← Co-Teaching

Chapter 01 · 第一章

The System
You're In

你身處的制度

About 10 minutes. Six self-check questions at the end. Nothing on this page is recorded or uploaded.

約十分鐘讀完，末尾六題自我檢查。本頁不記錄、不上傳任何作答。

You did not choose to have another adult in your classroom. Neither did they. Before you decide anything about the person you teach with, it is worth knowing exactly what put the two of you in the same room — and what each of you is answerable for once you are there.

你沒有選擇要在教室裡多一個大人，對方也沒有。在對這位協同老師下任何判斷之前， 值得先弄清楚是什麼把你們放進同一間教室，以及進了教室之後你們各自要對什麼負責。

Section 01This was designed. It is not your school improvising.

Taiwan began placing foreign English teachers in public schools in 2004, and the number of placements grew sharply after 2021, when foreign teacher recruitment was folded into the national Bilingual 2030 policy. Co-teaching with a local English teacher is not an arrangement your principal invented to keep an eye on you. It is the shape the program was given from the start.

台灣自 2004 年起在公立學校配置外籍英語教師，2021 年外師延攬併入國家「2030 雙語政策」後， 名額大幅增加。「必須與本國英語老師協同教學」不是你的校長發明出來盯著你的安排，而是這個制度從一開始就設定的形狀。

The design assumption is simple, and worth saying out loud because it is rarely said to either teacher: neither of you is expected to run the class alone. You were brought in for language that is used rather than described — real speed, real hesitation, real idiom, a real listener who does not already know what the student is trying to say. Your co-teacher is there for the classroom itself: the curriculum, the exams, the pacing, the twenty-something individual children, and a shared first language that lets a confused student be rescued in four seconds instead of four minutes.

這個設計的預設很簡單，但很少有人對兩位老師明講：制度並不期待你們任何一方單獨撐起這堂課。 找你來，是為了「被使用的語言」而不是「被講解的語言」——真實的語速、真實的停頓、真實的慣用法， 以及一位並不預先知道學生想說什麼的真實聽者。而協同老師負責的是教室本身：課程、考試、進度、二十幾個各自不同的孩子， 以及一種能在四秒內（而不是四分鐘內）把卡住的學生救回來的共同母語。

Read that way, your co-teacher is not standing between you and your students. They are the other half of an instrument that was designed to have two halves.

這樣看，協同老師不是擋在你和學生之間的人，而是這件本來就設計成兩半的樂器的另一半。

Section 02What they carry that you don't

Most friction between foreign and local English teachers is read as a clash of personality or teaching philosophy. Far more often it is a clash of accountabilities. You and your co-teacher are not being judged on the same things, and neither of you was ever shown the other's list.

外師與本國老師之間的摩擦，多半被解讀成個性不合或教學理念不同。但更常見的其實是「要對什麼負責」的差異—— 你們兩人被評價的標準不一樣，而且從來沒有人給對方看過自己那張清單。

Your local English teacher answers for

本國英語老師要負責的

  • Curriculum pacing — the textbook must reach a certain page by a certain week. 課程進度
  • Unit exam results — scores that parents, the school, and sometimes their own annual review will read. 段考成績
  • Parents — usually reachable, usually by LINE, often the same evening. 家長聯繫
  • Administrative duties — homeroom or office work stacked on top of English classes. 行政與導師職務
  • A formal annual evaluation inside a career they intend to keep for decades. 年度考核
  • Next year — they will still have these students, and these parents, long after this unit is over.

You answer for

外師要負責的

  • Being the authentic voice — an expectation to perform, every single period, with energy. 真實語言的來源
  • Teaching without the students' first language, which removes your fastest repair tool.
  • A contract that is renewed rather than tenured — a different kind of pressure, on a different clock. 聘約續聘
  • A set of unwritten school rules nobody formally taught you.
  • Breadth — often more classes, across more grade levels and sometimes more schools, with less time in any one of them.

Look at the two lists together and a lot of familiar moments stop looking personal. When your co-teacher cuts your speaking activity short, the most accurate reading is usually not they don't value speaking. It is they are being held to a page number that you are not being held to. When they translate your explanation into Chinese seconds after you give it, the most accurate reading is usually not they doubt my English. It is they are responsible for whether every child in the class can answer this on a written exam in two weeks.

把兩張清單並排看，很多熟悉的場面就不再像是針對你個人。協同老師打斷你的口說活動， 最準確的解讀通常不是「他不重視口說」，而是「他被要求趕到某一頁，而你沒有」。 他在你講解完幾秒內就翻成中文，最準確的解讀通常不是「他懷疑我的英文」， 而是「兩週後的紙筆測驗，他要對全班每一個孩子答不答得出來負責」。

None of this means their reading of the moment is correct and yours is wrong. It means the argument you are actually having is rarely the argument you think you are having.

這不代表他的判斷就對、你的就錯。這代表你們真正在爭的，往往不是你以為在爭的那件事。

Section 03Co-teaching is four activities. Most pairs do one.

Wen-Hsing Luo, who has studied collaboration between native English-speaking teachers and local teachers in Taiwanese elementary schools for many years, describes effective co-teaching as four connected activities rather than a single event in a classroom:

長期研究台灣國小外師與本國教師協同的學者羅文杏（Wen-Hsing Luo）指出，有效的協同教學不是教室裡的單一事件， 而是四件互相扣連的事：

  1. Planning the lesson together — before it exists, not after it is written. 共同備課——在課還沒成形之前，不是寫完之後。
  2. Teaching it together — with a division of labor both people agreed to. 協同教學——依照兩人事先同意的分工。
  3. Watching deliberately — one of you noticing what is actually happening to the students while the other teaches. 刻意觀察——一人教的時候，另一人真的在看學生身上發生了什麼。
  4. Talking it through afterward — a short, honest debrief that changes the next lesson. 課後對話——一段簡短誠實的檢討，而且要真的改變下一堂課。

Now count how many of those four you did last week. For most pairs the answer is one: number two. They teach together and do nothing else together. Which means every problem in the lesson is discovered during the lesson, in front of a full class, with no channel afterward to fix it — so the same problem arrives again next week, slightly more annoying than before.

現在數數看，上週你做到了幾項。多數搭檔的答案是一項：第二項。他們一起上課，其餘什麼都沒一起做。 於是這堂課的所有問題都是在課堂上、當著全班孩子的面被發現的，而課後又沒有任何管道處理—— 下週同樣的問題再來一次，而且比上次更煩。

The useful reframe

If your co-teaching feels bad, the problem is often not the forty minutes you spend in the room together. It is the thirty minutes you never spend outside it.

如果協同教學讓你覺得不舒服，問題往往不出在教室裡共處的那四十分鐘，而出在教室外從來沒有發生過的那三十分鐘。

Section 04The barrier that is nobody's fault

Ask why the other three activities never happen and you will get the same answer from studies across Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, and Korea: there is no time scheduled for them. Not "the teachers were unwilling" — unscheduled. Your free periods and your co-teacher's rarely line up, and when they do, theirs is often already spent on homeroom duties, office work, a parent, or a student who needs them.

問「為什麼另外三件事從來沒發生」，台灣、香港、日本、韓國的研究給的是同一個答案： 那三件事沒有被排進課表。不是「老師不願意」，是沒有時間。 你的空堂和協同老師的空堂本來就很難對上，就算對上了，他那節多半已經被導師工作、行政、家長或某個需要他的學生佔走。

This matters because it changes what you should ask for. "We should really plan together sometime" is a standing invitation with no slot attached, and it loses every week to everything that does have a slot. A specific, small, repeating time is a far smaller thing for a busy person to agree to — fifteen minutes, same day, same period, every week, with one question you both know in advance. That request is not asking your co-teacher to care more. It is asking the timetable to hold a space that the policy forgot to hold.

這一點之所以重要，是因為它改變了你該提出的請求。「我們有空應該一起備課」是一句沒有時段的邀約， 每週都會輸給所有「有時段」的事情。一個具體、微小、固定重複的時間，對忙碌的人來說是小得多的請求—— 十五分鐘，固定星期幾、固定第幾節，每週一次，而且雙方事先知道要談的那一個問題。 這個請求不是要求對方「更用心」，而是替制度補上它忘了預留的那一格。

What the research does not say

Be careful with anyone — including this page — who tells you the research "proves" a particular way of co-teaching works. Most studies of FET–LET collaboration in Taiwan are small and qualitative: interviews, classroom observations, single-school case studies. Solid evidence linking a co-teaching model to measurable student achievement is thin, and researchers say so themselves.

What the literature gives you is not proof. It is something more useful for a Monday morning: shared vocabulary, and a map of the places where these partnerships predictably break.

任何人告訴你「研究證明某種協同教學有效」，包括這一頁，都值得存疑。台灣關於外師與本國老師協同的研究， 多數規模小、屬質性研究——訪談、課室觀察、單一學校個案。能把某種協同模式與可測量的學生成效連起來的紮實證據其實很少， 研究者自己也這樣說。這些文獻給你的不是證明，而是對星期一早上更有用的東西：一套共同語言，以及一張「這種搭檔通常會在哪裡壞掉」的地圖。

Section 05Three sentences to take into next week

  1. Co-teaching is policy, not suspicion. Nobody assigned you a supervisor. 協同是政策，不是監視。沒有人指派了一個主管給你。
  2. Your co-teacher is graded on things you are not. Most of what reads as resistance is accountability you cannot see. 協同老師被評價的項目跟你不同。多數看起來像「不配合」的事，其實是你看不見的責任。
  3. The fix is usually outside the classroom. Ask for a small fixed slot before you ask for a change in how the lesson runs. 解方通常在教室外。在要求改變上課方式之前，先要到一個固定的小時段。

Chapter 2 takes the next step: the six recognized ways two teachers can divide a single classroom, why almost every pair defaults to the one that satisfies neither of them, and what you can propose instead.

第二章接著談下一步：兩位老師分工一間教室的六種公認模式、為什麼幾乎所有搭檔都掉進那個雙方都不滿意的預設模式，以及你可以提出什麼替代方案。

Check yourself

自我檢查

Six situations. Pick the reading that best matches the chapter. Nothing here is scored, saved, or seen by anyone else — it is only so you can tell whether the chapter landed.

六個情境，選出最符合本章觀點的解讀。不計分、不存檔、不會有第二個人看到——只是讓你確認自己讀進去了沒有。

Q1.Your co-teacher translates your explanation into Chinese seconds after you finish it, every time. What is the most useful first move?
每一次你講解完幾秒內，協同老師就把內容翻成中文。最有用的第一步是什麼？
C. Translating to make sure the whole class can answer a written exam question in two weeks is a completely different problem from translating out of habit — and the two need different fixes. You cannot tell which one you are looking at until you ask. 為了確保全班兩週後都答得出紙筆測驗而翻譯，和純粹習慣性翻譯，是完全不同的問題，解法也不同。不問就分不出來是哪一種。
Q2.Which of these is your local co-teacher generally accountable for in a way that you are not?
下列哪一項是本國協同老師要負責、而你通常不必負責的？
A. Exam results are read by parents, by the school, and sometimes by their own annual evaluation. That accountability sits on their side of the room, and it drives a great deal of what they do in it. 段考成績會被家長、學校，有時甚至他自己的年度考核讀到。這份責任落在他那一邊，而且深深影響他在教室裡的行為。
Q3.Co-teaching is described in this chapter as four activities. Which one do most FET–LET pairs actually do?
本章把協同教學描述為四件事。多數外師與本國老師的搭檔實際上做到的是哪一件？
D. Teaching together is the one part that the timetable forces to happen. The other three have no slot, so they quietly disappear — which is why problems are always discovered live, in front of the class. 「一起上課」是課表逼著一定會發生的那一項；另外三項沒有被排進時間，於是就默默消失了——所以問題永遠是在課堂上、當著全班的面才被發現。
Q4.You have said "we should plan together sometime" three times and it has never happened. The best next move is:
你已經說過三次「我們有空應該一起備課」，但從沒發生。最好的下一步是：
B. Research points at unscheduled time far more often than unwillingness. An open invitation loses every week to things that have a slot; a small fixed one is much easier for a busy person to say yes to. (C is not wrong, but it fills the gap rather than opening the channel.) 研究指向的是「沒有排時間」，而不是「不願意」。沒有時段的邀約每週都輸給有時段的事；固定的小時段對忙碌的人來說容易答應得多。（C 不算錯，但那是把洞補起來，不是把管道打開。）
Q5.Which statement best describes the state of research on FET–LET co-teaching in Taiwan?
下列哪一句最能描述台灣外師與本國老師協同教學的研究現況？
D. Most of the literature is interviews, observations, and single-school case studies. It gives you shared vocabulary and a map of predictable failure points — not proof. Treat anyone claiming proof, including a web page, with suspicion. 多數文獻是訪談、課室觀察與單一學校個案。它給你的是共同語言和「通常會壞在哪裡」的地圖，不是證明。任何人宣稱有證明——包括某個網頁——都值得存疑。
Q6.Two weeks before the unit exam, your co-teacher asks you to cut a speaking activity. The most accurate reading is:
段考前兩週，協同老師要求你砍掉一個口說活動。最準確的解讀是：
A. The textbook has to reach a certain page by a certain week, and they answer for it. That does not automatically make their call the right one — but it does mean the conversation to have is about the exam and the pacing, not about your activity. 課本必須在某一週前趕到某一頁，而那是他要負責的事。這不代表他的決定就一定正確，但它代表該談的是段考和進度，不是你的活動好不好。

Sources

參考文獻

  1. Luo, W.-H. An Inquiry into a Collaborative Model of Teaching English by Native English-Speaking Teachers and Local Teachers. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40299-013-0147-0
  2. Luo, W.-H. A study of native English-speaking teacher programs in elementary schools in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Education Review. link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF03029265
  3. Luo, W.-H. Training Needs of In-Service Bilingual Teachers: A Study of Taiwan. SAGE Open, 2024. journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241252508
  4. A case study on foreign English teachers' challenges in Taiwanese elementary schools. System. sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0346251X09001420
  5. Evaluating Collaborative Teaching under the Taiwan Foreign English Teacher Program. Asian Institute of Research. asianinstituteofresearch.org
  6. A Phenomenological Study of Co-Teaching's Collaborative Decision Making Process in Taiwanese Elementary School. St. Cloud State University. repository.stcloudstate.edu/tesl_etds/14
  7. Toward an Ideal Model of Teacher Collaboration: A Focus on Listening Instruction of 5th Grade Classes in Taiwan. English Teaching & Learning. link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42321-022-00131-8