RESEARCH REPORT: JUNE 2015 Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation Table of Contents 3 Executive Summary 7 Introduction and Overview 11 Key Shifts toward Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation 27 Conditions for Success: Considerations for Shifting toward Clinically Oriented Preparation 33 Conclusion 34 Appendices A-D 51 References Acknowledgments Urban Teacher Residency United would like to thank the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation for their support of this important work, especially Macy Parker and Arron Jiron. We would also like to extend a very special thank you to all of the program leaders and faculty participating in this study, who are driving innovation in teacher preparation through clinically oriented program designs. Their work serves as a model for the field and the nation as we collectively strive to prepare profession-ready teachers. II UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Project Management: This project involved staff members from across UTRU. Research and writing efforts were led by Shari Dickstein Staub, with support from Sarah Scott Frank. Editing and production efforts were led by Anissa Listak and Tamara Azar, in partnership with Jeff Hall Design. Design: Jeff Hall Design Message from the Executive Director For many years, Urban Teacher Residency United (UTRU) has supported the development and sustainability of high-performing teacher residency programs across the nation. UTRU proliferates a specific model—one that leads to and fosters a true paradigm shift in the ways in which institutions of higher education and school districts partner to develop effective teachers. Today, we continue to hone the UTRU teacher residency model using data focused on the impact and implementation of the core programmatic components from our Network of 19 residencies. To support continuous learning, UTRU produced Building Effective Teacher Residencies (BETR) in 2014, a seminal paper that elevates the analysis of these core programmatic components through an in-depth study of two successful teacher residencies. BETR allowed UTRU to deeply and comprehensively examine the individual application of the components of the model. From this work, UTRU identified five elements of residency program implementation that inform—and are in fact, crucial to—success, and now use these elements to drive the support UTRU provides to existing residencies in the Network and to similarly minded teacher preparation programs around the nation. UTRU’s mission to improve student achievement is two-fold: to build and support teacher residencies, and to impact and inform the transformation of teacher preparation writ large. Key learnings from existing UTRU Network partners, the BETR paper, and UTRU’s ongoing new site development efforts have produced an unparalleled wealth of knowledge about residencies and clinically minded teacher preparation. Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation enhances that knowledge base by examining how preparation programs in a variety of settings are innovating residency model components, placing practice at the center of their work. Dozens of teacher preparation programs across the country are focused on transitioning their approach to new teacher development to one that is more clinically rich and dynamic. The programs featured in this paper will add color to these practices, providing living examples of how this important work is being implemented nationwide. Sincerely, Anissa Listak Founder & Executive Director Urban Teacher Residency United RESEARCH REPORT 1 Innovative programs have embraced the research calling for coordination between teacher preparation programs and partnering school districts. 2 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Executive Summary An era of unprecedented change is underway in both K–12 and teacher education across the United States. As states focus their attention on preparing students to be college and career ready, teacher education programs are also in a time of renewal—exploring the question of how to prepare teacher candidates for the demands of teaching and learning in the 21st century. R esearch confirms that the quality of instruction abound and there exists a general lack of sufficient qualified students experience day-to-day matters for student teachers to compensate for teacher turnover in schools achievement more than any other school-based and districts serving students with the highest needs.4 factor. Yet teachers beginning their careers across a range To address these issues, some teacher educators across of contexts—rural, urban, and suburban—routinely report traditional and alternative pathways are joining together to that they are unprepared to enact high-quality instruction invest in high-quality clinical teacher preparation in order on day one.1 Minority students and students living in poverty to ensure the candidates they prepare are profession-ready are disproportionately affected by this reality, given the at the start of their careers. inequitable tracking and sorting of teachers in schools and districts serving large populations of historically teacher preparation programs and the school districts with marginalized youth.2 which they partner, tightly aligned curricula and field expe- riences, and extensive clinical practice can improve teacher These inequities are compounded when juxtaposed Research reveals that purposeful coordination between with the associated costs of high teacher mobility and preparedness.5 In fact, a 2010 National Research Council turnover incurred in high-poverty and high-minority report went so far as to cite the field or clinical experience districts.3 Such costs are felt most heavily in math and as one of three aspects of teacher preparation likely to science, where serious difficulties filling teacher vacancies “have the highest potential for effects on outcomes for 1 4 See, for example, Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of Teach Plus. (2015). Teach plus teacher preparation flash poll summary. Available at http://www.teachplus.org/sites/default/files/downloads/ mathematics and science teachers sufficient? American Education Documents/flash_poll_one_pager_with_graphics_udpate_jennie.pdf Research Journal, 47(3), 563–594; U.S. Department of Education, 2 See Glazerman, S., & Jeffrey, M. (2011). Do low-income students have equal access to the highest-performing teachers? NCEE Evaluation Brief (Document No. PP11-23a). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey. (2013). Public school teacher data file, 1987–88 through 2011–12; Private school teacher data file, 2011–12. 5 See also Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance; Wolf, R. (2015). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Washington, DC: Teacher sorting and tracking within and between schools. Paper Urban Institute, Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational prepared for the Association for Education, Finance and Policy’s Research. Working Paper, 20; Darling-Hammond, L., in collaboration 40th Annual Conference. with Fickel, L., Macdonald, M., Merseth, K., Miller, L., Ruscoe, G., 3 Goldring, R., Taie, S., & Riddles, M. (2014). Teacher attrition and mobili- Silvernail, D., Snyder, J., Whitford, B.L., & Zeichner, K. (2006). ty: Results from the 2012–13 teacher follow-up survey (NCES 2014-077). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. Education Statistics. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch (2007). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 students.” 6 In response, dozens of articles and reports over 4 Identify common challenges programs face as they shift toward clinical teacher preparation. the past five years have called for a transformation in the way teachers are prepared, including the former National 5 Recommend high-level policies to support innovation in clinical teacher preparation. Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education’s Blue Ribbon Panel report, Transforming Teacher Education Through Clinical Practice.7, 8 Innovative programs across diverse contexts have embraced this research, placing practice at the center of teacher preparation and integrating a clinical orientation into the teacher education landscape. Despite a growing body of evidence that a clinical approach is part of the narrative of the evolution of teacher preparation, few studies to date provide tangible insight into the practical application of this evolution—in other words, insight into what programs actually do as they transition to a clinically oriented approach. What does the shift toward practice look like in teacher preparation? What can be learned from numerous programs across the nation making such a shift? How can this learning facilitate the creation of a robust system of practice-oriented teacher education in the United States? Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation, investigates these questions, based on interview data and The findings show that enhancing the clinical preparation of teachers means much more than lengthening the amount of time candidates spend in schools. Across the 22 programs interviewed, the shifts that were routinely identified make clear how fundamentally different clinically oriented teacher preparation is when compared with a more traditional approach that views academic knowledge about teaching as both authoritative and separate from practice.9 Programs described that shifting toward clinically oriented preparation was often disruptive and hard, requiring faculty and district personnel to collaboratively engage in the preparation of teachers in new and different ways. It became quite clear that clinically oriented teacher preparation is not a “business as usual” approach to teacher education but one that necessitates the following shifts: 1 Rethinking the nature of the clinical experience document review from 22 teacher preparation programs by positioning teacher candidates as co-teachers; that self-identify as having significantly altered the nature of emphasizing candidate performance and accountability clinical preparation experienced by their teacher candidates. through competency-based assessments and the use of district or state-aligned evaluation tools; increasing Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation aims to: mentor selectivity; focusing on mentor development; 1 Orient the reader to the teacher education landscape and devising new, clinically based roles to accommodate through a brief discussion of the literature on the role of clinical preparation in teacher learning, specifically for pre-service teachers. 2 Identify key shifts toward clinical teacher preparation 2 Reimagining coursework, pedagogies, and pathways to program entry, including tighter theory-to-practice integration, using simulations and rehearsals, and designing across this landscape and examine the practices that unique routes to program entry that attract individuals undergird these shifts. into the profession who otherwise might not consider 3 Delineate the conditions necessary for these shifts to occur. teaching as a career possibility. 6 National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building California. Oakland, CA: EdSource; Perlstein, L. (2015). Building effective evidence for sound policy. Report by the Committee on the study of teacher residencies. Chicago, IL: Urban Teacher Residency United; Teach- teacher preparation programs in the United States. Washington, DC: er Preparation Task Force (2012). Raising the bar: Aligning and elevating National Academies Press. teacher preparation and the teaching profession. Washington, DC: 7 NCATE merged with the Teacher Education Accreditation Council American Federation of Teachers; Dailey, C.R., with Watts, E., Charner, I., (TEAC) to form the Council for the Accreditation of Educator & White, R. (2013). Partnering to prepare tomorrow’s teachers: Examples Preparation (CAEP) in July, 2013. from practice. Durham, NC: FHI 360; McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., & 8 Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning (2010). Transforming teacher education through clinical practice. Washington, DC: NCATE. See also AACTE (2010). The clinical preparation of teachers: A policy brief. Washington, 4 programmatic changes. Kavanagh, S. (2013). Core practices and pedagogies of teacher education: A call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 20(10), 1–9. 9 Zeichner, K. (2010). Re-thinking the connections between campus DC: Author; Freedberg, L., & Rice, S. (2015). Preparing world class courses and field experiences in college and university-based teacher teachers: Essential reforms of teacher preparation and credentialing in education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1), 89–99. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? 3 Underscoring the importance of authentic collaboration crucial to create a robust system of teacher preparation and partnership between and across schools, school across the nation so that candidates from every program districts, and institutes of higher education. can be excellent from the start of their careers. Such a system of teacher education must be built on a strong These shifts have the potential to improve teacher knowledge base that is continuously improved over time. candidates’ ability to be profession-ready on day one, By highlighting innovation in the clinical preparation of thus ensuring a pipeline of teachers prepared for the teachers across 22 diverse programs around the nation, demands of teaching and learning in the 21st century. this report supports the development of this knowledge base and aims to embolden teacher educators as they Every year in the United States alone there is a need for 3.1 million practicing classroom teachers.10 Thus it is work to develop 21st century-ready practitioners. Participating Programs 1 Arizona State University ITeachAZ 6 CSU Long Beach UTEACH Academy 2 CSU Chico Rural Teacher Residency Program 7 CSU Northridge ACT-R 3 CSU Dominguez Hills California STEM Institute for Innovation & Improvement STAR Program 4 CSU Fresno 5 CSU Fullerton 8 Heritage University’s HU105 Program 9 Jacksonville Teacher Residency 10 Lipscomb University 11 Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency 12 New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER 13 NYC Teaching Collaborative 14 Relay Teaching Residency 15 Seattle Teacher Residency 16 Texas Tech University TechTeach 18 University of SD/ South Dakota Initiative 19 University of Southern California 20 UTeach Austin 21 UTeach National 22 Urban Teacher Education Program at University of Chicago 17 University of Central Florida 10 Institute for Education Sciences. (2014). Back to school statistics: Fast facts. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 Choosing effective teachers as mentors strengthens the likelihood that candidates will emerge profession-ready from their preparation experience. 6 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Introduction and Overview The changing landscape of K–12 education in the United States commands a different kind of teacher—one prepared to be successful with diverse learners and the demands of new standards and expectations on day one.11 I n response, teacher educators across the United States are focused on fundamentally rethinking the nature of teacher to be an exhaustive analysis of every innovative program training, especially the clinical components of their teacher in the United States nor a comprehensive review of every Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation does not intend preparation programs. The purpose of Clinically Oriented interviewed program. On the whole, however, this report Teacher Preparation is to illustrate this transition and to identi- captures the sea change currently underway in teacher fy and examine how programs across diverse contexts create preparation across the United States.13 dynamic, clinically based preparation experiences for per- service teachers, strengthening teacher candidates’ ability to criticized as a relatively weak degree option—one that lacks in- be profession-ready at the start of their careers.12 By carefully tellectual rigor and fails to prepare teachers who are as effective documenting the work of existing programs and examining as their peers entering the profession through other avenues.14 the conditions and challenges to consider as programs design Similarly, alternate route certification programs, including Teach and implement clinically oriented teacher preparation, this for America, The New Teacher Project’s Teaching Fellows, and report serves as a catalyst to highlight, spur, and strengthen others, are positioned as all-too-quick “trial by fire” approaches innovation in teacher preparation across the nation. that also do not prepare individuals for careers in teaching.15 11 The need for better-prepared teachers exists most heavily in the STEM University-based teacher education programs are routinely an initial interview, and eight programs participated in a second (and in one fields, especially math, given the significant national shortage of well- case third) follow-up conversation. The research team also conducted a prepared secondary mathematics teachers who can support their students document review of materials published by and about each program; these in achieving the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. See, for example, Ingersoll, R. & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and documents were typically provided directly by interviewed programs. 14 See, for example, Levine, A. (2006). Educating school teachers. Washing- science teachers sufficient? American Education Research Journal, 47(3), ton, DC: Education Schools Project. Available at http://www.edschools. 563–594; U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education org/pdf/Educating_Teachers_Report.pdf; National Council on Teacher Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), “Public School Teacher Quality. (2013). Teacher prep review 2013: A review of the nation’s Data File,” 1987-88 through 2011-12; “Private School Teacher Data File,” teacher preparation programs. Available at http://www.nctq.org/dms- 2011-12; Banilower, E., Smith, P.S., Weiss, I.R., Malzahn, K.A., Campbell, K.M., & Weiss, A.M. (2013). Report of the 2012 National Survey of Science and Stage/Teacher_Prep_Review_2013_Report 15 See, for example, Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers: A report of Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, 1–309; Markow, the Holmes Group. East Lansing, MI: Author; Goldhaber, D.D., & Brewer, D.J. D., Macia, L., & Lee, H. (2013). The MetLife Survey of the American Teacher: (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification Challenges for school leadership. New York, NY: Metropolitan Life Insurance. status and student achievement. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12 Throughout this report the terms “pre-service teachers” and “teacher 22. 129–45; Hootnick, A. (2014, April 21). Teachers are losing their jobs, but candidates” refer to individuals who are enrolled in a teacher preparation Teach For America’s expanding. What’s wrong with that? The Hechinger program and are not the teacher of record in the classroom. Report. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University; Rochkind, J., 13 This project began by contacting via email 25 teacher education programs Ott, A., Immerwahr, J., Doble, J. & Johnson, J. (2007). Working without believed to have shifted to a clinical orientation; 22 programs responded. a net: How new teachers from three prominent alternate route programs The data informing this paper include semi-structured, 45- to 60-minute describe their first year on the job. New York: Public Agenda Foundation. telephone interviews with these 22 programs. All programs participated in http://www.publicagenda.org/citizen/researchstudies/education INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 7 Many of the critiques of extant teacher preparation The first example typifies a non–clinically focused universi- programs are accompanied by calls for organizing teacher ty- based teacher preparation program,18 and the second education around practice and clinical experiences, much features a university-based teacher preparation program like the residency model that is now standard in medical highlighted in this paper that has made significant shifts education. 16 The thinking is that individuals must learn to toward clinically oriented preparation and can serve as a teach by teaching, and they need to do so alongside expert model for the nation. While the names of the two teachers teachers for prolonged periods of time, with multiple oppor- are fictitious, the details are drawn from observations, tunities to engage in teaching practice that is embedded in interviews, and document reviews. These two stories set contexts that parallel the realities of the classroom. the stage for the discussion of clinically oriented teacher preparation programs. This report examines programs that have worked to heed these calls, emphasizing and intensifying the clinical components of teacher preparation. By investigating these pro- TRADITIONAL TEACHER PREPARATION: grams, Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation provides guid- THE CASE OF MS. REYNOLDS ance to those interested in shifting their approach to align Elizabeth Reynolds completed her student teaching in a with research-based best practices and contemporary calls teacher preparation program in Ms. Meyer’s ninth-grade to transform teacher preparation. Importantly, this report is classroom in the suburban town where she grew up, where agnostic with regard to program type—that is, clinically ori- students were mostly like her, and in a high school with a ented practices were examined across a range of undergrad- strong academic reputation. In her 120-credit undergraduate uate and post-baccalaureate programs, including those in program for secondary Biology, Ms. Reynolds was required which a majority of coursework is completed online; teacher to take 36 credits of teacher education courses and 12 cred- preparation housed in universities, non-profits, charter and its of student teaching in addition to the general education traditional public school districts were all considered. and biology courses required by her major. Student teaching While pockets of innovation in teacher education have was a capstone experience that took place during the final 17 recently received considerable attention, these programs, semester of her undergraduate training. and the knowledge they encompass, are accessible to relatively few very qualified candidates. In the United spanned twelve weeks. She began the semester by observing States alone there is a need for 3.1 million practicing class- her cooperating teacher and slowly took on increasing levels room teachers annually; thus we must imagine pathways of responsibility for instruction. In the last two weeks of stu- to teaching across the teacher preparation landscape that dent teaching, she completed her “full-time teach” where she ensure that all pre-service candidates are profession-ready taught for the entire day. Ms. Reynolds was the first student when they begin as teachers of record. teacher that Ms. Meyer had mentored, though Ms. Meyer had Student teaching began at the end of January and not received training in mentoring or coaching. Understanding the Current Teacher Preparation Landscape T Ms. Reynolds’s university supervisor came three times during the semester to observe and evaluate her teaching. Additionally, Ms. Reynolds attended an hour-long weekly teaching o better understand the nature of teacher prepara- practicum class with other student teachers in her program to tion in the United States, the following two vignettes talk about their experiences and offer each other support. This are drawn from the experiences of individuals who was the only course she took with direct connections to her completed teacher education programs as undergraduates. 16 Grossman, P. (2010). Learning to practice: The design of clinical experience in teacher preparation (Policy brief). Washington, DC: Partnership for Teacher Quality. 17 See, for example, Rich, M. (2014, October 10). As apprentices in 8 practicum experience during her time as a student teacher. Strategies, innovations, and challenges under the federal Race to the Top Program. Washington DC: Center for American Progress. 18 For more on this type of program, see Zeichner, K. (2010). Re-thinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college classroom, teachers learn what works. New York Times, p. A1; Crow, R. and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, (2012). Getting better at teacher preparation and state accountability: 61(1), 89–99. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? There were no open teaching positions in the district of a four-member Teaching and Learning Team consisting where Ms. Reynolds student taught (and the district rarely of three candidates learning to teach at different stages of hires first-year teachers). Students at Ms. Reynolds’s univer- development and one Core Teacher who went through a sity typically land their first teaching jobs at challenging and rigorous selection process as well as continuous training on underperforming schools nearby, which is exactly where Ms. coaching and mentoring. Ms. Williams had regular opportuni- Reynolds landed a seventh-grade science teacher position. ties to teach independently, co-teach, and receive feedback. She was excited for her first teaching job and felt she had She met daily with her team to discuss lessons, rehearse the content and instructional knowledge needed to teach the and role-play teaching scenarios, problem-solve particular required topics in the school’s Next-Generation Science Stan- instructional challenges, and receive support to progress on dards aligned curriculum. Her first month, however, proved her individual PCAI goals. exceptionally difficult. Despite having received an honors distinction and consistently strong evaluations from her Ms. William’s Site Advocate (an HU105 faculty member who university supervisor during student teaching, Ms. Reynolds supports a cohort of teams in a school or group of schools) reports feeling inadequately prepared for the challenges she visited her classroom one to three times a week to provide faces on a daily basis in her classroom. She has almost no additional guidance on assessments, classroom manage- support in her school to guide her as she navigates her first ment, instructional design and implementation, and school year of teaching science to students who do not have strong operations and expectations as well as to co-teach or model science backgrounds. Ms. Reynolds wants her students to be particular practices when needed. Ms. William’s teaching successful in science but does not know how to achieve this team and Site Advocate worked collaboratively to assess goal and does not know where to turn for support. and evaluate her practice throughout her clinical experience. In addition to the on-site support received from her team, Graduates of the HU105 program are often hired by the CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION: schools where they apprentice (if there are openings) and THE CASE OF MS. WILLIAMS almost always by the district. The school where Ms. Williams Contrast Ms. Reynolds’s student teaching experience with now teaches is a few miles away from where she completed the experience of Keesha Williams, a new sixth-grade science her residency. Having had hundreds of “at bats” in science teacher in Toppenish, Washington. Ms. Williams recently teaching in a supportive environment with an abundance of graduated from Heritage University’s HU105 program, a feedback on her teaching practice, she began her school residency-based approach to teacher preparation where she year confident to take on a position in another school. Her spent four semesters student teaching in a middle school in first month of school was not easy, but because she had seen one of the program’s partner districts. The students served by two school years launch, she worked hard to establish solid HU105’s partner schools and districts live in an area of central management routines and relationships with her students, Washington with the second highest poverty level in the state. 100% of whom passed her first end-of-unit assessment. In lieu of traditional courses during her preparation, The learning and teaching opportunities afforded to Ms. Williams was held accountable to a set of core compe- Ms. Williams during her HU105 experience are consistent tencies through rigorous performance assessments driven with the shifts toward clinically oriented teacher preparation by HU105’s Professional Competency Assessment Instrument being made by many programs across the country. This (PCAI). Throughout her clinical experience, she was part report documents the work of over 20 such programs. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 9 “I had never been content with the early field clinical experience that teacher candidates have been historically conducting, where they are required to meet X number of hours of observation. So the candidate goes to a school, asks to conduct classroom observations in a classroom of a teacher he or she’s never met before, completes the observation hours, and submits a signature form to confirm that he or she conducted the required hours. There is no monitoring of such a process other than the signature form. How does one know if the observations were really conducted appropriately? How is the quality of such observations ensured? Did any of the teachers observed or anyone else engage the candidate in reflective conversations about the classroom experiences to help them fully understand and make meaning of what they observed? This traditional model has existed for years and continues to exist.... We decided to do away with this model and radically changed the clinical experience for our candidates.” —Director, CSU Dominguez Hills California STEM Institute for Innovation and Improvement 10 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Key Shifts toward Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation Analysis of interview data and program-related documents revealed three key shifts as programs moved toward a clinically oriented approach to teacher preparation. In many cases, these shifts represent a dramatic departure from how the interviewed programs have traditionally conducted teacher training. Key Shifts student teaching by rethinking the very nature of the clinical 1• Rethinking the nature of the clinical experience— structure, time, quality, and accountability • Reimagining coursework, pedagogies, and pathways 2 to program entry • Emphasizing authentic partnerships between and 3 across schools, districts, and institutes of higher education The programs described in this paper are transforming experience. Beyond revising the structure and amount of time candidates spend learning and teaching in schools and classrooms throughout their preparation, the programs have strengthened the quality of the candidate experience in the clinical realm, shifting away from traditional student teaching in five concrete ways: • Positioning candidates as co-teachers • Emphasizing candidate performance through SHIFT 1 competency-based assessments and the use of Rethinking the Nature of the Clinical Experience district or state-aligned evaluation tools • Increasing mentor selectivity I n the vast majority of teacher education programs around • Strengthening mentor development the nation and internationally, the student teaching • Devising new clinically based roles to accommodate semester has historically been the capstone and only programmatic changes extended clinical experience for candidates, usually taking place in the final semester of their preparation.19 Of late, POSITIONING CANDIDATES AS CO-TEACHERS this approach has been criticized as a problematic and Many of the clinically oriented programs participating in inadequate system of preparing teachers, leading to a this report require mentor teachers and teacher candidates sense of ill-preparedness and high turnover rates among to co-teach. In a co-teaching arrangement, the classroom novices nationwide—particularly in the content areas with teacher and candidate both assume responsibility for jointly the greatest teacher shortages, like science and math. 20, 21 19 Ronfeldt, M., & Reinninger, M. (2012). More or better student teaching? planning and delivering instruction. The collaborative 21 According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (2011), 1 in Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1091–1106. 20 Fraser, J., & Watson, A.M. (2014). Why clinical experience and mentoring are replacing student teaching on the best campuses. Princeton, NJ: 12 mathematics teachers leaves the profession every year, with another 1 in 16 changing schools. The attrition rate is particularly high for teachers with 3 years or less of experience. See also Footnote 1. Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 11 structure of co-teaching facilitates ongoing problem particular teaching practices or writing a lesson plan or solving and interaction between the candidate and mentor, reflection about a teaching experience. By focusing on actual 22 or cooperating, teacher while also strengthening student outcomes. A four-year study conducted at St. Cloud Univer- performance, programs can address the oft-made critique by school districts that institutions of higher education are long sity found that in reading and math, students in co-taught on theory without attention to practice. classrooms statistically outperformed students in classrooms The TechTeach program at Texas Tech University, for with a non-co-teaching model of student teaching and example, uses performance assessments aligned to a set of students in a classroom with a single teacher. 23 In California instructional competencies associated with greater student State University (CSU) Chico’s Rural Teacher Residency achievement gains to evaluate candidate performance program (RTR), trend data suggest similar outcomes; 24 through a video capture system called Teachscape.25 The program faculty recently received a two-year grant to con- competencies also align to measures used by the program’s duct more formal research to corroborate this trend data. partner districts. TechTeach’s focus on outcomes extends At CSU Fresno, co-teaching is now emphasized across to the students the candidates teach: Student perception every credential pathway in the school of education. Pro- surveys serve as an additional measure to assess candidate gram faculty note that co-teaching mitigates the anxiety practice, and the program has made a promise to its mentor teachers often felt during traditional student teach- district partners that the achievement gains of students in ing when they needed to step aside for a period of time to TechTeach candidates’ classrooms will be more significant allow candidates to implement lessons. Program faculty at than if the mentor teacher had been in the classroom alone. CSU Fullerton note that the co-planning/co-reflection com- Further, if partner districts hire candidates after graduation, ponents of co-teaching strengthen the intentionality with TechTeach aims to demonstrate that they have value-added which candidates select pedagogy and lesson design, as scores above the district average after two years of teaching. well as their skills as collaborative educators. The many These bold commitments stem from the level of confidence programs studied that embrace co-teaching (see Table 1) program officials have in the preparation candidates receive commend the approach for bringing the question “Are through TechTeach and the mechanisms used to assess and students learning?” into sharp focus for mentors and can- evaluate candidate performance.26 didates alike. Placing such a targeted emphasis on class- room-level results represents a shift in and of itself for many provide guidance for others interested in using performance teacher preparation programs; co-teaching has facilitated assessments. For example, performance outcomes drive critical discussion about whether and how students are the CSU Northridge ACT-R program, a residency program learning and the role of both co-teachers in that learning. designed to train special educators. Given the exclusive A number of clinically oriented programs studied focus on developing special education teachers, program EMPHASIZING CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE faculty have worked to design assessment tools that align In shifting the nature of the clinical experience, programs with existing tools in the partner district (Los Angeles also shifted outcome expectations for candidates by Unified School District) and that are tailored to the work focusing on performance—what a candidate demonstrates special educators must do, such as develop individualized the capacity to do when interacting with students—rather education plans and collaborate with classroom teachers, than relying on proxy measures such as taking a test about specialists, and parents. These assessment tools have proven 22 The terms “mentor” and “cooperating teacher” are often used inter- model of student teaching. Program leadership is conducting more changeably in teacher preparation. 23 Bacharach, N.L., Heck, T.W., & Dahlberg, K. (2010). Changing the face of student teaching through co-teaching. Action in Teacher Education, prepare teaching candidates. Texas Tech Today. Available at 23(1), 3–14. http://today.ttu.edu/2013/10/innovative-techteach-program-aims-to- 24 The trend data shows that in grades 3–6, students taught by co-teacher teams in the CSU Chico State Rural Teacher Residency program earned 12 formal research to investigate this trend. 25 Cranford, L. (2013). Innovative TechTeach program aims to better better-prepare-teaching-candidates/ 26 TechTeach launched in 2011. The first cohort of candidates completed the highest average state standardized test scores in English and math the program in May 2014, and the college is currently assessing data in comparison to students taught in classrooms with a non-co-teaching from the classrooms. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? TABLE 1 Structure of Clinical Experience in Participating Programs In some programs, the structural shifts identified here occurred through multiple pathways in one institution; in other programs, this shift occurred in a particular program or pathway. Program Name Yearlong (or more) Residency Two Semesters Student Teaching Range of Intense Clinical Experiences Use of Co-Teaching Model* ASU-ITeachAZ CSU Chico Rural Teacher Residency Program CSU Dominguez Hills California STEM Institute for Innovation & Improvement STAR Program CSU Fresno (various credential pathways) CSU Fullerton (various credential pathways) CSU Long Beach UTEACH Academy CSU Northridge ACT-R Heritage University’s HU105 Program Jacksonville Teacher Residency Lipscomb University Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER NYC Teaching Collaborative Relay Teaching Residency Seattle Teacher Residency Texas Tech University TechTeach University of Central Florida University of SD/South Dakota Initiative University of Southern California UTeach Austin UTeach National Urban Teacher Education Program at University of Chicago Note: *In a co-teaching arrangement, teacher candidates and the cooperating teacher share the planning, organization, delivery, and assessment of instruction as well as the physical space. Both adults are actively involved and engaged in all aspects of instruction at all times. It is a model of clinical practice used with intention by many clinically oriented programs. In programs using this model, candidates and cooperating teachers typically use seven or more co-teaching strategies adapted from the work of faculty at St. Cloud University. KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 13 Prioritizing Outcomes and Performance The Relay Teaching Residency at the Relay Graduate School of Education uses student learning as a metric for measuring teacher candidate performance. During the first year of the residency, candidates spend time lead teaching in mentor classrooms. During that time they are required to demonstrate how much their students have learned. As teachers of record the following year, and in order to get their master’s degree, Relay-trained teachers working in elementary classrooms are required to show that their students demonstrated, on average, a year’s growth in reading and 70% mastery on a year’s worth of state or Common Core Standards in one other subject. Middle school teachers are held to the same standard—70% mastery on a year’s worth of state or Common Core Standards—in their specialty area. Performance outcomes drive the Seattle Teacher Residency (STR) program, which has devised a number of “gateway” assignments that require candidates to demonstrate specific competencies at set time points. These gateways act as benchmarks for performance outcomes that fall along a continuum of development for residents and must be successfully completed in order to show progress, meet the valuable not only for assessing teacher candidates but also competencies that lead to the formation of powerful and for supporting conversations with mentor teachers. One effective first-year teachers. Importantly, the evaluation pro- program faculty member explained that the tools allowed cess is designed to align with the English language learning them to be specific and explicit with mentors regarding standards and the standards for special education in their expectations for candidate outcomes and resulted in more partner districts as well as the evaluation process used in focused support from the mentor teachers to the candidates. Washington State public schools.27 (See Appendix C for more information.) ACT-R’s emphasis on candidate performance has become a norm throughout aligned evaluation frameworks was an important way to hold all credential pathways in the special education department; candidates accountable for particular knowledge and skills, for example, every course assignment is linked to a practical the tools also signaled a desire to create coherence with component that candidates execute in the field and is district expectations and strengthen key partnerships, a shift observed and evaluated by the course instructor. examined in depth later in this report. While programs noted that devising district or state- Heritage University’s HU105 residency program serves as another strong example of performance-driven prepa- INCREASING MENTOR SELECTIVITY ration. The program has abandoned all formal coursework Many programs explained that effectively shifting the nature and course titles in favor of the Professional Competency of the clinical experience necessitated the thoughtful and Performance Assessment (PCAI), now in its seventh edition. deliberate selection of mentor teachers, heeding calls that Since 2010, Heritage faculty, staff, core teachers, candidates, the placement and pairing of candidates with mentor teach- and administrators have worked collaboratively to identify ers during traditional student teaching has historically been 27 More information on the PCAI can be found here: hu105.org./index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=97&Itemid=211 14 criteria for completing the residency program, and receive credit for the field practicum course each quarter. While formative in nature, they also serve as a summative tool aligned with the teacher evaluation framework used by Seattle Public Schools, edTPA, and the STR program’s Core Practices, which articulate the program’s vision of effective teaching. Successful completion of all gateways is one component of the requirements necessary for residents to receive a Washington State teaching certificate. Candidates complete five gateways over the course of the residency year. They demonstrate various competencies by annotating video of their actual teaching practice, self-evaluating their performance using a progress evaluation tool, and then making the video, annotations, and self-evaluations available online to program faculty (who are also their instructional coaches). All videos and annotations are scored according to a standardized rubric that candidates know and understand, and mentors, residents, and coaches meet to discuss resident performance after each gateway to identify next steps. (See Appendix B for a sample gateway task.) UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? haphazard and has not adequately delineated the “discrete processes by participating programs highlights the crucial skills employed in mentoring aspiring teachers well.” 28 role that mentor selection—and mentoring—plays in high- quality clinical preparation. Choosing teachers as mentors In some cases, increased mentor selectivity involved a rigorous selection process wherein teachers applied and who have achieved and can model effective practice, participated in a thorough interview process. The Rural explain the rationale behind their instructional moves, and Teacher Residency at CSU Chico offers one such example; demonstrate an affinity for adult learning and collaboration the Jacksonville Teacher Residency (JTR) offers another. At strengthens the likelihood that candidates will emerge CSU Chico, the interview for mentor teachers focuses on the profession-ready from their preparation experience. program mission as well as the teachers’ comfort with technology integration, co-teaching, collaboration, and ability to FOCUSING ON MENTOR DEVELOPMENT communicate with adult learners, among other things. CSU Research emphasizes that the degree of impact mentors have Chico works to help potential mentor teachers understand on pre-service teacher learning, efficacy, and effectiveness how the mentor teacher role in the Rural Teacher Residency is as dependent upon mentors’ capacity to teach and coach program differs from the cooperating teacher role they have effectively as the mentoring supports provided to them by historically utilized in their traditional teacher preparation the preparation program.30 Thus, for many programs profiled program. (See Appendix D for more information.) in Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation, a heightened focus on mentor selection went hand in hand with a shift toward Leaders of the JTR program, a partnership between Uni- versity of North Florida and the Duval County Public Schools, more thoughtful and ongoing mentor development. highlight their mentor teacher selection process as one of the strongest components of their approach. The process is training institutes for candidates and mentors where partic- extensive. First, potential mentors must meet minimum qual- ipants learn about co-teaching and the performance-based ifications, including three years of teaching experience in an competencies that serve as program outcomes. Some take urban school, completion of step one of Duval County Public this training further, however, by providing mentors with Schools mentor training, and demonstration of value-added intensive and ongoing support, both in the classroom and measure scores that are at or above average. Florida is one through off-site professional development meetings. For of just three states that require that student performance example the New York City Teaching Collaborative, a be considered as part of the mentor teacher selection pro- uniquely structured residency program in which residents 29 cess. Once potential mentor teachers meet these criteria, Most of the programs profiled herein include summer begin their preparation in January, offers mentors intensive they complete an application, which includes an essay, the professional development throughout the fall to strengthen recommendation of the principal, and letters of support from their coaching skills. On-site support for mentors continues students. Strong applicants are moved forward to a phone in- through the remainder of the school year as candidates terview. Finally, the process ends with JTR program staff visit- engage in an intensive residency assignment in the spring ing the potential mentor’s classroom to observe and debrief semester. The Urban Teacher Academy (UTEACH) at CSU instruction. JTR was one of a handful of programs across Long Beach has historically offered a master’s degree in the 22 interviewed that included classroom observations of curriculum and instruction on site for mentor teachers mentor teachers as part of the mentor selection process. working with candidates in the program, empowering and incentivizing mentors to improve their own practice and The development of sound and rigorous selection 28 Fraser, J., & Watson, A.M. (2014). Why clinical experience and mentoring Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 449–462; Feiman­-Nemser & Parker are replacing student teaching on the best campuses. Princeton, NJ: (1992). Mentoring in context: A comparison of two U.S. programs for Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. beginning teachers. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research 29 National Council on Teacher Quality. (2014). State teacher policy year- on Teacher Learning; Holloway, J. (2001). The benefits of mentoring. book. Available at http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/2013_State_Teach- Educational Leadership, 58(8), 85–86; Wang, J., & Fulton, L.A. (2012). er_Policy_Yearbook_National_Summary_NCTQ_Report. Rhode Island Mentor-novice relationships and learning to teach in teacher induction: and Tennessee are the other two states. A critical review of research. REMIE: Multidisciplinary Journal of 30 See, for example, Carver, C.L., & Katz, D.S. (2004). Teaching at the Educational Research, 2(1), 56–104. boundary of acceptable practice: What is a new teacher mentor to do? KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 15 Rigorous Mentor Selection 16 Learning from the ACT-R program at CSU Northridge has transformed mentor selection across the entire Department of Special Education. Prior to implementing ACT-R, faculty in the department knew that tremendous variability existed in the quality of support that candidates received from their mentor teachers, driven in part by the fact that geographic proximity to candidates’ residence was a primary factor when pairing them with mentors. This is no longer the case given the rigorous mentor selection process developed through ACT-R. In partnership with their liaisons from ACT-R’s partner district (Los Angeles Unified), program leadership worked to develop an approach to selection that included the development of key criteria for effective mentoring of prospective special educators in high-need schools and an observation instrument aligned to the district’s teacher evaluation framework but specific to the special education context. These tools continue to inform interviews and observations with every potential mentor for the department, resulting is a cadre of exceptionally committed mentor teachers. development while also strengthening candidate practice. by nationally recognized speakers. In the New Visions for As part of their degree requirements, mentor teachers in the Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER program (MASTER), master’s program study their own classrooms and conduct mentors enroll in a 20-hour course designed to develop action research in collaboration with teacher candidates. The their capacity to act as teacher educators in supporting the master’s degree option for mentors upholds the program’s growth and learning of new teachers, as well as to increase founding principle as a fully articulated “teaching hospital” mentors’ ability to use assessment and data to drive instruc- that provides on-site training and education for teachers at tion and improve student learning outcomes. The program all levels of pre- and in-service teaching. The on-site master’s offers additional on-site coaching and support for participat- for mentors is on temporary hiatus as every mentor involved ing mentors throughout the year. Additionally, in partnership in the program has completed a degree; program leadership with the New York Hall of Science and the New Visions math expects that the program will launch again soon. initiative, the program provides professional development At the New York City Teaching Collaborative (NYCTC), finding the right partner schools and mentors is an important part of the program’s model. Conversations with potential mentor teachers and school sites begin a year in advance. Before observing and interviewing potential mentors, program staff members work with school principals to assess program “fit” with the goals and culture of the school. The school’s instructional approach and expectations for teacher candidates must sync with the demands of NYCTC’s intensive residency. Once sites are chosen, potential mentors are identified and NYCTC staff observe them teach. In some cases, staff members provide constructive feedback on the instruction they see and return to see whether and how their feedback has been incorporated. In CSU Northridge’s ACT-R program, the primary focus opportunities for mentors to develop their pedagogical of monthly mentor training sessions is data-driven decision content knowledge and address content-specific novice making. Sessions focus on English/language arts assessment, teacher development. Residents use the museum to conduct data collection and analysis, and the use of data to guide inquiry labs and customize additional modules to test in their specific instructional interventions. Monthly meetings also classrooms. These components are designed to strengthen support mentors in the development of mentoring strategies the pedagogical content knowledge of both mentors and that facilitate effective collaboration, coaching, and consul- residents, a key goal of the program. Importantly, all math tation. Annually, each cohort of mentors is also supported in mentors in the MASTER program teach in schools participat- building knowledge, skill, and community by attending, as a ing in the New Visions math initiative, a math Common Core group, a Language and Literacy Institute with presentations project in thirty schools across the New Visions network.31 31 The New Visions math initiative is a partnership with the Silicon Valley Math- teacher learning in mathematics through the use of formative assessments, ematics Initiative (SVMI), funded by an Investing in Innovation (i3) grant performance assessments provided by SVMI, teacher-led inquiry, and ongo- from the U.S. Department of Education called “Accessing Algebra through ing professional development. A2i is designed as an on-ramp and pathway Inquiry” (a2i). The goal of the a2i initiative is to maximize student and toward students achieving Common Core State Standards in mathematics. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Other programs have sponsored professional develop- dashboard that allows them to upload and view trends in ment workshops that are open to all teachers in the district. their candidates’ teaching practice. Site Coordinators (key For example, the California STEM Institute for Innovation program staff roles at both of these programs) use this data and Improvement (CSI ) at CSU Dominguez Hills sponsors a in monthly training sessions to focus mentors on how to Professional Development Academy each week that is open coach candidates. This provides mentor teachers with strat- to teachers in LA Unified as well as teacher candidates in the egies for coaching candidates on particular areas of struggle residency program. The optional academy meets at a partner and strengthens their skills as data-driven teacher educators. school, and program faculty bring in experts to facilitate Beyond planning and facilitating monthly mentor and weekly and present on teacher-generated topics of interest such as resident sessions and acting as the personalized coach for problem-based learning and classroom management. both, TechTeach’s Site Coordinators (SCs) are responsible for 3 making all clinical placements for the “pod” of schools under DEVISING NEW CLINICAL ROLES FOR FACULTY, their purview in a particular district partnership across the STAFF, AND MENTOR TEACHERS state. According to program leadership, this requires the SCs Restructuring the nature of the clinical experience compelled to get to know potential mentors, administrators, and school many programs to devise new clinical roles and responsibilities contexts exceptionally well. The university uses the position for faculty, staff, and mentor teachers to support candidate as a way for a very large teacher preparation program to success in the field. Programs created a range of positions, most make thoughtful placements of teacher candidates with men- of which are hybrid in nature, with no clear delineation between tor teachers, to ensure the health and strength of those place- faculty, supervisor, and mentor; instead, the roles ask individuals ments, and to fully immerse into a partner district and school. to bridge theory and practice in new and innovative ways. While compensated by the university, SCs are considered Changing expectations for mentor teachers has come (and consider themselves) to be employees of the districts with new titles for the role, such as Clinical Resident Mentor with whom TechTeach partners. At iTeachAZ, the SCs lead or Clinical Teacher Educator, as well as new responsibilities quarterly governance meetings attended by partner school for mentors, such as holding weekly 1:1 meetings with their principals and district superintendents as well as program ad- candidates, using data to drive coaching, and co-develop- ministrators—including the Program Specialist, whose job it is ing action plans to strengthen candidate practice. At the to coach and develop SCs. SCs use data at these meetings to University of Chicago’s Urban Teacher Education Program demonstrate trends in candidate performance, and all parties (UChicago UTEP) mentors hold the title of Clinical Instructor. present discuss how to maximize assets across the partner- UChicago UTEP describes these educators as accomplished, ship to address challenges faced by candidates and mentors. practicing teachers and leaders who host and guide residents during half-year placements in their classrooms. They model for the clinical realm. Consider, for example, the Teaching and observe instruction, provide constructive feedback, and Associate role at the Seattle Teacher Residency, in which help residents set realistic instructional goals to improve a majority of the program’s instructional team also serve their practice in order to ensure development of a pipeline as on-site coaches who observe and coach residents of teachers ready to meet the demands of teaching Chicago weekly. This means that the person teaching courses also Public Schools students in context-specific ways. They are observes residents on site, allowing residents to experience considered, first and foremost, teacher educators in the clin- a strong level of coherence between what they are learning ical realm and are tasked with providing practical instruction in their courses and the feedback they are receiving on on how to apply theoretical knowledge in the classroom set- their teaching practice. The role also allows instructors to ting. Apropos of their title, Clinical Instructors meet regularly tweak course content in order to meet resident needs and with Residency Instructors to maintain shared understandings reference relevant examples from the field as they introduce about their residents’ progress. They receive monthly mentor new material and information. Individuals in this role must be training and support from the Residency Instructors as well. capable of managing multiple contexts as they move across At iTeachAZ at Arizona State University and TechTeach various Seattle Public Schools, and they must be skilled at Texas Tech University, mentors have access to a data instructors and instructional coaches. KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION Many other programs have established entirely new roles 17 SHIFT 2 throughout the course of their preparation, in comparison Reimagining Coursework, Pedagogies, and Pathways to Program Entry to candidates in programs with a more traditional student teaching approach. But candidates’ increased exposure to the clinical realm also changes the nature of, and time they W hile teaching is, at its core, interactive work, have to “do,” their work. A redesigned clinical experience of- many teacher learning opportunities in more ten means that candidates have less time for lengthy course traditional teacher education settings could be readings, multiple-page lesson plans, or writing and research characterized as exclusively non-interactive: reading texts assignments not grounded in practice. Overall, course rede- assigned by university faculty, writing detailed unit plans, sign efforts in the programs studied here recognized these and examining student work. The assumption is that teacher realities, acknowledging the need to be responsive to the candidates will be able to transfer what they have learned changing demands of immersive field placements. Time—or from these academic contexts into work that is deeply inter- lack of it—was a very real constraint for their candidates, and active and experiential during the student teaching semester. thus programs shifted the scope and sequence of courses as However, this approach is not well supported by the research well as their course expectations to honor these constraints. literature. First, research indicates that teacher education stu- dents have difficulty integrating the theory that is espoused multiple semesters of student teaching follow a 4:1 weekly in university coursework with the practical knowledge that schedule, with candidates in district schools four days and in is gained through work with children in actual classrooms.32 coursework one full day each week. This shift in course deliv- There is also the “problem of enactment,” 33 a term coined Several programs operating residencies and/or requiring ery requires out-of-the-box thinking on the part of program to refer to the phenomenon of novice teachers having a officials. For example, when the University of South Dakota wealth of content knowledge and commitment to principles moved to a full-year residency model for program seniors, and ideals but being unable to enact these principles in their the program needed to integrate a semester’s worth of senior- 34 teaching practice beyond the university classroom. year courses into a one-day-a-week schedule. Hence, courses traditionally offered twice weekly over the course of a semes- In response to these criticisms, clinically oriented pro- grams are intentionally redesigning coursework and pedago- ter are now offered in four-hour increments eight different gies to heed the trajectory of novice teacher development, times on coursework days throughout the residency year. modifying candidate entry processes, and implementing Other program innovations pointed to new or different instructional innovations to ensure that teacher candidates conceptualizations about a particular “course,” such that a tra- can skillfully enact high-quality instruction. ditional three-credit course, for example, was deconstructed into three one-credit units of study spanning the entire year. ATTENDING TO SHIFTING TRAJECTORIES OF Program faculty in CSU Chico’s Rural Teacher Residency NOVICE TEACHER DEVELOPMENT deconstructed a general education course focused on The developmental trajectories of teacher candidates shift in planning into three one-credit components, which allowed a clinically oriented approach, and the programs described them to return to the topic of planning throughout the entire in this report shared a need to accommodate this shift. Given year rather than focusing on the topic only when students their early and frequent exposure to schools, classrooms, were enrolled in the three-credit course. They also moved and teaching, clinically intensive program candidates are a course about working with struggling readers to the fall often much more advanced in what they can do and when semester of their program so that candidates could maximize 32 See, for example, Darling-Hammond, L., & Hammerness, K. (2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 390–441). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; Goodfellow, J., & Sumsion, J. (2000). Transformative pathways: Field-based teacher educators’ perceptions. 18 Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations. Seattle: University of Washington, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. 33 Kennedy, M. (2005). Inside teaching. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 34 Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(3), 245–257; Wilson, S.M., for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Floden, R.E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Unique Field Experiences Secondary education teacher candidates at the University of Central Florida (UCF) may have their first student teaching experience in the Florida Virtual School (FVS). While candidates quickly find that teaching in a virtual context is difficult and demanding, the asynchronous setting also provides them with time and space to make decisions and receive advice and feedback on difficult situations without the immediacy of in-person classroom teaching. Requiring candidates to student teach in a statewide virtual environment has the added benefit of strengthening candidate readiness to teach in a changing world, in which they will likely teach a course online and/or provide students with some level of instruction using a virtual platform before they end their careers. In fact, every child who graduates from a Florida public school must experience one online class during his or her tenure as a public school student. The FVS has franchised its courses to districts across the state, and UCF program leaders have data showing that a majority of these districts hire their graduates to teach these online courses in the public schools. Importantly, over 90% of all student teachers at UCF are supervised remotely using live remote observation tools that do not record their teaching. Remote supervision has resulted in supervisors doubling the number of observations they make and has enabled them to provide immediate feedback through Skype or Adobe Connect. In the various teacher pathways housed in the California STEM Institute for Innovation and Improvement (CSI3) at CSU Dominguez Hills, early field experiences were radically changed by requiring candidates to complete a certain number of hours in the institute’s Lab School under the guidance of faculty and master teachers. Lab School, which takes place at three different sites across Los Angeles, operates on Saturday during the school year and Monday through Thursday during the summer and is a required component of the field experience for all candidates participating in CSI3 teacher pathways at Dominguez Hills. An instructional team that includes an expert teacher and several teacher candidates teaches every lab school class. Instruction is organized around a theme. While the expert teacher initially takes the lead, novice teachers soon follow and receive feedback on their teaching. At the end of each day, instructional teams meet to debrief what worked well and modifications for next time as well as the progress of each teacher candidate. The lab school affords teacher candidates opportunities to work with one group of students, with mentoring and feedback, in a designed setting. While student outcomes provide important feedback on candidate performance, they also serve as an important source of feedback for program design. the knowledge and skills gained in the course in the field as to analyze critically how forms of privilege and oppression they worked with students one-on-one and in small groups impact their identities and perspectives and ultimately throughout the fall. affect teaching and learning in the educational system. Two UChicago UTEP at the University of Chicago has based half-year residency placements follow in the second year of its program on the trajectory of novice teacher learning in the program, enabling candidates (who commit to teach in a clinically oriented approach. During their first year in the Chicago for three years after graduating from the program) program, candidates are exposed to a variety of clinical to immerse themselves in a Chicago public school and gain experiences while simultaneously engaging in coursework. content area expertise and/or the field experience needed The approach offers candidates multiple opportunities to for additional endorsements to their credential. negotiate these experiences in the context of the theory they are learning in real time, creating “an internal dialogue tweaks to the scheduling of particular courses. Some pro- between what’s studied and what’s experienced” 35 in grams underwent complete overhauls of their approach. For the actual classroom. One key aspect of novice teacher example, as the University of Southern California’s (USC) development that the program attends to in the first year Rossier School of Education shifted to a clinically orient- is the soul strand. This strand provides a space for interns ed model, more than 30 full-time faculty members came Reimagining coursework and pedagogies went beyond 35 See page 2, Fraser, J., & Watson, A.M. (2014). Why clinical experience and mentoring are replacing student teaching on the best campuses. Princeton, NJ: Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 19 together as a community to re-conceptualize the program’s UNIQUE PATHWAYS TO PROGRAM ENTRY definition of an effective teacher. Faculty identified com- While some universities have reimagined coursework and mon domains and components of instructional practice and pedagogies, others have modified candidate entry processes worked together to thread these throughout every course in unique and different ways. University of Texas-Austin’s they teach—particularly the program’s Guided Practice UTeach Austin program has a distinctive approach to course, the clinical cornerstone of its MAT curriculum. At admission. Its STEM-specific teacher preparation program Lipscomb University, in Tennessee, undergraduate students casts a wide net across the university, encouraging all STEM majoring in secondary education complete coursework that majors, especially those who may have never considered is very similar and at times identical to what a major in the it, to try out teaching. It recruits students by piquing their discipline (content area) takes. For example, math education interest in teaching with two one-credit courses that majors take all but two courses alongside math majors to offer school-based opportunities to teach inquiry-based ensure they gain deep content knowledge. The rigorous lessons; potential candidates prepare and rehearse the and content-specific coursework required of secondary lessons multiple times with peers under the guidance of education majors in particular disciplines compelled the faculty before going out and delivering those lessons in university to undertake a comprehensive redesign of its elementary and middle school classrooms. Those who clinical experience, transforming the traditional student decide they want to continue still get a degree in a STEM teaching semester into three long-term clinical placements subject area such as biology, mathematics, or chemistry, to allow all education majors to complete in schools the while simultaneously receiving teacher certification in their teaching hours needed for state certification. content area of choice. This ensures that candidates possess sufficient content knowledge alongside a strong foundation In other programs, changes to the teams responsible for designing and teaching courses occurred. Team-teaching by in instruction and pedagogy, and a teaching pipeline where district and university staff became an integral part of many STEM candidates do not have to choose between teaching programs in order to be more district-responsive, better pre- and a degree in a STEM field. Those candidates who choose pare teachers to meet the context-specific needs of students, to continue in the program are required to satisfy a variety and more tightly align theory and practice. In the Fresno of requirements, including a minimum GPA, satisfactory Teacher Residency program, a partnership between Fresno field teaching in every course, and a preliminary and final Unified School District (FUSD) and CSU Fresno, every course portfolio. Lipscomb University also has a “secondary admit” has been restructured with an FUSD lens and every faculty policy for candidates, whereby students who want to major member is paired with an FUSD partner to team-teach every in teaching go through an admissions process at the end of class. A similar shift occurred as district and university stake- their freshman year or beginning of their sophomore year. holders conceptualized the Jacksonville Teacher Residency, The university requires a higher GPA requirement a partnership between the University of North Florida (UNF) than the minimum state requirements for entry into its and the Duval County Public Schools (DCPS), whereby UNF teacher education program, an in-person interview, and faculty and DCPS staff co-teach each course. For these pro- participation in a weekend retreat that frontloads the grams, team-teaching university coursework changed the na- program’s philosophy, conceptual framework, and what ture of the faculty partnerships with the district and the ways the learning-to-teach process will look like over next three in which faculty approach their own instruction. Modeling years. According to program leadership, this practice allows and parallel pedagogy became much more commonplace as for heightened selectivity and program candidates who partners gained comfort in their instructional collaborations, are ready to embark on a clinically intensive approach to demonstrating a shift from faculty talking about teaching learning to teach. 36 toward doing the work of teaching themselves. 36 See, for example, Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books; Ball, D.L., & Cohen, D.K. (1999). Developing practice, developing 20 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? practitioners. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 3–32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. INSTRUCTIONAL INNOVATIONS In these programs, a teacher candidate enacts a lesson plan Clinically oriented programs also have adopted a range of by saying and doing exactly what he or she would do in inter- instructional innovations focused on creating opportunities action with students and receives feedback on this enact- for safe practice that approximate instruction in classrooms ment from an expert prior to enacting the lesson with actual with support and feedback, leading to tighter theory-to-prac- students.39 The use of simulations and rehearsals is respon- tice alignment. “Safe practice” is a reference to medical sive to contemporary calls for teacher education coursework training simulations in which doctors in training conduct that is focused on what teachers do in their daily work.40 medical procedures in simulated settings in advance of 37 doing the procedure on a live patient. Historically, teacher Teaching any subject well is a complex coordination of planning, pedagogical skill, on-the-spot judgment, and education pedagogies most often involved direct contact knowledge of cognitive and child development. The delib- with students—the equivalent of a medical student practicing erate shifts toward reimagining coursework and pedagogies on a live patient. Safe practice opportunities highlighted by taken by the clinically oriented programs in this report run interviewed programs include the use of a digital classroom counter to the popular notion that talent, coupled with one’s simulator and the use of rehearsals with coached feedback. own school experience, prepares one to be a good teacher. The University of Central Florida creates opportunities for These programs rest on the conceptualization of teaching safe practice in advance of teacher candidates working direct- as an interactive practice that is learned in experience with ly with students through the use of TeachLivE, a mixed-reality guidance from an expert. simulation tool developed with an interdisciplinary team of researchers that allows pre-service teachers to teach in a simulated classroom environment.38 In the TeachLivE environment, a teacher candidate walks into a room that looks like a middle school classroom. Instead of real students, however, there are avatars. This setting allows multiple teacher candidates to practice the same skill during six- to ten-minute simulations over the course of a single class session. TeachLivE’s primary purpose is to develop teacher candidates’ knowledge of classroom management, pedagogy, and content. Rehearsals of teaching in a university classroom also SHIFT 3 Emphasizing Authentic Partnerships Between and Across Schools, Districts, and Institutes of Higher Education A majority of programs interviewed underscored the many ways in which shifting to a clinically oriented approach required them to work differently across their partnerships in order to accomplish their goals. As one program leader stated, “No longer could we say we have build on the principle of “do no harm.” In the Seattle Teacher five student teachers and then find teachers who are willing Residency and UTeach Austin’s STEM teacher preparation to mentor. We needed to partner with the district and with program at University of Texas-Austin, rehearsals of practice schools. As a result we work with fewer districts but more with coached feedback are an important pedagogy in a num- deeply.” Many programs situated at an institution of higher ber of courses. The Relay Teaching Residency also relies on education (IHE) characterized past relationships with districts rehearsals of classroom enactment with no students present. as passive or worse—that local education agencies felt that 37 Schaeffer, J.J., & Gonzales, R. (2000). Dynamic simulation: A new meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, tool for difficult airway training of professional health care providers. Canada; Scott, S.E., & Benko, S. (2010). Coached rehearsals in pre- American Journal of Anesthesiology, 27, 232–242. service teacher education: What’s coachable? Paper presented at the 38 Dieker, L.A., Rodriguez, J., Lingnugaris-Kraft, B., Hynes, M., & annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Hughes, C.E. (2014). The potential of simulated environments in teacher education: Current and future possibilities, Teacher Education Denver, CO. 40 See, for example, Ball, D.L., & Forzani, F.M. (2009). The work of and Special Education, 37(1), 21–33. 39 See, for example, Kazemi, E., & Hubbard, A. (2008). New directions teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 497–511; Ball, D.L., Sleep, L., Boerst, T.A., & Bass, H. for the design and study of professional development: Attending to (2009). Combining the development of practice and the practice of the coevolution of teachers’ participation across contexts. Journal of development in teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 109(5), Teacher Education, 59(5), 428–441; Lampert, M. (2005). Preparing 458–474; Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., teachers for ambitious instructional practice: Learning to listen and & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional to construct an appropriate response. Paper presented at the annual perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100. KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 21 institutions of higher education actively did not value their as following the district calendar to demonstrate a clear perspective. To alter this characterization, the programs in this commitment to the partnership and to enable candidates paper embraced the mindset that districts were both partners to experience the full cadence of the school year. and clients, or consumers, of the teachers that IHEs prepare. programs to prepare teachers for context-specific work. In the evolution toward true partnership, programs described Collaborative curriculum redesign has also allowed three trends that signal a commitment to authentic partnership: In the full-year residency for teacher education program designing curriculum that is responsive to district-identified seniors at the University of South Dakota, as well as candi- needs, changing faculty roles, and creating intentional structures dates in CSU Chico’s Rural Teacher Residency program that signal commitment to district partnership. and Heritage University’s HU105 program, candidates learn to teach and work in the context of rural schools. DESIGNING CURRICULUM THAT IS RESPONSIVE Careful attention to collaborative curriculum design in TO DISTRICT-IDENTIFIED NEEDS these programs (i.e., in the form of mentor and principal Historically, university courses have been created with consid- input) has helped candidates understand what it means to erable autonomy among faculty, often with little or no input live rurally and work with rural students while responding from any hiring school district. With the view of the district as to the needs of underserved learners, including English the “client” of teacher preparation, however, clinically orient- language learners and students in special education. Other ed teacher education programs shifted this practice. A num- programs described their partnership similarly. A central ber of programs featured here designed courses in collabora- focus of the Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency tion with their district partners, at times in planning sessions (LAUTR), for example, is equipping teacher candidates prior to launching a new program and at others by gathering with the knowledge and skills to enact culturally relevant direct input from existing program mentors on what was pedagogy in the Los Angeles Unified School District. needed or not working in their extant curriculum. Depending Curriculum redesign efforts have helped candidates move on the program, some mentor teachers co-wrote new curric- beyond cultural assumptions and develop specific skills ula. According to university and district personnel, successful that support candidates to teach in a way that honors the collaborative redesign efforts required compromise by both backgrounds, experiences, and talents students bring to the partners but, when done well, worked to increase coherence classroom. Importantly, LAUTR has established strong part- and tighten theory-to-practice integration. nerships with a number of different community organizations For example, in the Fresno Teacher Residency (FTR) with whom it works to help teacher candidates more deeply program, teacher education courses typically used Bloom’s understand the communities in which their students live. taxonomy as a framework for teaching questioning skills.41 Meanwhile, Fresno Unified School District relied on Webb’s teacher education curriculum that fosters competence in Depth of Knowledge (DOK) in question planning, which is culturally relevant pedagogy. Program faculty and district aligned with the Common Core State Standards. This led the personnel note that teacher candidates exit their programs individuals designing FTR courses to incorporate the use of with a competence and cultural proficiency enabled by a Webb’s DOK in place of Bloom’s taxonomy when they teach curriculum that is responsive to the contexts in which can- questioning. By shifting to focus on DOK in its coursework, didates teach. UChicago UTEP at the University of Chicago the program created greater coherence in the candidate ex- found that its context-specific approach to teacher prepara- perience. Programs have also made shifts that proved more tion is a crucial reason why candidates are so successful in logistically difficult in order to foster greater coherence, such working in Chicago Public Schools after graduation.42 41 Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: 42 Hammerness, K., & Matsko, K.K. (2013). When context has content: The cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay. CSU Fullerton placed a similar focus on developing a A case study of new teacher induction in the University of Chicago’s Urban Teacher Education Program. Urban Education, 48(4), 557–584. 22 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? New Faculty Roles As Heritage University shifted to a clinical program with HU105, faculty hires have been made primarily from the most talented practitioners in the program’s partner districts. The former classroom teachers are responsible for teaching courses in HU105’s nontraditional competency-based curriculum and working as site advocates, representing one school or a group of schools in the district depending on the number of teacher candidates. In their role as site advocates, faculty are in schools and classrooms at least three days per week, working to support candidates and core teachers in HU105’s various Teaching and Learning teams to successfully enact their roles. They also inform and coordinate with school principals on all issues relevant to school personnel, instruction, and HU105 operations. In addition to working in their roles as site advocates, clinical faculty spend 10% of their time dedicated to supporting school districts through professional development in their areas of expertise at no cost to the districts. UTeach-National’s Master Teacher role exists in every STEM- focused preparation program in the UTeach network. Master Teachers are secondary-level practitioners with advanced degrees who are hired as full-time, non-tenured clinical faculty for UTeach programs. They supervise candidates’ multiple field experiences and act as informal mentors and advisors to candidates, teach multiple courses on practice, are paired with research faculty in all courses with a field component, model effective and efficient classroom instruction throughout the candidate experience, serve as the bridge between the university program and the local public schools, facilitate all candidate and host teacher placements, and support cooperating or host teachers to understand how to give feedback to the candidates who share their classrooms. They are exclusively dedicated to student support and program success. They also provide customized, on-demand induction support during the first two to three years of teaching. A longitudinal study found that pre-service teachers Changes in Teaching Schedules Coursework in a clinically oriented program does not often who have been prepared in programs that pay particular 43 attention to context are more likely to remain in teaching. align with typical university scheduling structures. Courses Indeed, this same research suggests that UChicago UTEP’s might be taught within a compressed time frame (e.g., every targeted preparation may be particularly important to day for two weeks), or take place at times that might be candidates’ commitments, practices, and decision to stay considered inconvenient (e.g., early on a Friday morning) or in 44 in teaching. site-based locations far removed from the university (e.g., 90 minutes away at a rural school). The flexibility and willingness CHANGING FACULTY ROLES of faculty members to modify traditional teaching schedules to From collaborating on curriculum development to teaching meet the needs of candidates proved essential to the success courses at school sites, faculty in many of the programs of the clinically oriented programs participating in this project. studied are more connected than ever before with the districts where their teacher candidates work and learn to Changes in Hiring Practices teach. Changes in teaching schedules, hiring practices, and Some programs have recognized the need to hire “differently.” the professional development that faculty willingly engage The dean at CSU Fresno’s Kremen School of Education, for in to stay current with district practices all demonstrate how example, interviews every potential job candidate to learn changing faculty roles fosters greater program coherence more about his or her willingness to collaborate in teach- and stronger, more authentic partnerships. ing courses, serve as a liaison between the university and a 43 Tamir, E. (2009). Choosing to teach in urban schools among graduates Inspiring teaching: Context-specific teacher preparation for the 21st of elite colleges. Urban Education, 44(5), 522–544; Tamir, E. (2014). Choosing teacher as a career in urban public, Catholic and Jewish century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. 44 Matsko, K.K., & Hammerness, K. (2014). Unpacking the “urban” in schools by graduates of elite colleges. Journal of Educational Change, urban teacher preparation: Making a case for context-specific teacher 15, 327–355; Feiman-Nemser, S., Tamir, E., & Hammerness, K. (2014). preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 128–144. KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 23 partner district, and teach courses on site, which may require the data literacy of clinical and research faculty, including driving considerable distances. This represents a significant iTeachAZ at ASU, TechTeach at Texas Tech, UTeach Austin shift away from the typical hiring approach in many institu- at the University of Texas-Austin, USC’s Rossier School tions of higher education. of Education, the New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER program, and the Relay Teaching Residen- University Faculty Professional Development cy. The TechTeach program, for example, uses Tableau, University leadership and faculty also recognize the need a platform that can pull data from various sources and to strengthen instructional knowledge of current practices create multiple displays and dashboards. The design of in K–12 settings, especially as a majority of states usher in TechTeach’s data management system allows for the col- the Common Core State Standards. In response, programs lection and analysis of candidate and student performance and whole schools of education have taken on professional data given the program’s emphasis on student impact, and development initiatives to heighten awareness and strength- provides all stakeholders across the partnership with access en course relevance in the current climate. For example, the to important information about program implementation. entire School of Education at Lipscomb University is dedi- To galvanize program staff to use Tableau effectively, the cated to the intentional integration of the Common Core into dean of the school of education instituted “data days” in its coursework. Faculty spend considerable time in meetings which he individually meets with every Site Coordinator in and professional development discussing what they will the program so that he can better understand how they are do to shift toward teaching to the Common Core and how using data to make decisions about how best to support assignments will reflect this change. their teacher candidates. CSU Fresno leaders describe their approach to clinical teacher education as an “all-in approach” by faculty. On CREATING INTENTIONAL STRUCTURES THAT multiple occasions a busload of teacher education faculty SIGNAL COMMITMENT TO DISTRICT PARTNERSHIP have visited partner districts for tours of targeted schools. It Conversations across a range of programs highlighted is not unusual for the dean of the school to join. In fact, the that leaders in both IHEs and districts must understand dean also takes research faculty, educational administration the complex challenge of growing effective teachers in a faculty, the engineering and undergraduate dean, and faculty clinically oriented approach. To do so, programs established from math, science, and arts on once-monthly walk-throughs intentional structures to support and foster an authentic in the Fresno Unified School District (FUSD); they visit a partnership in the following ways: different school and, in conversation with FUSD’s curriculum and instruction leadership, including the Associate Superintendent, visit different classrooms and debrief after each members from the partner local education agency, classroom visit. Having a range of higher education faculty an advisory board, and university faculty and leadership in a school district monthly is a dramatic departure from business as usual in teacher education. Heritage University’s HU105 program expects faculty to • Scheduling weekly meetings where faculty and university partners co-plan and evaluate student progress • Using learning management systems with teacher use data to drive candidates’ training. The program’s entire candidates, cooperating teachers, and university faculty and staff meet from 8 a.m. until noon every Monday supervisors that allow for constant communication to make decisions about program design and support plans and collaborative discussion among stakeholders based on data; these plans are then posted on the program website for all core teachers and candidates to see. Faculty/ site advocates work to identify problem issues and red flags 24 • Ensuring that every meeting scheduled includes • Establishing monthly standing meetings between district superintendents and school of education deans • Collaborating in knowledge building, for example, by and to propose solutions. Other programs report similar inviting faculty and teacher education candidates to pro- systematic use of data and intentional work to strengthen fessional development that is sponsored by the district UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Data-Driven Decision Making The accessibility of resident performance and overall implementation data at the New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER program has heralded groundbreaking changes to course content as well as to how research and clinical faculty work together to revise and strengthen that content. For example, upon reviewing math resident performance data during year one of the program, the chair of the math department at the School of Arts and Sciences invited a team of research and clinical faculty to rework the design and delivery of a summer-term geometry course in the program. Together, the team was able to create a very different and unique experience for the math residents in year two of the program, one that emphasized pedagogical content knowledge (a key program focus) and strengthened residents’ readiness to meet learner needs. implementing the program’s new data management system, Site Coordinators spent full days each week writing reports from their offices and making data available online. With the facility of the program’s new technology and dashboard, Site Coordinators can maximize their time in classrooms and schools, upload data in the moment, and address real-time challenges with ease. Additionally, all program staff can look across 30 cohorts in the state at any time and be well positioned to make data-based decisions to drive performance improvements. Arizona State University’s iTeach AZ program uses the App+Data dashboard, enabling program staff to use formative data in real time to improve candidate learning and performance. Program staff can print out data dashboards daily, identify data-based trends, and immediately adjust their courses and coaching. For example, when a Site Coordinator noticed a common struggle with a particular indicator on the program’s teacher performance rubric after several candidate observations, she tweaked her course session plan that week in order to model the indicator. Prior to Clinically oriented programs strengthen teacher candidates’ ability to make data-driven instructional decisions by intentionally focusing on data literacy in the curriculum. In the Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency (LAUTR), residents first study the persistent and entrenched achievement gap that exists in the district and the role of high expectations in mitigating this gap. In coursework, residents analyze achievement data by subgroup and work to identify trends across math and literacy achievement for their students. Faculty and staff then support residents as they consider the role of high-quality instruction to improve instructional outcomes and what specific actions they can take to improve achievement outcomes for their students. Residents create action plans, teach, and reflect on the impact of their data-based instructional choices on student learning. CSU Fullerton’s learning management system, for co-teach- The above systems and processes work to build, reinforce, and expand the commitment that programs and partner ing support and collaboration as well as a co-teaching com- districts have made to create a teacher education experience munity website that houses videos, documents, and ideas that results in well-prepared beginning teachers. For exam- for co-teaching in the classroom and forums for discussion ple, in the co-teaching partnership between CSU Fullerton’s and sharing. elementary education credential program and the Fullerton School District, both the district and university co-plan and terized their partnerships as a mutual sharing of professional deliver joint professional development because of a desire responsibilities. In many cases, faculty and district partners to establish a shared vision and a common language as they described that their willingness and desire to engage with support candidates through the clinical experience. The col- the program were driven by the authenticity of the partner- laboratively planned sessions also strengthen participants’ ship between the IHE and the district. Regardless of the structures in place, programs charac- facility with the district’s data systems, instructional processes, and teacher evaluation expectations and are typically attended by supervisors, teacher candidates, cooperating teachers, and university faculty whenever possible. Finally, program stakeholders across the partnership use Titanium, KEY SHIFTS TOWARD CLINICALLY ORIENTED TEACHER PREPARATION 25 Clinically oriented programs are redesigning coursework and pedagogy to ensure teacher candidates can skilfully enact high-quality instruction. 26 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS Considerations for Shifting toward Clinically Oriented Preparation Change management in teacher education is not easy or automatic. The programs in this report are at different stages of shifting toward a clinical approach to teacher education, with some just in their first year of implementation and enduring a steep learning curve. A cross all programs, however, clear conditions sur- Schools all serve on various STR leadership committees and faced that made the shifts possible, and recurring were vocal participants in multi-day planning sessions prior challenges had to be negotiated at the district, to the program’s official launch in 2013. At CSU Long Beach, state, and program levels to ensure the shifts took hold. the College of Education Dean and the Superintendent of Below we examine four conditions for success: leadership, Long Beach Unified meet monthly to discuss key issues and financial sustainability, program faculty buy-in, and data use to strategize on next steps, while the Dean at Lipscomb and data sharing. We pair each condition with a discussion University makes teacher education and the sharing of best of potential barriers and recommendations for policy that practices in integrating the Common Core part of every might mitigate these barriers. faculty meeting. Leadership P In some cases, invested leaders expanded the scope and reach of their clinically oriented teacher education programs to increase impact. For example, successful implementation rograms repeatedly pointed to unprecedented of the Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency compelled leadership moves that enabled transformation at the Dean of CSU Los Angeles (CSULA) Charter College of the university and district levels. Time and again, the Education to make the teacher residency model the primary data revealed how chancellors, provosts, deans, department means of preparing all CSULA education students to become chairs, superintendents, and principals with strong visions teachers, transforming the way that the college prepares all for shifting toward practice in teacher education also made of its teacher candidates. A similar transformation under the tremendous efforts to execute their visions across university, guidance of strong leadership happened at CSU Fullerton, school, program, and, in a few cases, state contexts. In the where all teacher education students are now prepared in a Jacksonville Teacher Residency, for example, the presence clinically oriented model of teacher education that requires of the Superintendent of Duval County Public Schools and two semesters of student teaching in a co-teaching environ- the Chair of the Foundation and Secondary Department at ment. By Fall 2015, all credential pathways at CSU Fullerton the University of North Florida contributed at several key will follow the district calendar, not the university calendar, planning and implementation meetings to faculty and district so teacher candidates experience classrooms for a full school staff’s desire to engage in the partnership and to the devel- year. This approach is already in place in CSU Fullerton’s opment of shared impact goals for the program. Similar lead- Department of Secondary Education. At the University of ership commitments exist at the Seattle Teacher Residency Southern California, pioneering leadership ushered in an (STR); the College of Education dean, faculty leaders, associ- innovative online program that mirrors the on-campus ate deans, and assistant superintendents from Seattle Public program. Finally, at iTeachAZ at Arizona State University CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUCCESS 27 and TechTeach at Texas Tech, the leadership of pioneering collecting and analyzing district-level data that clearly deans made it possible to scale intensive clinical preparation defines the professional development needs of teachers statewide. Leadership committed to clinically oriented teacher in their first three years of teaching, preparation providers education makes innovation possible. can make data-driven changes to programming in order to better address those needs during the clinical prepara- BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION tion. This also allows school districts and school building Unstable leadership—at institutions of higher education or leaders to provide more tailored professional development partner districts—can make implementing a clinically orient- for novice teachers once they are teachers of record, and ed teacher education program very difficult. For example, if there is no permanent dean for multiple years, or a new in accordance with other school-specific goals. • States should examine teacher preparation program district superintendent every year, as was the case in two approval and certification requirements to ensure extend- participating programs, implementing change and getting ed, clinically based experiences are a core component of strong faculty and district buy-in can prove difficult if not approved programs and to allow for innovation in prepa- impossible. ration curriculum and delivery that is not constrained by overly prescriptive content or course-hour requirements. Multiple approaches to preparation at a single institution can also serve as a barrier to long-term success in shifting • Institutions of higher education should adopt a unified, toward a clinical orientation. Leaders that have adopted a clinically based approach to teacher preparation and single approach, or that have supported the shift toward adjust policies for preparation programs, faculty practice across multiple credential pathways in their organi- engagement, and financing to reflect this priority. zations, have been able to scale, grow, increase reach, maintain faculty buy-in, and implement real change in programs. At sites where this has not occurred, the positive impacts of a clinically oriented shift have been felt only by a handful of candidates in a particular department or content area. By committing to the power of a clinically oriented approach as the way to prepare teachers, programs can confidently state Financial Sustainability A majority of interviewed programs received supplemental financial support to fund redesign efforts as well as to pay stipends for mentor teachers and teacher candidates (e.g., grants from founda- that this is how they “do” teacher education, build coher- tions, states, and the federal government such as the Teacher ence, gain momentum, and let innovation take hold. Quality Partnership (TQP) and Transition to Teaching grant programs). Program staff universally acknowledged that POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS such support made a shift toward clinical practice possible. • State and national higher education associations should Understandably, seed and other sources of external funding provide leaders who are transitioning to clinically based are often necessary to the initial planning and launch of a preparation programs with a professional learning redesigned teacher education program. To endure over the community that facilitates sharing of best practices. long term, however, clinically oriented preparation programs • K–12 and higher education leaders should examine how to reinvent their relationship to support and facilitate clin- Finite sources of funding in the form of multi-year grants ically based teacher preparation and to build a mutually or one-time gifts from foundations or private, philanthrop- beneficial value proposition that advances the quality of ic donors do not support financial sustainability over the new teachers. long term. In fact, some of the programs in this report that • P–16 partnerships should examine how professional launched due to initial rounds of TQP grants in 2009 and development investments can be better tailored to meet 2010 will sunset in the 2015–16 academic year due to a lack the needs of incoming teachers and novice teachers. By of funding.45 45 These include the ACT-R program at CSU Northridge and the Urban Teacher Residency program at CSU Dominguez Hills. 28 require financial sustainability based on existing sources. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Several programs are rethinking their program design with At CSU Dominguez Hills, the time to degree has histori- an eye toward a sustainable financial model. For example, cally been, on average, six to seven years because students some programs are considering creating, or have already typically work full-time while pursuing their degree. An created, cost-sharing models with partner districts, especially immersive clinical teaching experience that requires full-time, hard-to-staff districts that view the program as a recruitment yearlong commitments from candidates makes it impossible pipeline. Some programs have developed new initiatives for students to also work a full-time job. Some programs have and partnerships in concert with complementary initiatives mitigated the cost of being in a full-time clinical placement with an eye toward sustainability. For example, New Visions by negotiating paid teaching associate positions with partner for Public Schools has been able to integrate the math and districts, providing scholarships from private foundations, science teacher residency program with its a2i math initiative and supporting students to apply for FAFSA and need-based by ensuring that all math mentor teachers in the New Visions scholarships as well as federal loan forgiveness programs. for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER program work in an a2i school.46 Finally, other programs have engaged in POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS efforts to redesign their original initiatives. For example, when • Programs and partnerships should investigate hybrid the New York City Department of Education launched the student-teacher roles in school systems that can provide New York City Teaching Residency for School Turnaround monetary support for candidates while reflecting the in 2012 (now the New York City Teaching Collaborative), a in-training, learner position of teacher candidates who two-year federal School Improvement Grant made it possible work in schools in a clinically oriented program. for the then yearlong residency program to provide residents • States and the federal government should invest in both with a $23,000 stipend, plus another $20,000 in benefits per need-based and merit-based scholarships and grant resident. Once the grant was over, this level of funding was opportunities to ease the transition for candidates and not sustainable. To decrease costs, the program moved to a providers to a clinically based training model. dual residency model spanning January to August; 47 residents • The federal government should create a STEM-focused receive a stipend of $13,000. The dual residency from January career-to-teacher grant, similar to Troops to Teachers, to August not only is more sustainable financially but also to attract and support career professionals transitioning allows program staff to do induction work with program grad- into teaching. uates in the fall and to spend time coaching mentor teachers before residents share their classrooms full-time, which they previously had no capacity for in the original program design. • State-level programs should be created that mirror the federal Teacher Quality Partnership grant competition, providing living stipends for program participants. • Institutions of higher education should reduce tuition BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION rates for teacher candidates during full-time, clinically Shifting to a more clinically oriented programmatic approach based periods of preparation. can have unforeseen, temporary financial implications. Dra- • State and national higher education associations should matic curriculum shifts such as moving to a full-year clinical provide university and program leaders with professional placement or introducing more rigorous performance measures development on forming partnerships with other educa- can lead to an initial decreased enrollment and thus reduced tion stakeholders, including local philanthropy, business, income for programs. At ASU’s iTeachAZ program, enrollment and community leaders, in order to build diverse financial initially decreased when the dean made the decision to shift models to support the transition to clinically oriented whole-scale toward a clinically oriented, full-year residency ap- teacher preparation. proach; it took three years to return to typical levels. The same happened at TechTeach at Texas Tech, where it took two years for program enrollment to return to typical levels and recover. 46 a2i stands for Accessing Algebra through Inquiry and is a U.S. Department of 47 Residency one spans January–June; residency two spans June–August. Education–funded grant under the Investing in Innovation (i3) grant program. CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUCCESS 29 Program Faculty Buy-In P rograms noted the significance of strong collaboration among research and clinical faculty when programs, including district-based staff or adjunct faculty that do not have doctorates. • Institutions of higher education (IHEs) should include participation in clinically oriented teacher preparation as conceptualizing and implementing clinically oriented part of annual review evaluations and tenure requirements shifts. This was true even at large research institutions, like for all program faculty; IHEs should incentivize faculty the University of Southern California and the University of participation through financial or other professional Texas-Austin, which houses the UTeach Austin STEM preparation program. An explicit program goal of the New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER program is to growth opportunities. • University- and district-based faculty should be included as key stakeholders in programmatic discussions about unite faculty from the Schools of Arts and Sciences and Edu- transitioning to a clinically oriented preparation model. cation to work collaboratively on the program. At CSU Long Beach, educator preparation is seen as a university-wide responsibility; while the credential programs are housed in Data Use and Data Sharing the College of Education, faculty in content areas teach in Data-driven decision making enabled by data sharing the credential program to ensure that future teachers have between programs and districts has the power to inform deep content expertise. All faculty members involved in the quality of clinical teacher preparation. Intentional use teacher preparation have engaged in their own professional of data can allow programs to measure impact on a host of development around the Common Core State Standards. measures as well as transform the nature of conversations between districts and their higher education partners and Moreover, many of the programs interviewed did not rely primarily on adjuncts or graduate students to teach courses; mentors and teacher candidates. more often, tenured faculty members and district practitioners committed to the long-term success of a clinically oriented however, has been elusive. This is because the norms of approach were the primary course instructors. data sharing across IHEs and partner districts do not The ability to measure the impact of teacher preparation, always support this goal and because strong systems for BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION data management do not always exist at either organization. Innovation in teacher education is not easy. Expecting a small Further, partners are often unclear on what constitutes the number of faculty to shoulder the burden of an entirely new “right” data to share and when to share it. Programs that approach to clinical preparation is not recommended given have made progress toward measuring impact create clear the insights provided by interviewed programs. Programs memoranda of understanding (MOUs) from the start that that do not commit the necessary funds to staff a clinically outline shared goals for what constitutes data, how that oriented program sufficiently can run soft on quality and over- data should be used, and clear plans for the collection, all faculty and staff satisfaction. Additionally, some universities management, and analysis of shared data. do not allow master’s level courses to be taught by individuals who do not have a doctorate; this serves as a barrier for clini- their various MOUs with partner districts as a central condi- cally oriented programs that want to hire practicing teachers tion for success. The memoranda stipulate how partners will and other district staff to teach or co-teach courses. share benchmark assessment data, student perception data, Leaders of Texas Tech University’s TechTeach program cite and teacher performance data as measured by the TxBess48 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Activity Profile (TAP) from candidate classrooms, as well as • States, universities, districts, and programs should ensure comparative value-added data for TechTeach graduates. that their policies do not prevent or discourage high- quality clinical staff from supporting teacher preparation considerations to incorporate into partnership agreements: 48 The Texas Beginning Educator Support System’s Activity Profile (TAP) is a data gathering process designed to help beginning teachers reflect on and improve their teaching practice, and is based on the 30 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Across the board, programs highlighted key data TxBess Framework, which contains performance standards and a developmental continuum for beginning teachers. • What data will be collected and shared? that strengthening the PCK of mentors and candidates is a • What are the goals of data sharing? central goal of the program.49 It has collaborated with an • How will the data shared be used? external evaluator to develop such tools, but creating valid • Who is responsible for collecting the data? assessment tools to measure PCK at the secondary level has • Who will have access to the data, and when? been challenging. • How will the data be packaged? • How will teacher candidates be identified? POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS • How will students be identified? • Memoranda of understanding between universities, districts, and other third parties entering a teacher BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION preparation partnership should clearly define data Beyond a lack of clear and comprehensive memoranda of needs, sources, uses, and a clear timeline for data- understanding, additional barriers to data sharing include a sharing in order to assess program impact and guide lack of coherence between program and district assessment improvement; these memoranda should be signed by and evaluation tools. Aligning program frameworks with all involved parties and updated annually to maintain those used by district partners enables cross-stakeholder relevance and ensure data needs are continually met. conversations and reflects a shared responsibility for • Teacher preparation partnerships between universities teacher candidate learning. and districts should align program and district evaluation tools to evaluate candidates and as a condition for meet- Programs also noted that even when a commitment to the collection and analysis of impact data exists across a partnership, the necessary evaluation tools don’t always ing program completion requirements. • States should require districts to evaluate and report exist. For example, New Visions for Public Schools-Hunter graduate effectiveness back to preparation providers. College MASTER program has made attempts to measure • States should require evidence of program implementa- teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), given tion and impact in program approval standards. 49 See Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUCCESS 31 UTRU: Conclusion In their seminal piece “A Knowledge Base for Teaching: What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One,” Hiebert, Gallimore, and Stigler highlight that in the United States, educators often do not use what is already known about best practices to build on and continue to improve education, resulting in a constant reinvention of the wheel. T o foster systemic change toward clinically orient- increased mentor selectivity, the introduction of new clinical ed preparation, the teacher preparation landscape roles, a focus on mentor development and site-based training, needs comprehensive, sophisticated, and continual as well as thinking very differently about coursework and the knowledge management, data sharing, and collaboration. partnership between preparation programs and hiring school The goal of Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation is to districts. Shifting toward clinically oriented teacher prepara- contribute to a knowledge base of best practice in clinical tion is not just a matter of placing students in classrooms for teacher preparation so that others interested in building longer periods of time, hoping they will emerge as better pre- clinically rich programs can learn from those who have gone pared beginning teachers. The programs interviewed for this before them. report suggest that it is a deliberate effort, characterized by innovative pedagogies and talented human capital, to ensure The programs highlighted in this paper acknowledged the need to attend to many different facets and operations in that beginning teachers are well prepared for the challenges order to implement a clinically oriented approach—including of teaching and learning in the 21st century. CONCLUSION 33 Appendix A Clinically Oriented Teacher Preparation Program Snapshots B elow is a brief overview of the clinically oriented during their residency year and upon program completion preparation programs that participated in this paper. earn a subject credential in math or science at the middle It is important to note that in California, post-bac- and high school levels as well as a Master of Arts in Educa- calaureate is the only option for teacher certification. Some tion. Prior to STAR, CSI3 housed the math and science–fo- schools have strong pathways into teaching that include cused Urban Teacher Residency program at CSU Dominguez prerequisite courses as part of the undergraduate experi- Hills, which accepted its last cohort of candidates in 2014. ence, but students must complete their baccalaureate degree before completing a teaching credential program. CSU Fresno (Fresno, CA) The Fresno Teacher Residency is one of multiple pathways Arizona State University-ITeachAZ (Statewide Initiative) to teaching at CSU Fresno. It is a 15- to 18-month residen- Arizona State University’s residency program is one of the cy program in partnership with the Fresno Unified School largest teacher education programs in the United States. District. The middle grades residency program helps prepare ASU-ITeachAZ is an undergraduate teacher preparation new teachers for the classroom with an emphasis on math program that includes a full-year residency in students’ final and science instruction. It combines rigorous master’s-level year. The program utilizes performance assessments and a coursework, teacher credentialing coursework, and a year- data-sharing tool that facilitates data-driven decision making long apprenticeship in a classroom with a mentor teacher by program staff and mentor teachers. supported by a comprehensive professional development curriculum in order to develop and support new teachers. CSU Chico (Chico, CA) Residents receive a $12,500 stipend during the training pe- The Rural Teacher Residency at CSU Chico is a yearlong resi- riod and make a commitment to teach in the Fresno Unified dency. Teacher candidates, called “residents,” co-teach in one School District for a minimum of three years after complet- of four partner rural school districts and complete course- ing the program. Other Fresno pathways include CalTeach work necessary for a master’s degree with a multiple-subject (online), a small traditional credential program in the evening or education specialist preliminary credential. for working candidates and interns, additional partnerships through the Central Valley Partnerships for Exemplary CSU Dominguez Hills STEM Institute for Innovation and Teachers: Linked Learning with the Porterville Unified, and Improvement (Carson, CA) teacher preparation partnerships in Clovis, Central, Sanger, The teacher education program at Dominguez Hills includes and Washington districts. multiple pathways into teaching, one of which is the newly 34 launched STAR urban teacher residency program, set to train CSU Fullerton (Fullerton, CA) its first cohort of candidates in 2015. This STEM-focused This clinically oriented program utilizes a co-teaching model program, situated in the California STEM Institute for Innova- in strong partnership with a small number of local school tion and Improvement (CSI3), lasts 18 months and includes a districts. Candidates can earn a variety of credentials at the yearlong teaching residency in a middle or high school locat- elementary level (including a multiple-subjects credential ed in south Los Angeles. Students receive a $30,000 stipend with bilingual authorization), single-subject credentials at the UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? middle and high school levels, and special education certifi- Heritage University: HU105 Program (Toppenish, WA) cation. All pathways emphasize a cohort model, and candi- Heritage University-105 (HU105) is a 1.5- to 2-year residency dates complete two semesters of student teaching aligned program in partnership with Educational Service District 105, to the district, not university, calendar. which serves children in the Yakima Valley, an area of central Washington plagued by dire and endemic poverty. Under- CSU Long Beach: Urban Teaching Academy graduate and graduate candidates who complete the pro- (Long Beach, CA) gram are considered proficient in the competencies required CSU Long Beach’s Urban Teaching Academy (UTEACH) to be an elementary teacher and have an endorsement in program is a yearlong residency designed in partnership with teaching English language learners. Long Beach Unified School District. The UTEACH model has been in existence for ten years. Teacher education course- Jacksonville Teacher Residency (Jacksonville, FL) work is taught on site where the students are doing their The Jacksonville Teacher Residency (JTR) is a program residency, and students are placed in a classroom with a that involves a yearlong STEM-focused residency in the master teacher. Candidates who complete this program typi- classroom of an experienced math or science teacher cally teach Grades K–8. UTEACH is one of multiple credential and coursework leading to a master’s degree in education. pathways offered at CSU Long Beach. Candidates must already have a bachelor’s degree in math or science or a STEM-related field prior to admittance to CSU Northridge: ACT-R Residency Program the residency program. The program is a partnership (Northridge, CA) between Duval County Public Schools and the University ACT-R is a combined 24-month credential/master’s degree of North Florida. JTR is supported by the Jacksonville program offered collaboratively by California State Univer- Public Education Fund. sity, Northridge (CSUN) and the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). The program prepares teachers to serve Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency (Los Angeles, CA) students with disabilities in high-need schools. Candidates The Los Angeles Urban Teacher Residency is an intensive obtain a credential in one year through full-time study as a program that leads to earning a teaching credential and teacher in residence. Mentors for the program are selected master’s degree at California State University Los Angeles through a rigorous process that includes application, inter- (CSULA). Designed to equip future teachers in secondary view, and observation of their teaching practice. In the sec- math, science, and special education to close the achieve- ond year of the program, graduates are employed in LAUSD ment gap in high-need urban schools, the 18-month gradu- and complete their master’s degree while on the job. With ate-level program offers an opportunity for teacher residents an additional semester, candidates may obtain an Education to work alongside outstanding mentor teachers for an entire Specialist Clear Credential. Candidates in ACT-R are eligible school year. Program partners include CSULA, the Center for a stipend of up to $35,000 and have an obligation to for Collaborative Education, and the Los Angeles Unified teach in a special education position in an LAUSD high-need School District. school for three years. APPENDIX A 35 Lipscomb University (Nashville, TN) simultaneously enroll in Relay, where they take classes on This clinically focused undergraduate teacher preparation core teaching techniques and content-specific instruction, program is built on a co-teaching model and includes three then rehearse those techniques and receive expert feedback different clinical placements, each building in intensity and during weekly practice sessions with faculty and classmates. expectations for the teacher candidate. Lipscomb’s faculty In year two, candidates transition into being teachers of re- has worked collaboratively to infuse the Common Core State cord while completing their coursework at Relay, leading to a Standards across the teacher education program and has de- master’s degree. The program uses a blended learning model, signed massive open online courses (MOOCs) that are widely with 45% of coursework available online and 55% in person. used across Tennessee and available for free nationally. Seattle Teacher Residency (Seattle, WA) New Visions for Public Schools–Hunter College MASTER The Seattle Teacher Residency prepares candidates to become (New York, NY) Seattle Public Schools (SPS) teachers through a curriculum The MASTER (Math and Science Teacher Residency) program that combines a full-year residency embedded in a mentor is a 14-month residency with a secondary math and science teacher’s classroom with graduate-level coursework through focus. Residents earn a stipend while learning in a cohort the University of Washington. Candidates take courses one model and are paired with experienced mentor teachers who evening and one full day each week and spend four days each receive intensive professional development and training on week working in their placement classroom. The program is a mentoring adult learners. A partnership among New Visions partnership between SPS, the University of Washington, the for Public Schools, Hunter College, and the New York Hall of Seattle Education Association, and the Alliance for Education. Science allows science teacher candidates to get coached by subject matter experts from the New York Hall of Science and TechTeach Across Texas at Texas Tech University math teacher candidates to get coached by New Visions’ in- (Statewide Initiative) structional coaches; all engage in subject matter inquiry at the TechTeach is a fast-track, one-year undergraduate teacher college and the museum. Upon successful completion, candi- preparation program combining intense clinical experiences dates earn their initial teaching certification in New York City with applicable online courses in district-based partnership and a master’s in adolescent education from Hunter College. around the state. The program allows students to complete a bachelor’s degree and earn their teacher certification in New York City Teaching Collaborative (New York, NY) one calendar year. All TechTeach students must success- NYC Teaching Collaborative, an eight-month residency fully complete a series of competency-based performance program for secondary teacher candidates (Grades 7–12) at assessments. Program outcomes are aligned with the Texas the graduate level, is run by the New York City Department Teacher Advancement Program, the teacher evaluation of Education. The program offers candidates a dual-residen- system used statewide. cy model that includes a six-month spring residency and a second six-week summer residency. Residents receive a University of Central Florida (Orlando, FL) stipend of $13,000 during their eight-month training period In this clinically oriented program, candidates complete two and begin coursework toward a master’s degree at St. John’s semesters of student teaching in the final year of their under- University at the start of the summer term. graduate teaching studies. Secondary education candidates may complete at least one of their student teaching semes- 36 Relay Teaching Residency (New York, NY; Houston, TX; ters in the Florida Virtual School, a statewide online school. Chicago, IL; Newark, NJ) All cooperating teachers in the program must complete a This 2-year graduate program is a partnership between the certification course, which is offered by UCF, and university Relay Graduate School of Education and high-perform- professors supervise 90% of all student teachers remotely. ing charter networks in cities across the country, such as UCF is also pioneering the use of virtual simulations in Achievement First, KIPP, Blue Engine, and the Noble Network. teacher preparation through TLE TeachLivE, a patented In year one, candidates complete a teaching residency and simulation and training program. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? University of South Dakota (Statewide Initiative) UTeach National (National Initiative) Undergraduate students at USD receive a bachelors’ degree UTeach National builds off of the founding UTeach program in Elementary Education, Secondary Education, or Special at the University of Texas-Austin and, as of January 2015, Education through a four-year program that includes a full- is serving 44 universities across 21 states and the District year residency during candidates’ senior year. This 3+1-year of Columbia. residency program for undergraduate students began at the University of South Dakota and is currently being scaled Urban Teacher Education Program at the to all public universities in the state. For the first time ever, University of Chicago (Chicago, IL) teacher candidates are learning to teach in rural parts of The graduate-level Urban Teacher Education Program the state that do not have universities and are completing (UChicago UTEP) prepares elementary (K–9) as well as coursework through virtual courses and virtual supervision. secondary biology and mathematics students to work in urban schools throughout Chicago. It is a five-year University of Southern California experience that integrates rigorous academic and methods (Nationwide/International) coursework with ongoing teaching experiences that broaden The MAT program at USC’s Rossier School of Education is in scope as candidates progress through an initial two-year a primarily online program that involves students placed in MAT program. During the first year (the foundation year), 700 districts and 4,000 schools across the United States and teacher candidates complete tutoring experiences in one of internationally. Credential tracks are offered at the elementa- the four University of Chicago–affiliated charter schools. In ry (multiple subject) and secondary (social studies, science, year two, the residency year, teacher candidates complete an English, and math) levels. The Special Education Credential, intensive yearlong clinical residency in two placements that Gifted Certificate, and Bilingual Authorization for Spanish is complemented by a professional teaching seminar and Certificate may be obtained through optional additional related coursework, including a final Transitions to Teach- coursework. Candidates complete coursework that blends ing course taught by induction coaches. After graduation, theory with a variety of hands-on, field-based teaching residents are assigned a coach and receive up to three years experiences throughout their time in the program, allowing of induction support that includes in-classroom coaching, them to build positive classroom environments to meet the workshops, inquiry groups, and access to an online profes- challenges of today’s high-need schools. sional community—all of which create leadership learning opportunities that bridge to the role of Clinical Instructor. UTeach Austin at the University of Texas-Austin (Austin, TX) The founding UTeach program is designed specifically to prepare middle and high school STEM teachers. The unique collaboration between the Colleges of Natural Science and Education at the University of Texas-Austin is designed to give undergraduate students the opportunity to explore the profession of teaching in a hands-on way. Students studying mathematics, science, engineering, or computer science receive both a degree in their major and teaching certification without additional time or cost. Beginning in the first semester of the program, candidates engage in practice teaching experiences in local classrooms and complete three additional required field experiences prior to completing their apprenticeship teaching. APPENDIX A 37 Appendix B Sample Gateway Assessment From the Seattle Teacher Residency STR Evaluation Tool; Gateway 2; Adopted Sept 2014 Adapted from Washington State Criteria (http://tpep-wa.org/wp-content/ uploads/Danielson-Rubrics-by-criteria.pdf), Danielson Framework, and University of Washington Secondary Education Program 2011-2012 Resident _____________________ Content Area ______________________ School _______________________ Grade ______ Coach ___________________________________ Date Coach Evaluation Completed _______________________________ Mentor Teacher ___________________________ Date Mentor Feedback Provided ________________________________ This progress evaluation is intended to provide the Resident with an opportunity to self-reflect AND receive feedback on his/her progress in developing the ability to successfully integrate the components of teaching as defined by the STR Core Practices and SPS evaluation framework. Successful completion of this Gateway accounts for 35% of the fall quarter Field Experience course (EDTEP 502). PROCESS FOR COMPLETION OF THE GATEWAY: 1 Resident submits teaching portfolio to Canvas (details of this portfolio can be found on STR Home — “Gateway #2” page) — (by November 30) 2 Coach reviews Resident materials scores, adds their scores and justification (Completed by December 4) 3 Mentor reviews Resident and Coach scoring and provides input as needed where discrepancies occur (they do not provide scores). 4 Coach, Resident, and Mentor meet to debrief lesson (Completed by December 12) 5 Evaluation form is submitted to STR Field Director and kept in Resident file (Coaches Complete by December 15) 6 If concerns arise, Resident and Coach will meet with Field Director to develop a plan or modified plan for program completion. 38 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices Residents will be measured against the SPS evaluation criteria that align with the Core Practices for a particular Gateway. The measured criteria for Gateway #2 are indicated in tan. Criterion 1 Centering Instruction on High Expectations for Student Achievement 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning 3a: Communicating with Students 3c: Engaging Students in Learning Criterion 2 Demonstrating Effective Teaching Practices 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 4a: Reflecting on Teaching STR Core Practice: Teach towards instructional goals. Criterion 3 Recognizing Individual Student Learning Needs and Developing Strategies to Address Those Needs 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge 1a: Demonstrating of Students Knowledge of Content 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Pedagogy and Responsiveness 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Student Growth Criterion 3 Student Growth 3.1: Establish Student Growth Goals (s) Student Growth 3.2: Achievement of Student Growth Goal(s) STR Core Practice: Orient students to the content. Position students as competent. Criterion 4 Providing Clear and Intentional Focus On Subject Matter Content and Curriculum STR Core Practice: Orient students to the content. Position students as competent. STR Core Practice: Teach with each student in mind. Criterion 5 Fostering and Managing a Safe, Positive Learning Environment Criterion 6 Using Multiple Student Data Elements to Modify Instruction and Improve Student Learning 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures 2d: Managing Student Behavior 2e: Organizing Physical Space 1f: Designing Student Assessments 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records STR Core Practice: Establish a community of learners. Student Growth 6.1: Establish Student Growth Goal(s) Student Growth 6.2: Achievement of Student Growth Goal(s) Student Growth Criterion 6 Criterion 7 Communicating and Collaborating With Parents and the School Community 4c: Communicating with Families STR Core Practice: Invest in the school community to support student learning. Criterion 8 Exhibiting Collaborative and Collegial Practices Focused On Improving Instructional Practice and Student Learning 4d: Participating in a Professional Community 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally 4f: Showing Professionalism Student Growth Criterion 8 Student Growth 8.1 Establish Team Student Growth Goal(s) STR Core Practice: Invest in the school community to support student learning. STR Core Practice: Assess student understanding to guide instruction. APPENDIX B 39 SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices (continued) DIRECTIONS: • For each item, Resident and Coach will indicate a score (from 1 to 4) and provide justification for that score. • Mentors will provide additional feedback if any scoring discrepancies arise. CRITERION 1: Centering Instruction On High Expectations for Student Achievement 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning Unsatisfactory – 1 The classroom culture is characterized by a lack of teacher or student commitment to learning and/or little or no investment of student energy into the task at hand. Hard work is not expected or valued. Medium or low expectations for student achievement are the norm, with high expectations for learning reserved for only one or two students. Basic – 2 The classroom culture is characterized by little commitment to learning by teacher or students. The teacher appears to be only going through the motions, and students indicate that they are interested in completion of a task, rather than quality. The teacher conveys that student success is the result of natural ability rather than hard work; high expectations for learning are reserved for those students thought to have a natural aptitude for the subject. Proficient – 3 Distinguished – 4 The classroom culture is a cognitively busy place where learning is valued by all, with high expectations for learning being the norm for most students. The classroom culture is a cognitively vibrant place, characterized by a shared belief in the importance of learning. The teacher conveys that with hard work students can be successful. Students understand their role as learners and consistently expend effort to learn. Classroom interactions support learning and hard work. Resident Coach Mentor Input Resident Coach Mentor Input The teacher conveys high expectations for learning by all students and insists on hard work. Students assume responsibility for high quality by initiating improvements, making revisions, adding detail, and/or helping peers. 3a: Communicating with Students Unsatisfactory – 1 Basic – 2 The instructional purpose of the lesson is unclear to students, and the directions and procedures are confusing. The teacher’s attempt to explain the instructional purpose has only limited success, and/or directions and procedures must be clarified after initial student confusion. The teacher’s explanation of the content contains major errors. The teacher’s spoken or written language contains errors of grammar or syntax. The teacher’s vocabulary is inappropriate, vague, or used incorrectly, leaving students confused. The teacher’s explanation of the content may contain minor errors; some portions are clear; other portions are difficult to follow. The teacher’s explanation consists of a monologue, with no invitation to the students for intellectual engagement. Teacher’s spoken language is correct; however, his or her vocabulary is limited, or not fully appropriate to the students’ ages or backgrounds. 40 Proficient – 3 Distinguished – 4 The teacher clearly communicates instructional purpose of the lesson, including where it is situated within broader learning, and explains procedures and directions clearly. The teacher links the instructional purpose of the lesson to student interests; the directions and procedures are clear and anticipate possible student misunderstanding. Teacher’s explanation of content is well scaffolded, clear and accurate, and connects with students’ knowledge and experience. The teacher’s explanation of content is thorough and clear, developing conceptual understanding through artful scaffolding and connecting with students’ interests. During the explanation of content, the teacher invites student intellectual engagement. Teacher’s spoken and written language is clear and correct and uses vocabulary appropriate to the students’ ages and interests. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Students contribute to extending the content and help explain concepts to their classmates. The teacher’s spoken and written language is expressive, and the teacher finds opportunities to extend students’ vocabularies. SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices (continued) DIRECTIONS: • For each item, Resident and Coach will indicate a score (from 1 to 4) and provide justification for that score. • Mentors will provide additional feedback if any scoring discrepancies arise. CRITERION 1: Centering Instruction On High Expectations for Student Achievement 3c: Engaging Students in Learning Unsatisfactory – 1 The learning tasks and activities, materials, resources, instructional groups and technology are poorly aligned with the instructional outcomes or require only rote responses. The pace of the lesson is too slow or too rushed. Few students are intellectually engaged or interested. Basic – 2 The learning tasks and activities are partially aligned with the instructional outcomes but require only minimal thinking by students, allowing most to be passive or merely compliant. The pacing of the lesson may not provide students the time needed to be intellectually engaged. Proficient – 3 The learning tasks and activities are aligned with the instructional outcomes and designed to challenge student thinking, the result being that most students display active intellectual engagement with important and challenging content and are supported in that engagement by teacher scaffolding. The pacing of the lesson is appropriate, providing most students the time needed to be intellectually engaged. Distinguished – 4 Resident Coach Mentor Input Virtually all students are intellectually engaged in challenging content through well-designed learning tasks and suitable scaffolding by the teacher and fully aligned with the instructional outcomes. In addition, there is evidence of some student initiation of inquiry and of student contribution to the exploration of important content. The pacing of the lesson provides students the time needed to intellectually engage with and reflect upon their learning and to consolidate their understanding. Students may have some choice in how they complete tasks and may serve as resources for one another. APPENDIX B 41 SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices (continued) DIRECTIONS: • For each item, Resident and Coach will indicate a score (from 1 to 4) and provide justification for that score. • Mentors will provide additional feedback if any scoring discrepancies arise. CRITERION 2: Demonstrating Effective Teaching Practices 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Unsatisfactory – 1 Basic – 2 Teacher’s questions are of low cognitive challenge, require single correct responses, and are asked in rapid succession. Teacher’s questions lead students through a single path of inquiry, with answers seemingly determined in advance. Interaction between teacher and students is predominantly recitation style, with the teacher mediating all questions and answers. Alternatively, the teacher attempts to frame some questions designed to promote student thinking and understanding, but only a few students are involved. A few students dominate the discussion. Teacher attempts to engage all students in the discussion and to encourage them to respond to one another, but with uneven results. Proficient – 3 Although the teacher may use some lowlevel questions, he or she asks the students questions designed to promote thinking and understanding. Teacher creates a genuine discussion among students, providing adequate time for students to respond and stepping aside when appropriate. Teacher successfully engages most students in the discussion, employing a range of strategies to ensure that most students are heard. Distinguished – 4 Resident Coach Mentor Input Resident Coach Mentor Input Teacher uses a variety or series of questions or prompts to challenge students cognitively, advance high-level thinking and discourse, and promote metacognition. Students formulate many questions, initiate topics, and make unsolicited contributions. Students themselves ensure that all voices are heard in the discussion. 4a: Reflecting on Teaching Unsatisfactory – 1 Teacher does not know whether a lesson was effective or achieved its instructional outcomes, or he/she profoundly misjudges the success of a lesson. Teacher has no suggestions for how a lesson could be improved. 42 Basic – 2 Teacher has a generally accurate impression of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which instructional outcomes were met. Teacher makes general suggestions about how a lesson could be improved. Proficient – 3 Distinguished – 4 Teacher makes an accurate assessment of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which it achieved its instructional outcomes and can cite general references to support the judgment. Teacher makes a thoughtful and accurate assessment of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which it achieved its instructional outcomes, citing many specific examples from the lesson and weighing the relative strengths of each. Teacher makes a few specific suggestions of what could be tried another time the lesson is taught. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Drawing on an extensive repertoire of skills, teacher offers specific alternative actions, complete with the probable success of different courses of action. SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices (continued) DIRECTIONS: • For each item, Resident and Coach will indicate a score (from 1 to 4) and provide justification for that score. • Mentors will provide additional feedback if any scoring discrepancies arise. CRITERION 4: Providing Clear and Intentional Focus On Subject Matter Content and Curriculum 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Proficient – 3 Unsatisfactory – 1 Basic – 2 In planning and practice, teacher makes content errors or does not correct errors made by students. Teacher is familiar with the important concepts in the discipline but displays lack of awareness of how these concepts relate to one another. Teacher displays solid knowledge of the important concepts in the discipline and the ways they relate to one another. Teacher’s plans and practice indicate some awareness of prerequisite relationships, although such knowledge may be inaccurate or incomplete. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect accurate understanding of prerequisite relationships among topics and concepts. Teacher’s plans and practice display little understanding of prerequisite relationships important to student’s learning of the content. Teacher displays little or no understanding of the range of pedagogical approaches suitable to student’s learning of the content. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect a limited range of pedagogical approaches to the discipline or to the students. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect familiarity with a wide range of effective pedagogical approaches in the discipline. Distinguished – 4 Resident Coach Mentor Input Resident Coach Mentor Input Teacher displays extensive knowledge of the important concepts in the discipline and the ways they relate both to one another and to other disciplines. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect understanding of prerequisite relationships among topics and concepts and provide a link to necessary cognitive structures needed by students to ensure understanding. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect familiarity with a wide range of effective pedagogical approaches in the discipline, anticipating student misconceptions. 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Unsatisfactory – 1 Outcomes represent low expectations for students and lack of rigor, and not all of them reflect important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are stated as activities rather than as student learning. Outcomes reflect only one type of learning and only one discipline of strand and are suitable for only some students. APPENDIX B Basic – 2 Proficient – 3 Distinguished – 4 Outcomes represent moderately high expectations and rigor. Most outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. All outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. Some reflect important learning in the discipline and consist of a combination of outcomes and activities. All the instructional outcomes are clear, are written in the form of student learning, and suggest viable methods of assessment. The outcomes are clear, are written in the form of student learning, and permit viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect several types of learning, but teacher has made no attempt at coordination or integration. Most of the outcomes are suitable for most of the students in the class in accordance with global assessments of student learning. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and opportunities for coordination. Outcomes take into account the varying needs of groups of students. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and, where appropriate, represent opportunities for both coordination and integration. Outcomes take into account the varying needs of individual students. 43 SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices (continued) DIRECTIONS: • For each item, Resident and Coach will indicate a score (from 1 to 4) and provide justification for that score. • Mentors will provide additional feedback if any scoring discrepancies arise. CRITERION 5: Fostering and Managing a Safe, Positive Learning Environment 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Unsatisfactory – 1 Basic – 2 Patterns of classroom interactions, both between the teacher and students and among students, are mostly negative, inappropriate, or insensitive to students’ ages, cultural backgrounds, and developmental levels. Patterns of classroom interactions, both between the teacher and students and among students, are generally appropriate but may reflect occasional inconsistencies, favoritism, and disregard for students’ ages, cultures, and developmental levels. Interactions are characterized by sarcasm, put-downs, or conflict. Teacher does not deal with disrespectful behavior. Students rarely demonstrate disrespect for one another. Teacher attempts to respond to disrespectful behavior, with uneven results. The net result of the interactions is neutral, conveying neither warmth nor conflict. Proficient – 3 Distinguished – 4 Teacher-student interactions are friendly and demonstrate general caring and respect. Such interactions are appropriate to the ages of the students. Classroom interactions among the teacher and individual students are highly respectful, reflecting genuine warmth and caring and sensitivity to students as individuals. Students exhibit respect for the teacher. Interactions among students are generally polite and respectful. Students exhibit respect for the teacher and contribute to high levels of civil interaction between all members of the class. The net result of interactions is that of connections with students as individuals. Teacher responds successfully to disrespectful behavior among students. The net result of the interactions is polite and respectful, but impersonal. Resident Coach Mentor Input Resident Coach Mentor Input 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures Unsatisfactory – 1 Basic – 2 Much instructional time is lost through inefficient classroom routines and procedures. Some instructional time is lost through only partially effective classroom routines and procedures. There is little or no evidence that the teacher is managing instructional groups, transitions, and/or the handling of materials and supplies effectively. The teacher’s management of instructional groups, transitions, and/or the handling of materials and supplies is inconsistent, the result being some disruption of learning. There is little evidence that students know or follow established routines. 44 With regular guidance and prompting, students follow established routines. Proficient – 3 There is little loss of instructional time because of effective classroom routines and procedures. The teacher’s management of instructional groups and the handling of materials and supplies are consistently successful. With minimal guidance and prompting, students follow established classroom routines. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? Distinguished – 4 Instructional time is maximized because of efficient classroom routines and procedures. Students contribute to the management of instructional groups, transitions, and the handling of materials and supplies. Routines are well understood and may be initiated by students. SPS Teacher Evaluation Framework Aligned with STR Core Practices (continued) DIRECTIONS: • For each item, Resident and Coach will indicate a score (from 1 to 4) and provide justification for that score. • Mentors will provide additional feedback if any scoring discrepancies arise. CRITERION 5: Fostering and Managing a Safe, Positive Learning Environment 2d: Managing Student Behavior Unsatisfactory – 1 There appear to be no established standards of conduct and little or no teacher monitoring of student behavior. Standards of conduct appear to have been established, but their implementation is inconsistent. Students challenge the standards of conduct. Teacher tries, with uneven results, to monitor student behavior and respond to student misbehavior. Response to students’ misbehavior is repressive or disrespectful of student dignity. Proficient – 3 Basic – 2 There is inconsistent implementation of the standards of conduct. Distinguished – 4 Student behavior is generally appropriate. Student behavior is entirely appropriate. The teacher monitors student behavior against established standards of conduct. Students take an active role in monitoring their own behavior and that of other students against standards of conduct. Teacher response to student misbehavior is consistent, proportionate, respectful to students, and effective. Resident Coach Mentor Input Resident Coach Mentor Input Teachers’ monitoring of student behavior is subtle and preventive. Teacher’s response to student misbehavior is sensitive to individual student needs and respects students’ dignity. 2e: Organizing Physical Space Unsatisfactory – 1 Proficient – 3 Distinguished – 4 The classroom is safe, and learning is accessible to all students; teacher ensures that the physical arrangement is appropriate to the learning activities. The classroom is safe, and learning is accessible to all students, including those with special needs. Basic – 2 The physical environment is unsafe, or many students don’t have access to learning resources. The classroom is safe, and essential learning is accessible to most students. There is poor coordination between the lesson activities and the arrangement of furniture and resources, including computer technology. The teacher’s use of physical resources, including computer technology, is moderately effective. Teacher makes some attempt to modify the physical arrangement to suit learning activities, with partial success. Teacher makes effective use of physical resources, including computer technology. Teacher makes effective use of physical resources, including computer technology. The teacher ensures that the physical arrangement is appropriate to the learning activities. Students contribute to the use or adaptation of the physical environment to advance learning. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: • Resident must earn a score of at least 2 (Basic) in all If no, next steps for second attempt: categories in order to meet expectations for Gateway #2. • Progress will be evaluated at each Gateway and any additional Resident attempts of the Gateway. • Resident has met expectations for Gateway #2 Yes _______ No _______ APPENDIX B 45 Appendix C CSU Northridge Department of Special Education Education Specialist Mild/Moderate Evaluation Form Adapted from the Framework for Teaching, Charlotte Danielson and aligned with elements of the California Standards for the Teaching Profession and the Teacher Performance Expectations. Date_____________ School District________________________ School____________________________________________ Name of Candidate______________________________________ Student ID_________________________________________ CSUN Supervisor___________________________________ Mentor/Cooperating Teacher_______________________________ Course 403/579ACT____________ 580MM____________ 580ACT____________ 506 Seminar 1 2 3 4 Midterm Evaluation __________________ Final Evaluation _________________ Class Designation: RSP ______ SDP ______ RATING SCALE Ratings represent a cumulative evaluation of candidate competencies based on observations, professional conversations, and artifacts. Please note that during the initial field experience candidates must obtain an overall average of 2.0. For the final field experience/student teaching, candidates must obtain an overall average of 2.5 with no 1s on any item. IE 1 2 3 4 Insufficient Evidence Does Not Meet Expectations Approximates Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations 1. PLANNING FOR INSTRUCTION: Knowledge of Content, Pedagogy and Students Items Description 1.1 Standards-Based Instruction Plans lessons that are aligned with the Common Core and English Language Development State Standards. 1.2 Content/Discipline Knowledge Demonstrates knowledge of the concepts in the lesson and how concepts build upon and to one another when planning instruction. 1.3 Subject-Specific Pedagogy Demonstrates evidence-based, subject-specific pedagogical approaches in the discipline when planning instruction. 1.4 Students’ Skills, Knowledge and Language Proficiency Uses information about individual students’ skills, prior knowledge, and language proficiency when planning instruction. 1.5 Age-Appropriate Instruction Plans instruction appropriate for the grade-level curriculum and interests of the age group. 1.6 Students’ Culture and Interests Uses knowledge of students’ home language, family culture, life experiences, and interests to plan instruction that will engage students. Rating IE 46 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? 1 2 3 4 2. PLANNING FOR INSTRUCTION: Establishing Instructional Objectives and Designing Instruction Items Description Rating IE 2.1 Instructional Objectives Designs instructional objectives that are measurable, aligned with the Common Core and English Language Development State Standards and at an appropriate level of challenge. 2.2 Instructional Activities Designs instructional activities that are aligned with the instructional objectives, evidence-based, at an appropriate level of challenge and anticipate student difficulties. 2.3 Sequenced Instruction Plans logically sequenced instruction using task analysis and purposeful connections across lessons. 2.4 Individual Student Needs Designs instructional adaptations that are evidence-based and address individual student needs, including Universal Design for Learning. 2.5 Direct Instruction Lesson Structure Designs lessons with a direct instruction lesson structure (opening, modeling, guided practice, independent practice, closure and assessment). 2.6 Instructional Materials and Resources Selects instructional materials and resources that are suitable for students, support the instructional objectives and provide access to content. 2.7 Instructional Technology Selects instructional technology that is suitable for students, supports the instructional objectives and provides access to content. 2.8 Instructional Groups Designs a variety of flexible instructional groupings to meet students’ individual needs. 1 2 3 4 3 4 3. ASSESSING STUDENT LEARNING Items Description 3.1 Design of Formative Assessments Designs formative assessments to determine strengths and gaps in students’ knowledge and skills and mastery of instructional objectives. 3.2 EL Assessment Adjusts assessments to enable English learners to demonstrate their knowledge and skills and mastery of instructional objectives. 3.3 Monitor Student Learning Gathers and analyzes formative assessment data to determine strengths and gaps in students’ knowledge and skills and mastery of instructional objectives. 3.4 Assessment Informs Instruction Uses formative assessment data to plan future instruction. 3.5 Summative Assessment Uses formal and informal summative assessments to document student learning. 3.6 IEP Goals and Objectives Uses assessment data to describe students’ present levels of performance and develop long and short term IEP goals and objectives. Rating IE APPENDIX C 1 2 47 4. MANAGING CLASSROOM PROCEDURES AND STUDENT BEHAVIOR Items Description Rating IE 4.1 Academic Expectations Promotes a classroom environment that reflects high academic expectations. 4.2 Management of Instructional Time Manages instructional pace, classroom procedures, routines and transitions to maximize instructional time. 4.3 Materials Preparation Prepares and gathers materials in advance and distributes them in a way that does not interrupt instructional time. 4.4 Paraprofessionals Provides clear direction to paraprofessionals to productively engage them in supporting student learning. 4.5 Expectations for Behavior Develops and maintains expectations for behavior. 4.6 Monitoring Student Behavior Is alert to and monitors student behavior. 4.7 Positive Behavior Support Implements positive behavior support techniques to prevent or address inappropriate behavior. 1 2 3 4 3 4 4.8 Social Development Promotes social skill development and responsibility. 5. DELIVERING INSTRUCTION THAT ENGAGES STUDENTS IN LEARNING Items Description 5.1 Communicates purpose of lesson, directions and procedures to students. Rating IE 48 Lesson Purpose, Directions and Procedures 5.2 Instructional Activities Provides instructional activities that are aligned with the instructional objectives, evidence-based, at an appropriate level of challenge and anticipate student difficulties. 5.3 Explanation and Modeling Provides explanations and modeling that support student learning. 5.4 Questions and Discussion Uses higher-order questions that encourage extended responses and promote student discussion. 5.5 ELD Instructional Strategies Uses ELD instructional strategies to support EL student learning. 5.6 Academic Language Models and provides instruction on essential academic language, including vocabulary. 5.7 Lesson Structure and Pacing Models and provides instruction on essential academic language, including vocabulary. 5.8 Checks for Understanding Checks for understanding and corrects student misunderstandings. 5.9 Review and Practice Provides opportunities for review and practice. 5.10 Instructional Grouping Arranges a variety of flexible instructional groupings that meet individual student needs. 5.11 Individual Student Needs Uses evidence-based instructional strategies and adaptations including Universal Design for Learning to address individual student needs. 5.12 Instructional Materials and Resources Uses instructional resources and materials that are suitable for students, support the instructional objectives and provide access to content. 5.13 Instructional Technology Uses instructional technologies that are suitable for students, support the instructional objectives and provide access to content. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? 1 2 6. DEMONSTRATING PROFESSIONALISM AND REFLECTING ON PRACTICE Items Description 6.1 Shows initiative and responsibility for classroom tasks and assignments. Rating IE Initiative and Responsibility 6.2 Timeliness Meets deadlines and completes tasks in a timely manner. 6.3 Professional Appearance and Demeanor Demonstrates professional appearance and demeanor. 6.4 Professional Ethics Upholds laws, regulations and policies; maintains confidentiality and shows sound judgment. 6.5 Reflective Practice Reflects on teaching practices to improve teaching effectiveness. 6.6 Response to Feedback Uses constructive criticism and suggestions to improve teaching practice. 6.7 Seeks Assistance Identifies challenges and seeks assistance to resolve them. 6.8 School and Community Resources Identifies school and community resources to support student learning. 6.9 Collegial Relationships Demonstrates respectful communication and cooperative relationships with colleagues. 6.10 Collaboration Collaborates with colleagues to integrate students across instructional settings. 1 2 3 4 Please summarize the candidate’s strengths. ___________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Please indicate areas to be developed. ________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation completed by: University Supervisor Signature _____________________________________________________ Date __________________ Or Mentor/Cooperating Teacher Signature _______________________________________________ Date __________________ I have reviewed this evaluation with my University supervisor or mentor/cooperating teacher ____ I accept this evaluation or, ____ I wish to submit an addendum Candidate Signature ______________________________________________________________ APPENDIX C Date __________________ 49 Appendix D CSU Chico Rural Teacher Residency Cooperating Teacher vs. Mentor Teacher Role Comparison – Cooperating Teacher/Mentor Teacher 50 Cooperating Teacher Mentor Teacher Training Training provided through web-based and print materials and meetings with university supervisors. Summer training workshop and ongoing professional development events throughout academic year.* Mentoring Hierarchical Focuses on preparation for student teachers to teach independently. Collaborative Focuses on co-teaching and reflection on practice to improve both teaching and student achievement. Collaboration Primarily occurs within classroom and with university supervisors. Occurs between general and special education and English learner teaching teams. Focus on professional learning communities and tiered interventions. Community Helps acculturate student teacher to local school and community characteristics/needs with positive focus. Engages with TR to examine local school and community characteristics and needs to help define best practices. Self-Reflection; Professional Growth Is considered an “expert” who imparts information to candidate regarding pedagogy, subject matter knowledge, and classroom management. Models reflective practice for candidate. Enters into mentorship role prepared to teach and to learn; is willing to reflect on his/her own practices and grow professionally from the mentoring process Action Research No responsibility in this area. Works with the TR to identify research focus, gather and analyze data. Evaluation Shares responsibility with university supervisor. Participates in mid-term and final evaluations of candidates. Shares responsibility with university supervisor. Participates in mid-term and final evaluations of candidates. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? References AACTE. (2010). The clinical preparation of teachers: A policy brief. Washington, DC: Author. Bacharach, N.L., Heck, T.W., & Dahlberg, K. (2010). Changing the face of student teaching through co-teaching. Action in Teacher Education, 23(1), 3–14. Ball, D.L., & Cohen, D.K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners. In L. Darling Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 3–32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ball, D.L., & Forzani, F.M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 497–511. Ball, D.L., Sleep, L., Boerst, T.A., & Bass, H. (2009). Combining the development of practice and the practice of development in teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 458–474. Banilower, E., Smith, P.S., Weiss, I.R., Malzahn, K.A., Campbell, K.M., & Weiss, A.M. (2013). Report of the 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay. Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning. (2010). Transforming teacher education through clinical practice. Washington, DC: NCATE. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational Research. Carver, C.L., & Katz, D.S. (2004). Teaching at the boundary of acceptable practice: What is a new teacher mentor to do? Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 449–462. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2007). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L., & Hammerness, K. (2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 390–441). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dieker, L.A., Rodriguez, J., Lingnugaris-Kraft, B., Hynes, M., & Hughes, C.E. (2014). The potential of simulated environments in teacher education: Current and future possibilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(1), 21–33. Feiman-Nemser, S., Tamir, E., & Hammerness, K. (2014). Inspiring teaching: Context-specific teacher preparation for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013–1055. Feiman­-Nemser, S. & Parker, M.B. (1992). Mentoring in context: A comparison of two U.S. programs for beginning teachers. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. Fraser, J., & Watson, A.M. (2014). Why clinical experience and mentoring are replacing student teaching on the best campuses. Princeton, NJ: Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. Freedberg, L., & Rice, S. (2015). Preparing world class teachers: Essential reforms of teacher preparation and credentialing in California. Oakland, CA: EdSource. Glazerman, S., & Jeffrey, M. (2011). Do low-income students have equal access to the highest-performing teachers? NCEE Evaluation Brief (Document No. PP11-23a). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Cranford, L. (2013). Innovative TechTeach program aims to better prepare teaching candidates. Texas Tech Today. Available at http://today.ttu.edu/2013/10/innovative-tech teach-program-aims-to-better-prepare-teaching-candidates/ Goldhaber, D.D., & Brewer, D.J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 129–45. Crow, R. (2012). Getting better at teacher preparation and state accountability: Strategies, innovations, and challenges under the federal Race to the Top Program. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. Goldring, R., Taie, S., & Riddles, M. (2014). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2012–13 teacher follow-up survey (NCES 2014-077). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Available at http://nces. ed.gov/pubsearch Dailey, C.R., with Watts, E., Charner, I., & White, R. (2013). Partnering to prepare tomorrow’s teachers: Examples from practice. Durham, NC: FHI 360. Darling-Hammond, L., in collaboration with Fickel, L., Macdonald, M., Merseth, K., Miller, L., Ruscoe, G., Silvernail, D., Snyder, J., Whitford, B.L., & Zeichner, K. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. REFERENCES Goodfellow, J., & Sumsion, J. (2000). Transformative pathways: Field-based teacher educators’ perceptions. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(3), 245–257. Grossman, P. (2010). Learning to practice: The design of clinical experience in teacher preparation (Policy brief). Washington, DC: Partnership for Teacher Quality. 51 Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100. Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205. Hammerness, K., & Matsko, K.K. (2013). When context has content: A case study of new teacher induction in the University of Chicago’s Urban Teacher Education Program. Urban Education, 48(4), 557–584. Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers: A report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing, MI: Author. Holloway, J. (2001). The benefits of mentoring. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 85–86. Hootnick, A. (2014, April 21). Teachers are losing their jobs, but Teach For America’s expanding. What’s wrong with that? The Hechinger Report. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and science teachers sufficient? American Education Research Journal, 47(3), 563–594. Institute for Education Sciences. (2014). Back to school statistics: Fast facts. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display. asp?id=372 Kazemi, E., & Hubbard, A. (2008). New directions for the design and study of professional development: Attending to the coevolution of teachers’ participation across contexts. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 428–441. Kennedy, M. (2005). Inside teaching. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lampert, M. (2005). Preparing teachers for ambitious instructional practice: Learning to listen and to construct an appropriate response. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada. Levine, A. (2006). Educating school teachers. Washington, DC: Education Schools Project. Available at http://www.edschools.org/ pdf/Educating_Teachers_Report.pdf Markow, D., Macia, L., & Lee, H. (2013). The MetLife Survey of the American Teacher: Challenges for school leadership. New York, NY: Metropolitan Life Insurance. Matsko, K.K. & Hammerness, K. (2014). Unpacking the “urban” in urban teacher preparation: Making a case for context-specific teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 128–144. McDonald, M., Kazemi, E, & Kavanagh, S. (2013). Core practices and pedagogies of teacher education: A call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 20(10), 1–9. National Council on Teacher Quality. (2011). State teacher policy yearbook. Available at http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/2011_State_ Teacher_Policy_Yearbook_National_Summary_NCTQ_Report National Council on Teacher Quality. (2013). Teacher prep review 2013: A review of the nation’s teacher preparation programs. Available at http://www.nctq.org/dmsStage/Teacher_Prep_ Review_2013_Report National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2010). Transforming teacher education through clinical practice: A national strategy to prepare effective teachers. Washington, DC: Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning. 52 UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Report by the Committee on the study of teacher preparation programs in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Perlstein, L. (2015). Building effective teacher residencies. Chicago, IL: Urban Teacher Residency United. Rich, M. (2014, October 10). As apprentices in classroom, teachers learn what works. New York Times, p. A1. Rochkind, J., Ott, A., Immerwahr, J., Doble, J. & Johnson, J. (2007). Working without a net: How new teachers from three prominent alternate route programs describe their first year on the job. New York: Public Agenda Foundation. Available at: http://www. publicagenda.org/citizen/researchstudies/education Ronfeldt, M., & Reinninger, M. (2012). More or better student teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1091–1106. Schaeffer, J.J., & Gonzales, R. (2000). Dynamic simulation: A new tool for difficult airway training of professional health care providers. American Journal of Anesthesiology, 27, 232–242. Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books. Scott, S.E., & Benko, S. (2010). Coached rehearsals in preservice teacher education: What’s coachable? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. Tamir, E. (2009). Choosing to teach in urban schools among graduates of elite colleges. Urban Education, 44(5), 522–544. Tamir, E. (2014). Choosing teacher as a career in urban public, Catholic and Jewish schools by graduates of elite colleges. Journal of Educational Change, 15, 327–355. Teach Plus. (2015). Teach plus teacher preparation flash poll summary. Available at http://www.teachplus.org/sites/default/ files/downloads/Documents/flash_poll_one_pager_with_graphics_udpate_jennie.pdf Teacher Preparation Task Force. (2012) Raising the bar: Aligning and elevating teacher preparation and the teaching profession. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey. (2013). Public school teacher data file, 1987–88 through 2011–12; Private school teacher data file, 2011–12. Wang, J., & Fulton, L.A. (2012). Mentor-novice relationships and learning to teach in teacher induction: A critical review of research. REMIE: Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 56–104. Wilson S.M., Floden R.E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations. Seattle: University of Washington, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. Wolf, R. (2015). Teacher sorting and tracking within and between schools. Paper prepared for the Association for Education, Finance and Policy’s 40th Annual Conference. Zeichner, K. (2010). Re-thinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1), 89–99. 1332 N. HALSTED STREET, SUITE 304 CHICAGO IL 60642 312.397.8878 WWW.UTRUNITED.ORG UTRU MISSION Launch and support a network of high-performing residency programs dedicated to preparing highly effective urban public school teachers that will transform educational practices nationwide. UTRU: COTP: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRACTICES? 5406.2015/print100/jh.design@rcn.com