Advertisement

Team Teaching and Team Learning: SSM Applied to the Team-Taught Classroom

  • Daniel Roy PearceEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Translational Systems Sciences book series (TSS, volume 17)

Abstract

The benefits of team teaching in language education have largely been recognized in the literature. Nevertheless, there remain many barriers to achieving adequate teacher collaboration in the classroom. Such barriers may be a result of real-world constraints, such as a lack of time for preparation, or may be caused by personal or cultural factors. This chapter takes a managerial systems approach to the team-taught language classroom and suggests a methodology to help teachers overcome these issues. First, the ideal form of team teaching, Team Learning, is introduced, and the concept of a shared value in the classroom is discussed. Soft systems methodology (SSM) is then proposed as a tool for team-teaching practitioners to overcome hurdles in collaborative teaching. It is suggested that the implementation of SSM may assist practitioners in achieving Team Learning by inspiring systemic change in the team-taught classroom. This change should lead to emergent properties beyond those that might be expected in a traditional one-teacher classroom.

Keywords

Team teaching Team learning Value-centered classroom SSM Collaboration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to extend his gratitude to Mrs. Maiko Ikegami for her insightful comments regarding our hypothetical team-teaching situation.

References

  1. Aline, D., & Hosoda, Y. (2006). Team teaching participation patterns of homeroom teachers in English activities classes in Japanese public elementary schools. JALT Journal, 28(1), 5–22.Google Scholar
  2. Allwright, D. (2003). Exploratory practice: Rethinking practitioner research in language teaching. Language Teaching Research, 7(2), 113–141.  https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168803lr118oa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anton, M. (1999). The discourse of a learner-centered classroom: Sociocultural perspectives on teacher-learner interaction in the second-language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 303–318.  https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carless, D. R. (2006). Good practices in team teaching in Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong. System, 34(3), 341–351.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.02.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carley, H. F., III. (2013). Team teaching styles utilized in Japan: Do they really work? Journal of International Education Research, 9(3), 247–252.Google Scholar
  6. Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: A short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. West Sussex: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2010). Soft systems methodology. In M. Reynolds & S. Holwell (Eds.), Systems approaches to managing change: A practical guide (pp. 191–242). London: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-8094_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Copland, F., Davis, M., Garton, S., & Mann, S. (2016). Investigating NEST schemes around the world: Supporting NEST/LET collaborative practices. Resource document. British Council. http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/BC_Report_online_screen_res_final_ te.pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2017.
  9. Gladman, A. (2015). Team teaching is not just for teachers! Student perspectives on the collaborative classroom. TESOL Journal, 6(1), 130–148.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glasgow, G. P. (2013). The impact of the new national senior high school English curriculum on collaboration between Japanese teachers and native speakers. JALT Journal, 35(2), 191–204.Google Scholar
  11. Hanks, J. (2017). Exploratory practice in language teaching: Puzzling about principles and practices. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jang, S. J. (2006). Research on the effects of team teaching upon two secondary school teachers. Educational Research, 48(2), 177–194.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880600732272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kumabe, N. (1996). ALT donyu ga motarashitamono [What the introduction of ALTs has brought about]. Modern English Teaching, 33(6), 13.Google Scholar
  14. Lee, J. (2015). The interactional organization of bilingual co-teaching in South Korea (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hawaii: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
  15. Liu, L. (2008). Co-teaching between native and non-native English teachers: An exploration of co-teaching models and strategies in the Chinese primary school context. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 7(2), 103–118.Google Scholar
  16. Mahoney, S. (2004). Role controversy among team teachers in the JET Programme. JALT Journal, 26(2), 223–261.Google Scholar
  17. McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–213.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McHoul, A. (1990). The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society, 19(3), 349–377.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001455X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miyazato, K. (2009). Power-sharing between NS and NNS teachers: Linguistically powerful AETs vs. culturally powerful JTEs. JALT Journal, 31(1), 35–62.Google Scholar
  21. Ogawa, C. (2010). Perceptions about team teaching: From assistant language teachers and Japanese teachers of English. In A. Stewart (Ed.), JALT 2010: Creativity: Thinking outside the box (pp. 473–486). Tokyo: JALT.Google Scholar
  22. Pearce, D. R. (2017). A conversation analysis of interaction in the team-taught EFL classroom. Unpublished master’s thesis. Kyoto University, Kyoto.Google Scholar
  23. Pearce, D. R., & Oyama, M. (Forthcoming). Team teaching for EFL at the university level: Student and teacher perspectives. Ritsumeikan Higher Educational Studies, 19.Google Scholar
  24. Perry, B., & Stewart, T. (2005). Insights into effective partnership in interdisciplinary team teaching. System, 33(4), 563–573.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2005.01.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sakui, K. (2004). Wearing two pairs of shoes: Language teaching in Japan. ELT Journal, 58(2), 155–163.  https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/58.2.155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tajino, A. (1997). Team-teaching kara team-learning e – komyunikeshon katsudo kasseika ni mukete ‘team’ no saihen o [From team teaching to team learning – Reformulating the ‘team’ to encourage communicative activities]. Modern English Teaching, 34(9), 20–23.Google Scholar
  27. Tajino, A., & Smith, C. (2016). Beyond team teaching: An introduction to team learning in language education. In A. Tajino, T. Stewart, & D. Dalsky (Eds.), Team teaching and team learning in the language classroom: Collaboration for innovation in ELT (pp. 11–28). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Tajino, A., & Tajino, Y. (2000). Native and non-native: What can they offer? Lessons from team- teaching in Japan. ELT Journal, 54(1), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., & Nevin, A. I. (2004). A guide to co-teaching. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  30. Wada, M., & Cominos, A. (1994). Studies in team teaching. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Human and Environmental StudiesKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations