r i t i s h Columbia T e a c h e r s ' F e d e r a t i o n . Nongraded S c h o o l s : A Bibliography. Vancouver: B.C.T.F.,1970. _. The Open A r e a S c h o o l : A B i b l i o g r a p h y . B.C.T.F., 1970. C h a r l e s , M.R. A Preface to Education. Company, 1965* "  New  York:  Vancouver: Macmillan  D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n and S c i e n c e . C h i l d r e n and T h e i r Primary. S c h o o l s . London: Her M a j e s t y ' s S t a t i o n e r y O f f i c e , 1967. F r a n k l i n , M a r i a n Pope. S c h o o l O r g a n i z a t i o n : T h e o r y and Practice. C h i c a g o : Rand M c N a l l y and Co., 1961. ( A l s o ERIC ED022253) G o o d l a d , J o h n I . and A n d e r s o n , R o b e r t H. The Elementary School. (Revised Edition,). H a r c o u r t , B r a c e and W o r l d , I n c . , 1963.  Nongraded New Y o r k :  Haan, A u b r e y . E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l C u r r i c u l u m T h e o r y and R e s e a r c h . " B o s t o n : A l l y n and B a c o n , I n c . , 1962. H i l l s o n , Maurie. Change and I n n o v a t i o n i n E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l Organization. New Y o r k : H o l t , R i n e h a r t and W i n s t o n . I n c . , 1965. K o h l , H e r b e r t R.. The Open C l a s s r o o m . House I n c . , 1969. " Lebel,  New  York:  Random  Robert (ed.). Encyclopedia of E d u c a t i o n a l Research. T o r o n t o : , C o l l i e r - M a c m i l l a n Canada L t d . , 1969.  L o w e l l , K e i t h , P a u l B l a k e and S i d n e y T i e d t . Contemporary Curriculum i n the Elementary School. New Y o r k : H a r p e r & Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1968.  M i l l e r , R i c h a r d ( e d . ) . P e r s p e c t i v e s i n E d u c a t i o n a l Change. New Y o r k : A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 1967. Morse, A r t h u r D. S c h o o l s of Tomorrow Today. Doubleday and Company, I n c . , I960.  New  York:  N a t i o n a l Education A s s o c i a t i o n . Multi-Age Grouping: E n r i c h i n g t h e L e a r n i n g Environment. Washington, the A s s o c i a t i o n , 1967.  D.C:  . P r o j e c t on I n s t r u c t i o n R e p o r t : P l a n n i n g and O r g a n i z i n g f o r T e a c h i n g . Washington, D.C: the A s s o c i a t i o n , 1963. Research and P o l i c y Committee. The S c h o o l s and t h e C h a l l e n g e of I n n o v a t i o n . New York: Committee f o r Economic Development, 1969. Sampson, L.P. and E.N. E l l i s . Educational Innovation: Trends and Development i n E d u c a t i o n . Vancouver, B.C. S c h o o l T r u s t e e s A s s o c i a t i o n , 1967.  B.C.:  T a y l o r , J . Galen and W i l l i a m M. A l e x a n d e r . C u r r i c u l u m P l a n n i n g f o r Modern S c h o o l s . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and W i n s t o n , I n c . , 1966. Thomas, George I . and Joseph C r e s c i m b e n i . I n d i v i d u a l i z e d I n s t r u c t i o n i n t h e Elementary S c h o o l . New Y o r k : Random House, 1967. Trow, W i l l i a m C l a r k . Teacher and Technology: New Designs f o r L e a r n i n g . New York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , I 9 6 3 . W o l f , W i l l i a m C. and B r a d l e y M. Loomer. The Elementary S c h o o l : A P e r s p e c t i v e . C h i c a g o : Rand M c N a l l y and Co., 1966. Team Teaching B a i r , M e d i l l and R i c h a r d G. Woodward. Team Teaching i n A c t i o n . B o s t o n : Houghton M i f f l i n , Company, 1964. Beggs, David W. ( e d . ) . Team T e a c h i n g : B o l d New V e n t u r e . Indianapolis, Indiana: Unified College Press, Inc., 1964. B r i t i s h Columbia T e a c h e r s ' F e d e r a t i o n . Team T e a c h i n g : A B i b l i o g r a p h y . Vancouver, B.C.: B . C T . F . , 1969.  . Team Teaching: Report o f the Western Conference o f T e a c h e r O r g a n i z a t i o n s . Vancouver, B.C.: B.C.T.F., 1964. Bunyan, L.W. Team Teaching: A.Report. Burnand P r i n t i n g Co. L t d . , 1965.  Calgary, Alberta:  Canadian E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n . Team Teaching i n Canada: Report Number Three, 1963-1964. Toronto: Canadian Education A s s o c i a t i o n , 1964. Chamberlin, L e s l i e J . Administration. 19~W.  Team Teaching: O r g a n i z a t i o n and Columbus, Ohio: C h a r l e s I . M e r r i l l ,  D a v i s , H a r o l d S. Team Teaching: A S e l e c t e d Annotated Bibliography. C l e v e l a n d , Ohio: E d u c a t i o n a l Research C o u n c i l o f G r e a t e r C l e v e l a n d , 1967. (Also ERIC ED023159) Freeman, John. Team Teaching i n B r i t a i n . E d u c a t i o n a l Company, 1969.  London: Ward Lock  Hansloosky, Glenda, Sue Moyer and Helen Wagner. Why Team Teaching? Columbus, Ohio: C h a r l e s E. M e r r i l l , 1969Johnson, Robert H. and John J . Hunt. R f o r Team Teaching. M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.: Burgess P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1968. Joyce, Bruce.  The Teacher and H i s S t a f f : Man, Media and  Machines. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department o f Health E d u c a t i o n and Welfare, 1967. (Also ERIC ED016397) Lobb, M. D e l b e r t . P r a c t i c a l Aspects of Team Teaching. F r a n c i s c o : Fearson P u b l i s h e r s , 1964. L o v e l l , K. Team Teaching. Leeds, 1967.  San  Leeds, England: U n i v e r s i t y o f  N a t i o n a l School P u b l i c R e l a t i o n s A s s o c i a t i o n . Differential S t a f f i n g i n S c h o o l s . Washington, D.C.: N a t i o n a l School P u b l i c R e l a t i o n s A s s o c i a t i o n , 1970. P o l o s , N i c h o l a s . The Dynamics o f Team Teaching. Iowa: W i l l i a m C. Brown Company, 1965.  Dubuque,  S h a p l i n , Judson J . and Henry F. Olds (eds.). Team Teaching. New York: Harper and Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1962TI Vancouver Board o f School T r u s t e e s . T h i s I s MacCorkindale. Vancouver: Board o f School T r u s t e e s , 1967.  V a r s , G o r d o n F. Common L e a r n i n g s : Core a n d I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y Team A p p r o a c h e s . S c r a n t o n , Penn.: I n t e r n a t i o n a l T e x t book Co., 1969. W i g d e r s o n , H a r r y I . Team T e a c h i n g . W a s h i n g t o n , D . C : U.S. Department o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n a n d W e l f a r e , 1964. ( A v a i l a b l e ERIC E D O I I 4 6 9 )  Articles Educational  Journals  Adams, Andrew S. " O p e r a t i o n C o - t e a c h i n g C a l i f o r n i a , " The E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 2 ) , 203-12. " A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s G u i d e t o Team T e a c h i n g , "  D i g e s t , XXIX (September,  1963),  D a t e l i n e : Oceano, Journal, LXII The E d u c a t i o n a l  32-33.  A n d e r s o n , R o b e r t H. "Organizational Character of Education: S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n and Deployment," Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , XXXIV ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 4 ) , 455-469. . "School-University Cooperation i n the Lexington P r o j e c t , " J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l S o c i o l o g y , XXXIV ( A p r i l , 1 9 6 1 ) , 882-886. . "Some T y p e s o f C o - o p e r a t i v e T e a c h i n g i n C u r r e n t Use," The N a t i o n a l E l e m e n t a r y P r i n c i p a l , X L I V ( J a n u a r y ,  I 9 6 5 ) , 22-26. .  "Team T e a c h i n g , "  National Education A s s o c i a t i o n  J o u r n a l , L (March, 1 9 6 1 ) , 52-54. .  The  " T h r e e Examples o f Team T e a c h i n g i n A c t i o n , " N a t i o n ' s S c h o o l s , LXV (May, I 9 6 0 ) , 62-65, 102-10.  ., E l l i s A. H a g s t r o m a n d Wade M. R o b i n s o n . Teaching i n a n E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , " The S c h o o l  LXVIII  "Team Review,  ( S p r i n g , i 9 6 0 ) , 71-84.  A r n o l d , W i l l i a m E . " I s Team T e a c h i n g t h e A n s w e r ? " S c h o o l and S o c i e t y . X C I (December 14, 1 9 6 3 ) , 407-409. B a h n e r , J o h n M. "Team T e a c h i n g i n t h e E l e m e n t a r y E d u c a t i o n , LXXXV ( F e b r u a r y , 1 9 6 5 ) , 337-41.  School,"  Becker,  Harry  A., A r t h u r W.  L a l i m e and Bryce  T e a c h i n g , " I n s t r u c t o r , LXXI "Better  Perkins.  "Team  ( J u n e , 1 9 6 2 ) , 43-45-  S c h o o l s f o r a C h a n g i n g F u t u r e , " CTA J o u r n a l , V,  No. 4 ( O c t o b e r , 1967), 15-17.  Bond, R u t h A l l e n . "Team T e a c h i n g : What I s I t ? Where I s I t B e i n g Done? And Why?" G e o r g i a E d u c a t i o n a l J o u r n a l  ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 4 ) , 15. B o u t w e l l , W.D.  "What's H a p p e n i n g i n E d u c a t i o n ?  T e a c h i n g ? " PTA M a g a z i n e , L C I I  What  i s Team  (May, 1 9 6 3 ) , 16-25.  B r a d l e y , P.A. " I n d i v i d u a l i z e d I n s t r u c t i o n T h r o u g h Coo p e r a t i v e Teaching," N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l ,  C L I I (May, 1964), 46-49-  B r o w n e l l , J o h n A. a n d H a r r i s A. T a y l o r . "Theoretical P e r s p e c t i v e s f o r T e a c h i n g Teams," P h i D e l t a Kappan, XLV ( J a n u a r y , 1962), 150-157. "Calgary Designs  f o r Change," S c h o o l P r o g r e s s  1 9 6 8 ) , 47-48.  "California  Elementary  (August,  S c h o o l D r o p s Out N o n t e a c h i n g  The N a t i o n ' s S c h o o l s , L X X I I  Space,"  (November, I 9 6 3 ) , 52-55.  C a r l i n , P h i l i p M. "A C u r r e n t A p p r a i s a l o f Team T e a c h i n g , " E d u c a t i o n , LXXV ( F e b r u a r y , 1965), 348-53. Cass,  James.  "A S c h o o l D e s i g n e d  f o r K i d s , " Saturday  (March 21, 1970), 65-66, 75.  Crews, Roy L . (March,  "One-Room Space S c h o o l , " I l l i n o i s E d u c a t i o n  1967), 304-306.  "A C r i t i c a l Look a t Team T e a c h i n g , "  ( O c t o b e r , 1961), 39-42.  Cunningham, L u v e r n L. Teams," C a n a d i a n  31-36. .  Review,  Instructor,  LXXI  " E s s e n t i a l Components o f T e a c h i n g A d m i n i s t r a t o r , I I , No. 8 (May, I 9 6 3 ) ,  "Keys t o Team T e a c h i n g , " E l e m e n t a r y  School  Tournal, L X I I (December, 1961), 119-129. .  "Team T e a c h i n g : Where Do We  Notebook,  VII (April,  Stand?" A d m i n i s t r a t o r s 1  i 9 6 0 ) , 1-4.  D a v i s , H a r o l d S. " P l a n n i n g f o r Team T e a c h i n g , " LXXXV ( F e b r u a r y , 1965), 333-36.  Education,  Dean, Ray B. "Team T e a c h i n g i n t h e E l e m e n t a r y Schools," A m e r i c a n S c h o o l B o a r d J o u r n a l , CXLV (December, 1 9 6 2 ) , Dean, S t u a r t E .  XLIV "Design  "Team T e a c h i n g :  (September,  A Review," S c h o o l  Life,  1 9 6 1 ) , 5-8.  f o r Team T e a c h i n g , "  I n s t r u c t o r (May, 1 9 6 8 ) , 65-76.  " D i f f e r e n t i a t e d S t a f f i n g : The P r o f e s s i o n a l Answer t o C h a n g i n g Demands on t h e S c h o o l , " B.C. T e a c h e r (March, 1 9 7 1 ) ,  215-231. " D i v i s i b l e C l u s t e r P l a n f o r a Compact R e c o r d ( M a r c h , 1 9 6 5 ) , 176-177.  School,"  Douglass,  F u n d a m e n t a l Change o r  M a l c o l m P.  "Team T e a c h i n g :  Architectural  P a s s i n g F a n c y ? " CTA J o u r n a l , L I X ( M a r c h , 1 9 6 3 ) , 26-29,  55-56.  Downs, J.A.  "What's i n a Team Anyhow?" B.C.  ( S e p t e m b e r - O c t o b e r , 1 9 7 0 ) , 24-27-  Teacher  Drummond, H a r o l d . "Team T e a c h i n g : An A s s e s s m e n t , " D i g e s t , X X V I I ( F e b r u a r y , 1 9 6 2 ) , 5-8.  Education  D u r r e l l , D o n a l d D. "Implementing and E v a l u a t i n g Pupil-Team Learning Plans," Journal of Educational Sociology,  XXXIV  "Eagle  (April,  1 9 6 1 ) , 360-365.  H a r b o u r P r i m a r y S c h o o l , " The B r i t i s h T r u s t e e , X X I I I ( W i n t e r , 1 9 6 7 ) , 17.  Columbia  School  E a k i n , G l a d y s E . and Eugene S. S p e n c e . "Team T e a c h i n g a n d I n d e p e n d e n t R e a d i n g , " E l e m e n t a r y E n g l i s h , XXXIX ( M a r c h , 1 9 6 2 ) , 266-68. " E d u c a t i o n a l Trends f o r School  Design,"  K i t i m a t Review  (March, 1 9 6 8 ) , 1. E v a n s , H a r l e y a n d G e o r g e S. Womer. " S t i r r i n g s i n the B i g C i t i e s : Cleveland," National Education Association  J o u r n a l , L I (November,  Farkas,  A l y c e L.  1 9 6 2 ) , 50-53.  " I s t h e Granada P l a n t h e S c h o o l  F u t u r e ? " CTA J o u r n a l  of the  ( J a n u a r y , 1 9 6 7 ) , 17-20.  F a r r a r , W.W. "Sequence o f E v e n t s , " X ( A p r i l , 1 9 6 5 ) , 299-302.  Audiovisual Instruction,  "Fashioned f o r Freedom: C h a r t w e l l S c h o o l , " B r i t i s h School T r u s t e e , XXIV, No. 4 (1968), 72-7?.  Columbia  F i n k , David R. "The S e l e c t i o n and T r a i n i n g o f Teachers f o r Teams," The N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l , XLIV (January, 1965), 54-59. F i s c h l e r , Abraham S. and P.B. Shoresman. "Team Teaching i n the Elementary School " School Science and Mathematics, LXII ( A p r i l , 1962), 281-2F8": F r a e n k e l , J.K. and R.J. Gross. "Team Teaching: L e t ' s Look Before We Leap," Education D i g e s t . XXXII (October,  1966) , 4 - 6 .  . and R.J. Gross, "Team Teaching: Opinions D i f f e r , " N a t i o n a l Education A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , LXVI ( A p r i l ,  1967) , 14-17. Gamble, J.W. "An I n q u i r y Into the E v a l u a t i o n o f Team Teaching," C.S.A. B u l l e t i n , V I I I (October, 1968), 28-74. G a s k e l l , W. and J . Sheridan. "Team Teaching and the S o c i a l S t u d i e s i n the Elementary S c h o o l , " Elementary School J o u r n a l , LXVIII (February, 1968), 246-250. G a y f e r , M. "A School Where Team Involvement P l a y s I t s Role at Every L e v e l , " School Progress, XXX ( A p r i l , 1969),  50-52.  Georgiades, W i l l i a m . "Team Teaching: A New S t a r Not a Meteor," N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , LXVI ( A p r i l , 1967). Goodlad, John I . "Cooperative Teaching i n Education Reform," N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l , XLIV (January, 1965),  8-13.  . "Planning and O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Teaching," N a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l ( I 9 6 3 ) , 8. Goss, Jan. "Teaching i n the B i g Room," N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l . XLIV (January, 1965), iJ^T. Haas, A r t h u r . " F i r s t - y e a r O r g a n i z a t i o n o f Elmcrest Elementary School: Nongraded Team Teaching S c h o o l , " American School Board J o u r n a l . CLI (October, 1965), 22, 7TT. Haeckel, L e s t e r C. " F a c i l i t i e s f o r Elementary Team Teaching," American School Board J o u r n a l , XCLVI (January, 1963), 27-28.  H a m i l t o n , Andrew. " I s Team T e a c h i n g f o r y o u r M a g a z i n e L V I I (May, 1 9 6 9 ) , 4-6.  Child?"  PTA  t  H a y e s , C h a r l e s H. "Team T e a c h i n g Areas," N a t i o n a l Elementary 1965)1 6C^6T:  i n C u l t u r a l l y Deprived P r i n c i p a l , XLIV ( J a n u a r y ,  Heathers, Glen. " F i e l d R e s e a r c h on E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l O r g a n i z a t i o n and I n s t r u c t i o n , " J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l S o c i o l o g y , XXXIV ( A p r i l , 1 9 6 1 ) , 3 3 8 - 3 4 3 . " R e s e a r c h on I m p l e m e n t i n g and E v a l u a t i n g Coo p e r a t i v e Teaching," N a t i o n a l Elementary P r i n c i p a l , XLIV (January, 1965), 2 7 - 3 3 H o p p c o c k , Anne. "Team T e a c h i n g : Form W i t h o u t Substance," National Education Association Journal, L ( A p r i l ,  1961),  47-48.  H o r o w i t z , M. " P r o j e c t Meet. M c G i l l Elementary Education T e a c h i n g Teams," M c G i l l J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n , I I ( F a l l , 1 9 6 7 ) , 183^T8"5^ "How  t o Break  30-32.  Jaffa,  With  the Past," School Progress  (August,  1967),  N. N e u b e r t and R i c h a r d M. B r a n d t . "An A p p r o a c h t o t h e P r o b l e m s o f a Downtown S c h o o l , " N a t i o n a l E l e m e n t a r y P r i n c i p a l , X L I V (November, 1 9 & 4 ) , 2 5 - 2 8 .  J a r v i s , G a l e n M. and Roy C. F l e m i n g . "Team T e a c h i n g a s S i x t h - G r a d e r s See I t , " E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l J o u r n a l , LXVI ( O c t o b e r , 1 9 6 5 ) , 3 5 - 3 9 Jenkins, Trevor. " S p e c i a l i z a t i o n i s Wrong f o r t h e E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l , " The B.C. T e a c h e r (March, 1 9 7 0 ) , 2 4 8 - 2 5 0 . J o h n s o n , Kenn. "Team T e a c h i n g , " The (November, 1 9 6 7 ) . J o y c e , B r u c e R. Research, Kelly,  Teachers  Magazine  " S t a f f U t i l i z a t i o n , " Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l XXXVII ( J u n e , 1 9 6 7 ) , 3 2 3 - 3 3 6 .  Eric. "The M y t h o l o g y o f Change," The (February, 1970), 202-203, 210.  B.C.  Teacher  K e p p e l , F r a n c i s and P a u l a P e r r y . " S c h o o l and U n i v e r s i t y : P a r t n e r s i n P r o g r e s s , " P h i D e l t a Kappan, X L I I (January, 1 9 6 1 ) , 174-180" "Key  T i p p e d the S c a l e s t o Favor F l e x i b i l i t y , " American B o a r d J o u r n a l ( A p r i l , 1 9 6 9 ) , 2 4 , 26-26.  School  Klausmeier, Herbert J . and Mary R. Q u i l l i n g . "Alternative t o S e l f - C o n t a i n e d , Age-Graded C l a s s e s , " Wisconsin U n i v e r s i t y , 1967. (ERIC ED016010) . and D o r i s M. Cook. " P r o j e c t Models: A F a c i l i t a t i v e Environment f o r I n c r e a s i n g E f f i c i e n c y i n P u p i l L e a r n i n g and f o r Conducting E d u c a t i o n a l Research and Development," Wisconsin U n i v e r s i t y , 1967- (ERIC ED016004) "The K l e i n Concept of Team Teaching and Conti