Background of the study

Although the “team teaching” concept as a form of collaborative teaching has been long implemented in education, many still consider it as “new” methodology. Team teaching had its origins in the America of the mid-1950s. So far no attempt has been made to define exactly what is meant by expression “team teaching” in practical terms.  What has been established, though, is the impossibility of definition other than in the most general sort of way. It was initially introduced as a form of organization where groups of teachers work collaboratively and use different aids to teach groups of students (Warwick, 1971). Since interpretation team teaching has faced different changes and at the present time, it is synonymous with co-teaching or collaborative teaching.

The function of team teaching might seem as simple as bringing two teachers to plan and teach in the same class and with the same students, however, the collaboration between team members is complicated phenomena yet. Team teaching is perceived as an approach to minimize teachers’ isolation and to promote independent from teacher training professional growth (McCracken and Sekicky, 1998; Murata, 1997) and also to improve students learning outcomes (Murata, 1998; Oldfather & Thomas, 1998;).

Different forms of teaching can play a role of catalyst for teacher’s professional development and school improvement (McLaughlin, 1993;  Welch, 1998) because teachers participate in collaborative works and ongoing dialogues not only about students’ learning but also the whole school’s life. From the social constructivist view, learning takes place in social environments rather than in isolation.  Therefore, learning from each other is important and may serve for teachers as a strategic approach for ongoing development in their career.

Team teaching, in the countries where English is native language, is implemented in cross-curricular subjects to combine language and content instruction (Crandall, 1998; Snow et al, 1989), and also to integrate ESL and EFL learners into cuІture and maіnstream cІassroom (Becker, 2001; Coltrane, 2002; Creese, 2005; de Jong, 1996). But, in foreign language context, team teaching is considered as the participation of teachers with different linguistic, educational and cultural backgrounds. In comparison to traditional classroom where mainly works a local teacher and in most cases alone, team teaching better responds to students’ needs. It provides more opportunities to practice target language, to collaborate with other students and teachers with different backgrounds which, as a result, can stimulate them to learn better, and emerges positive attitude toward the target language (Carless, 2004, 2006; Tajino & Tajino, 2000;).

In the last two decades, several East Asian countries such as Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Hong-Kong started implementing team teaching into their educational policy in response to the impact of English as a global language (Nunan, 2003). But, Kazakhstan has the shortest history (since 2008) of practising team teaching. As a part of the trilingual policy of the government, Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools (NIS) were chosen to be an experimental platform for this project. Similar to other East Asian countries mentioned above, the policy in Kazakhstan is meant to enhance students’ English proficiency and facilitate professional development of local teachers. However, team teaching is not integrated into the Education System of Kazakhstan and it is practised only in NIS schools.

Research questions

1. What are challenges in team teaching between foreign and local teachers in Kazakhstan?
2. What are positive or successful models of team teaching in Kazakhstan?
3. What is the role of school administration in facilitating team teaching?
4. How does team teaching affect students’ learning outcomes?

Becker, H. (2001). Teaching ESL K-12: Views from the Classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Carless, D. (2002). Conflict or Collaboration: Native and non-native speakers team teaching in schools in South Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong. Paper presented at the English in South East Asia Conference (ESEA), Hong Kong. Carless, D. (2004). JET and EPIK: Comparative perspectives. Paper presented at the KOTESOL, Busan, Korea. Carless, D. (2006) Collaborative EFL teaching in primary schools. English Language Teaching Journal, 60 (4). Coltrane, B. (2002). Team teaching: Meeting the needs of English language learners through collaboration. ERIC/CLL News Bulletin, 25(2). Crandall, J. A. (1998). Collaborate and Cooperate: Teacher Education for Integrating Language and Content. English Teaching Forum, 36, pp. 2-9. Creese, A. (2005). Teacher collaboration and talk in multilingual classrooms. Frankfurt: Multilingual Matters Ltd. de Jong, E. J. (1996). Integrating: What does it mean for language minority students? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Bilingual Education, Orlando, Florida. McCracken, N. M. and Sekicky, N. (1998). An invitation to success: Co-teaching and learning in English. English Journal, 88(1), pp. 32-40. McLaughlin, M. W. (1993). What matters most in teachers’ workplace context? In J. W. Little and M. W. McLaughlin (eds.) Teachers’ work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts. New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 79-103. Murata, R. (1997). Connecting the visual and verbal: English and art for high school sophomores. English Journal, 86(7), pp. 44-48. Murata, R. (1998). Classroom innovation and school change: A curriculum ethnography of a loth grade English-art class. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico. Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific Region. TESOL Quarterly, 37, pp. 589-612. Oldfather, P. and Thomas, S. (1998). What does it mean when high school teachers participate in collaborative research with students on literacy motivations? Teachers College Record, 99(4), pp. 647-691. Snow, M. A., Met, M. and Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of langauge and content in second/foreign langauge instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, pp. 201-217. Tajino, A. and Tajino, Y. (2000). Native and non-native: what can they offer? Lessons from team-teaching in Japan. ELT Journal, 54, pp. 3-11. Warwick, D. (1971) Team Teaching. London: University of London Press Ltd. Welch, M. (1998). Collaboration: Staying on the bandwagon. Journal of Teacher Education, 49, pp. 26-37.