Co-teaching as an inclusive educational model is a new approach in Greece which aims to support the inclusion of children with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools. This research aimed to investigate and evaluate co-teaching practices as well as teachers’ and students’ with SEN perceptions with regard to co-teaching. This research adopted a mixed methodology in two independent phases in order to address the needs of the study. Namely, 140 teachers were surveyed and multiple case studies of five different secondary co-taught classrooms were incorporated. This study showed that the way co-teaching is implemented in Greek secondary schools is closer to the model of “one teach-one assist”. Specifically, co-teachers saw the general teacher as responsible for all children, while the special teacher as responsible for an individual child with SEN included in a mainstream classroom. Thus, limited special teacher role expansion to all children was observed. The study showed that the general teachers were more negative about the sharing of various classroom responsibilities compared to the special teachers. Moreover, the approach of children’s withdrawal out of class was implemented to a significant extent. According to the research findings it was largely the special teachers who preferred this integrated approach and not the general teachers. Also, limited differentiation and grouping methods were used by co-teachers. In addition, this study indicated that co-teaching pairs did not collaborate with each other in an extensive way and did not commonly plan lessons together. Thus, teacher participants were quite sceptical in relation to the potential personal benefits of co-teaching to themselves. This study showed teacher training in co-teaching, teachers’ sensitivity and positive attitudes towards children with SEN, collaboration between co-teachers and mutual planning time, clear and official allocation of co-teaching roles and special teachers employment at the beginning of the academic year were all regarded as factors which would facilitate the successful implementation of co-teaching. Interestingly, the present study revealed that from the perspectives of both teachers and children with SEN the model of “one teach-one assist” seemed to have positive academic outcomes to children with SEN. However, the model of “one teach-one assist” seemed to have not only positive but also negative social and personal outcomes for children with SEN. From the perspective of some teachers and children with SEN respondents it seems that the model of “one teach-one assist” limited the social interactions of some children with SEN and interrelationships with the remaining children, which was due to sitting next to them during the lesson time and escorting them during the break time. Moreover, children with SEN did not see that co-teaching resulted in their social skills development. As a result some children with SEN expressed their unwillingness to be supported by a special teacher during the following academic year. Among the various disadvantages of co-teaching that children with SEN mentioned was the confusion that they usually felt when both teachers were speaking simultaneously. Lastly, children with SEN who experienced the out of class support expressed their preference for being supported out of the mainstream classroom. This was because they saw that the out of class support benefited them academically.

Since the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act of 2004, special and general educators teach together in many classrooms. Co-teachers are subject to a variety of stressors, including role challenges for teachers who are accustomed to working independently. Research has shown that role ambiguity and role conflict are associated with burnout among special and general educators. However, no prior study has examined whether these role factors contribute to burnout among special and general educators in co-teaching roles. This study was based upon role stress theory in relation to the constructs of burnout. The sample included 72 special educators and 73 general educators who co-taught at 8 urban elementary schools. Participants completed the Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Scales and the 3 scales of the MBI-ES. Multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the relationship of role ambiguity and role conflict (independent variables) to each of the burnout scales (dependent variables). Each dependent variable was analyzed separately, as were data from special and general educators. Therefore, data analysis consisted of 6 separate regressions. The regression analyses indicated that role ambiguity was significantly related to personal accomplishment in both special and general education co-teachers while emotional exhaustion was significantly related to role conflict in both special and general education co-teachers. This information may lead to improved understanding of the factors contributing to burnout among co-teachers and to the design of appropriate interventions to address this problem.

Limited co-planning between special education and general education co-teaching partners has been documented in professional literature as a significant problem. Special education teachers do not adequately co-plan for the implementation of accommodations for students with disabilities educated in the general education classroom. The purpose of this study was to collect and analyze the perceptions of special education teachers in one suburban elementary school district in the United States regarding co-planning with regular education teachers. The theory of self-efficacy was utilized as the conceptual framework to understand how teachers' beliefs and experiences influenced planning and goal setting for special education students. Research questions were designed to capture the perceptions of elementary school special education teachers by documenting their roles, beliefs, and self-efficacy for co-planning. In this qualitative case study, 8 elementary school special education teachers currently holding co-teaching assignments in a public school district were interviewed. Interview data were analyzed using thematic analysis. School documents were also analyzed as a method of triangulation. Results were reflective of the theoretical framework in that special education teachers' believed that their co-planning experience influenced their general teaching efficacy, but not their personal teaching efficacy. They felt more prepared to teach general education students, but maintained their personal expertise in teaching special education students. The implications for social change include enhanced morale for teaching in inclusive classrooms for special education teachers, enhanced social interaction between co-teachers and students, and enhanced learning for all students including those with disabilities that might result in opportunities for educational and career advancement.