Principles, shared planning and reference visuals from the department guide →
Plan, teach, assess and review together to support EAL learners in mainstream lessons. Make subject goals, English language development and each teacher’s contribution explicit.
Practical guidance developed from the supplied 2022–2025 co-teaching programme: establish the partnership, plan access to a shared task, teach together, then review the evidence. Each guide includes a worked example and an editable template.
Agree how two teachers will share responsibility for subject learning and English development.
Guide + editable template →Practice 02Connect the curriculum sequence, the next lesson and a workable absence plan.
Guide + editable template →Practice 03Use purposeful micro-scaffolding while keeping learners connected to the lesson.
Guide + editable template →Practice 04Audit carrier language, disciplinary demands and evidence before changing a question.
Guide + editable template →Practice 05Build a route from text meaning to an independent subject explanation.
Guide + editable template →Practice 06Create candidate scaffolds from a clear teacher brief and review them against the original.
Guide + editable template →Practice 07Adjust access while keeping every learner engaged in the central subject thinking.
Guide + editable template →Practice 08Use a short reflection cycle to improve co-planning, delivery and co-assessment.
Guide + editable template →Use these suggested workshops with a real upcoming task. Each session ends with something the pair can trial and review.
5 min: share experience and expectations. 10 min: review learner evidence. 15 min: agree roles, communication and one lesson phase. 5 min: name the next action.
Take away: a partnership agreement and weekly plan.
Start the partnership →5 min: state the assessed construct. 10 min: audit carrier language. 15 min: adapt one question and compare versions. 10 min: moderate a sample and plan a trial.
Take away: an adaptation with a documented construct check.
Assessment guide →5 min: identify a barrier. 5 min: select a scaffold. 20 min: draft and co-review against the source. 10 min: plan oral rehearsal, independent response and scaffold fade.
Take away: a teacher-reviewed scaffold ready for a classroom trial.
Long-text guide → · AI drafting guide →5 min: review anonymised learner work. 10 min: reflect independently. 15 min: compare six dimensions of the partnership. 5 min: agree one change, owner and review date.
Take away: an evidence-based action for the next teaching cycle.
Reflection guide →This section is for EAL collaboration in mainstream classrooms. The EAL teacher contributes expertise in language development, multilingual learning and the language demands of subject tasks. The subject teacher contributes disciplinary expertise. Both teach the whole class, and each learner’s participation and independence matter.
Plan co-teaching as a partnership: both teachers contribute expertise to the learning goal, teaching, assessment and review. Subject expertise and language expertise can be complementary, but roles should be negotiated around the lesson rather than assumed from a job title.
What must learners understand? Which language demands may block participation? What will each teacher do at each stage? What evidence will you collect, and when will you review it?
Start with the language barrier and evidence of understanding. Use parallel teaching for more oral rehearsal, a temporary small group for targeted language preparation, stations for text and language work, or team teaching to connect a subject explanation with the English needed to express it. Keep the subject goal shared.
These six common arrangements are options to combine across lesson phases. No single model should become the automatic answer to every task.
Both teachers contribute to one lesson through planned explanations, questions, modelling and checks.
Useful purpose: Use complementary expertise to make subject reasoning and language visible.
Manage it: Agree handovers and when to add, question or revoice. Avoid two overlapping explanations.
Teacher A develops the particle explanation while teacher B models the causal language using the same diagram. Each can ask questions and extend the other’s example.
Watch for: Agree the key explanation and handover cues; avoid two competing accounts.
Evidence to review: Ask learners to produce one independent explanation linking the diagram and language.
Each teacher teaches a group towards the same agreed learning goal.
Useful purpose: Create more opportunities for discussion and individual checking.
Manage it: Align the content, task and success criteria; plan noise, space, timing and the shared exit check.
Groups rotate through planned tasks, with each teacher responsible for a station and a workable independent task where needed.
Useful purpose: Practise connected aspects of the same concept in smaller groups.
Manage it: Check that tasks do not require a fixed order unless rotations provide it; teach transitions and independent-work routines.
One teacher works with a temporary smaller group while the other teaches the larger group.
Useful purpose: Provide targeted pre-teaching, re-teaching, rehearsal or extension.
Manage it: Base grouping on current evidence, make it flexible and plan how learners reconnect with the shared lesson.
One teacher leads while the other gathers agreed evidence of student learning.
Useful purpose: Answer a specific question about participation, explanations or a language barrier.
Manage it: Specify the observation focus and recording method, then analyse it together. Rotate roles according to purpose.
One teacher leads a short phase while the other provides planned prompts or individual support.
Useful purpose: Help learners begin a task, check instructions or use a model.
Manage it: Agree the prompts and when to fade them. Avoid making one colleague the permanent assistant.
A and B represent the two teachers; dots represent learners. These diagrams are planning prompts, not fixed seating plans.
See unit, weekly and emergency planning →
This is a suggested agenda. Start with the lesson question and student evidence; finish with a short written agreement both teachers can see. Agree who prepares each resource and by when.
Check how EAL learners enter the task, use disciplinary language and work with decreasing support. Avoid using the EAL teacher only to translate instructions or circulate permanently beside one labelled group.
Introduce both teachers as teachers of the whole class. Agree how you address learners, reinforce routines and share access to planning and student evidence.
Check: Learners understand that either teacher can teach, question and give feedback.
Use a short agreed cue for changing who leads. Decide how the second teacher will add an example, revoice a point or flag a misunderstanding.
Check: Transitions are clear and the second teacher’s contribution is purposeful.
Use grouping as a teaching decision based on current evidence, rather than a permanent label. Consider language resources, peer relationships and independence.
Check: Groups are flexible and nobody repeatedly misses the central content.
Agree what a successful response looks like. Sample student work together and distinguish conceptual understanding from language needs.
Check: Feedback from the two teachers is coherent and actionable.
Use a private, specific conversation about the task and its effects. Avoid correcting or undermining a colleague publicly.
Check: The next lesson has an agreed adjustment and a time to review it.
Judge the arrangement by participation, understanding and independence, alongside its preparation cost.
Check: The team can explain what the second teacher’s involvement made possible.
| Phase | Subject teacher (A) | EAL teacher (B) | Shared evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Launch | Show a force diagram and ask for a prediction. | Check learners’ explanations and note a language barrier. | Which learners distinguish balanced from unbalanced forces? |
| Model | Explain the resultant force using the diagram. | Model the language linking force and change in velocity. | A shared example both teachers can refer to. |
| Practice | Teach one group using varied diagrams. | Teach a second group towards the same goal with oral rehearsal. | Both groups justify their decisions with the same criteria. |
| Review | Collect the individual exit response and compare a sample together. | Use the evidence to plan the next explanation or scaffold. | |
In Humanities, pair source interpretation with the language of evidence and qualification. In Maths, pair representations with explanations of valid operations. Roles can change across lessons according to expertise and the learning goal.
Complete these fields, then download an editable plan or print it. Your draft is stored in this browser when storage is available.
Further reading: Colorín Colorado: co-teaching English learners ↗; Connecticut education handbook: co-teaching approaches ↗.
Use subject-specific reading, writing and talk to make the reasoning visible. Start with an authentic task, identify its language demands and review learner independence.
Explore the philosophy and build a school action plan → · Essay, summary and feedback teaching guides →