Reflective Analysis of Co-Teaching in and Integrated Learning Course

Context and Description

In Spring 25, I co-taught an integrated learning (ITG) course alongside a colleague from a different tradition. The course was designed to contrast a variety of theological and musical perspectives and model a collegial relationship of mutual respect between instructors from different backgrounds. We had inherited the course design from a colleague who had left the university, and the syllabus and assignments did not align with contemporary inclusive pedagogical practices or the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework that informs much of my teaching.

Despite this design weakness, many students demonstrated meaningful engagement with the course material and developed important cross-cultural perspective; however, by mid-semester, a small but vocal group of students expressed dissatisfaction with the organization and expectations of the course. These concerns escalated into issues that necessitated intervention from department leadership, including serious but unfounded allegations that challenged both the integrity of the course and my professionalism. This required departmental mediation, careful documentation, and significant emotional labor.

Challenges and Response

The course presented three core challenges:

• Inherited Curriculum: Working with previously developed course materials required ongoing adjustments to align with our pedagogical strengths, causing confusion and disengagement.

• Co-Teaching Ambiguity: Unclear division of responsibility between instructors led to inconsistent communication and uneven student expectations.

• Group Dynamics: A trio of students created a disruptive emotional climate, which impacted the class as a whole.

In response, I initiated several interventions including:

• Working with my co-instructor to clarify teaching roles and create greater alignment in the latter half of the semester.

• Maintaining detailed records of all student interactions and course decisions.

• Individually supporting a neurodivergent student through scaffolding and restructured deliverables.

Reflection and Growth

While the situation was professionally and personally difficult, it provided a powerful moment of growth. I learned the importance of establishing shared expectations and collaborative authority in co-teaching situations, and proactively revising inherited materials to reflect current practice and prevent pedagogical misalignment. Finally, as an introvert, I’ve historically leaned on well-structured materials rather than personal rapport. This experience reminded me that trust is relational, and must be actively built—especially when teaching controversial or identity-adjacent material.

Looking Forward

In future co-teaching scenarios, I will establish clear pedagogical responsibilities and co-teaching protocols in advance, reinforce my commitment to UDL principles—particularly when navigating potentially contentious subject matter—and design assignments that promote cognitive dissonance in a safe, structured environment—particularly in ideologically charged subject matter. I will also apply these insights across all my courses by creating clearer documentation of the pedagogical purpose behind non-traditional assignments, and implementing structured check-ins with students throughout the semester to identify concerns before they escalate. Despite the difficulty, this experience deepened my understanding of student engagement, identity politics in the classroom, and the structural vulnerabilities of inherited course designs. It also reaffirmed my belief that transparency, reflection, and adaptability are crucial to meaningful teaching.