ED 474 183

AUTHOR

TITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

PUB DATENOTE

CONTRACT.

AVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

SP 041 408

Barnett, Berry ; Hopkins-Thompson, Peggy; Hoke, MandyAssessing and Supporting New Teachers. Lessons from theSoutheast. Teaching Quality in the Southeast Policy Brief.Southeast Center for Teaching Quality, Chapel Hill, NC.National Inst. on Educational Governance, Finance,Policymaking, and Management (ED/OERI), Washington, DC.;BellSouth Foundation, Inc. Atlanta, GA.2002-12-0017p.

R215U000004

Southeast Center for Teaching Quality, University of NorthCarolina, Office of the President, P.O. Box 2688, ChapelHill, NC 27515-2688. Tel: 919-843-9519; Fax: 919-843-7616.For full text: http://www.teachingquality.org/resources/SECTQpublications/Induction.pdf.Reports Research (143)

EDRS Price MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.Accountability; *Beginning Teacher Induction; *BeginningTeachers; Elementary Secondary Education; *FacultyDevelopment; Mentors; Program Effectiveness; TeacherCollaboration; Teacher Evaluation; Teacher Persistence

California; Connecticut; No Child Left Behind Act 2001;*United States (Southeast)

This report examines key elements of effective new teacherassessment and support, reviews southeastern states' progress in developingquality induction programs, and offers recommendations for action. Moredollars are being invested in new teachers than ever before, and some stateshave markedly increased the quantity of new teacher support programs.However, states have not established accountability mechanisms that wouldmake it possible to fully assess the quality of these investments.. Datasuggest new teacher induction programs lack adequate funding, payinsufficient attention to vital links between new teacher assessment andsupport, and under emphasize learning to teach specific content well. Thereport motes that quality induction programs can help with the teacherturnover problem. Some southeastern states are providing leadership toimprove teacher quality, strengthen assessment, and support new teacherprograms. The recent No Child Left. Behind Act will help states transformteacher development systems. After presenting key facts and issues related tonew teacher assessment and support, the report discusses southeastern states'work to develop better induction programs and offers recommendations (e.g.,build consensus, strengthen collaboration, and recognize the critical role ofmentors). Sidebars describe approaches to new teacher assessment and supportin Connecticut and North Carolina and induction programs in the southeast.(SM)

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

1

and Suppor

chers

Lessons from the Southeast

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS

BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

December 2002

Barnett Berry, Peggy Hopkins-Thompson, and Mandy HokeThe Southeast Center for Teaching Quality

2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

SUMMARY

For the most part, new-teacher induction programs are under-conceptualized, under-developed, under-supported, andunder-funded in the American public education system.

We have known for decades that no matter how good teachereducation is, the complexities of effective teaching are suchthat teachers will never know all they need to know whenthey enter their first classrooms. Schools must have soundinduction programs in which new teachers are both assessedand supported as they grow toward becoming expertclassroom leaders. Without such support, many beginningteachers resort to survival instructional strategies, strugglealone, and leave the profession early in their careers atalarmingly high rates.

The rapid turnover of early-career teachers compels statesand districts to spend more and more on programs that"address" the teacher shortage but do little to assure teacherquality. By failing to invest in high-quality inductionprograms, policy leaders end up practicing false economy.

The federal No Child Left Behind legislation requires all statesto guarantee by 2005-2006 that every teacher is highlyqualified. The law also zeroes in on racial and economicachievement gaps and the under-performance of high-povertyschools, where many new teachers begin their classroomcareers. States must seize the opportunity afforded by NCLBdollars to help every teacher who enters the professionbecome highly qualified to teach diverse students in diverseschools and to ensure that teachers remain in the professiononce they achieve this level of mastery.

Connecticut has the most highly developed induction modelin the nation and has made the most progress in connectingits assessment and support components through a well-institutionalized, performance-based licensing (PBL) system.North Carolina's induction program has been recognized as

the most comprehensive in the Southeast, but infrastructureand capacity problems threaten its development. Othersoutheastern states are making progress in developing strongcomponents of a comprehensive induction system. Throughregional action, states in the Southeast have the potential tolearn from each others' work and produce a comprehensivenew-teacher assessment and induction framework thatbolsters the region's reputation for education innovationand reform.

This report examines the key elements of effective new-teacherassessment and support, reviews the progress of southeasternstates in developing quality induction programs, and offersa set of recommendations for action, including the call for aregional New Teacher Summit. For a comprehensive look atthese issues across the region, go to www.teachingquality.org/resources/SECTQpublications/InductionintheSE.htm.

Effective induction programs for teachers must:Provide novice teachers with opportunities to observeand analyze good teaching in real classrooms, withreal teachers and real students;Assist novices in transferring the acquired knowledge,skills, beliefs, and attitudes needed to improvestudent learning;Provide novices with on-going guidance andassessment by an expert in the field, who has beentrained as a mentor;Reduce novices' work load to provide more learningtime;Assist novices, through mentor support, in theirefforts to meet licensure standards;Include rigorous evaluations that determine theeffectiveness of the program and provide informationthat can be used to continuously improve theprogram; andInvest in rigorous new-teacher assessments.

The work reported herein was supported in part by the BellSouth Foundation and under the Educational Research and Development Centers Program, PR/Award Number R215U000004, asadministrated by the National Institute on Educational Governance, Finance, Policymaking and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education.However, the contents do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of BellSouth, the BellSouth Foundation, the National Institute, OERI, or the U.S. Department of Education, or the

endorsement of the federal government. 500 copies of this public document were printed at a cost of $1620 or $3.24 per copy.

2

3

Those who enter the ranks of teachers do not know how

to teach, although they may know everything that is in

the innumerable books telling them how to teach. [They]

are ready to learn to teach, and they are ready, though

they know it not, to be formed by teaching.'

Seventy years ago, William Waller understood the importanceof developing new teachers through teacher education andthen supporting them during the first few years of teaching,when effective practices begin to form and be refined. SinceWaller's day, we have learned a great deal more about theconnection between what teachers know and do and howmuch students achieve. At the beginning of the GreatDepression, most teachers were being trained to educate aprivileged segment of the school-aged population for life andwork in what seems, in retrospect, a slower, simpler America.Today, at the beginning of the third millennium, we expectall of our public school students to meet challenging academicstandards and participate fully in our democratic society andhigh-speed global economy.

Teaching today is difficult, intricate work that requiresknowledge of complex subject matter, as well as knowledgeabout how to teach particular subjects to increasingly diverselearners, many of whom have special needs, limited Englishproficiency, different learning styles, and a wide range of familyand community circumstances.

Teachers must know not only their subjects, but also how toplan standards-based units and lessons and translate subjectmatter knowledge into curriculum appropriate for students.They must be able to assess students' progress continuously,while accommodating individual, language, and culturaldifferences. To make matters more complicated, beginningteachers must know how to do all of this while learningschool and district policies, figuring out the basics ofclassroom management, and fitting into the schoolorganization in which they find themselves.

Clearly, the need for teachers with high levels of knowledgeand skills has never been greater.

Yet the demand for better-qualified teachers has beencountered by a growing teacher shortage, and policymakersoften find themselves in a double bind. At the same timethey act to strengthen new-teacher standards to assure more

4

quality, they're also under pressure to revamp teacher licensurerequirements to create "fast-track" routes into the profession.The result? Many schools are hiring teachers with wildlyvarying degrees of preparation.

FOCUSING ON NEW TEACHERS

Today's schools may have new teachers who have completedtraditional teacher education programs that include extensivecoursework and student teaching. Schools may also have newteachers who have worked in Professional DevelopmentSchools where they gained several years of experience andearned a master's degree before entering their own classrooms.In some schools, there are growing numbers of teachers whoentered the profession through alternative certificationprograms; these teachers often take control of the educationof one hundred-plus students after only a brief summertraining component. Worst of all, some administrators andlocal school boards, using the expedient of "emergencycertificates," are forced to hire "teachers" who have nopreparation at all.

As the Southeast Center for Teaching Quality and othershave reported, many of the least prepared teachers begin theircareers in schools that house our nation's most disadvantagedurban and rural students. State accountability laws make itclear that we expect these students, who are already behindwhen they enter school, to meet the same high standards asthose who enjoy the services of the most experienced andaccomplished teachers. The problem would be solved, ofcourse, if teacher preparation didn't matter. But it turns outthat teacher preparation matters very much.

In a cutting-edge study of new teachers, Susan Moore Johnsonand her colleagues at Harvard University recently reportedthat novices who entered classrooms through short-cutalternative routes were largely unprepared to teach.' Theresearchers studied new teachers in Massachusetts and NewJersey and found that while many were mid-career switcherswho came to the classroom with strong subject-matter

3

competence and mature job skills, they lacked the know-how to work with young people, manage standards-basedlessons, teach in ways that reached diverse students, or adjustto daily routines of school life.

In a finding that would not surprise William Waller, evennew teachers who had completed solid teacher educationprograms needed significant, continuing, on-site support tocounter the "daily, complicated demands of teaching."' Bothgroups of new teachers "yearned for school-site support andprofessional development as they chose and adaptedcurriculums, planned and implemented lessons, and managedclassrooms."'

In this report, we speak to what weknow and must do about assessingand supporting new teachers, drawingupon lessons learned from theSoutheast. In assembling data andinformation from a variety of sources,we surfaced a number of issues thatmust be addressed if all teachers willbe ready and supported in order toleave no child behind.

THE CONDITION OF NEW-TEACHER SUPPORT IN THESOUTHEAST

Our review of current new-teacherassessment and support in theSoutheast reveals a mixed bag ofpolicies and practices. More dollars are being invested in newteachers than ever before, and, in some states, there havebeen marked increases in the quantity of new-teacher supportprograms. But are they of good quality? We don't know. Stateshave not established accountability mechanisms that wouldmake it possible to assess fully the quality of their new-teacherinvestments. In the absence of good state data, it's alsodifficult to compare either the real costs or the provenbenefits of the various approaches being tried across the region.

add even more tremors to already shaky ground, support forinduction programs can waiver among policymakers andpractitioners with each passing budgetary and political season.

We have known for decades that no matter how good teachereducation is, the complexities of effective teaching are suchthat teachers will never know all they need to know whenthey enter their first classrooms. Schools must have soundinduction programs in which new teachers are both assessedand supported as they grow toward becoming expertclassroom leaders. Without such supports, many beginningteachers resort to survival instructional strategies in theirinitial years of teaching. These make-do approaches negatively

affect student learning and bypass theopportunity for novices to learn fromattempts at good teaching practiceunder the guidance of a well-preparedmentor.' This scramble forinstructional survival also threatens anew teacher's longevity in theprofession. Richard Ingersoll's analysisof the federal Schools and StaffingSurvey, the nation's best source ofinformation on teachers and teachingconditions, revealed that the amountof assistance a school offers newteachers is a key determinant towhether they intend to stay inteaching.'

No matter !flow goodteacher eolucatiovt,the covupl-exities of

effective teachivvo aresuch that teachers

VI,ever IR/ow cal,

weed to le,vowwhew the etAter their

first cLassrooVIA,S.

Using the best information available, the Center hasexamined various new-teacher induction policies and practicesin the Southeast as part of our own research. All too often,we have found programs with very fragile underpinnings.They suffer from a lack of funding and coherent frameworks;they pay insufficient attention to the vital linkages betweennew-teacher assessment and new-teacher support; and theyprovide too little emphasis on learning to teach specificcontent well. They generally leave new-teacher mentor trainingup to the vagaries of local implementation, and they fail torecognize the amount of time needed for new teachers todeepen, document, and assess their own teaching skills. To

4

5

This is not a new problem, of course.Unlike other beginning professionals,

new teachers have long been expected to work independently,making the same kinds of complex decisions (about curricularcontent, teaching methods, child development, working withparents and families, etc.) as their more experiencedcolleagues, often in more challenging circumstances. Theytypically carry larger student loads, teach a higher number ofdifferent subjects, and take on or are assigned more demandingextracurricular assignments. This is not a new problem, butone that perhaps explains why we don't have enoughaccomplished teachers to go around. Many give up infrustration and leave the profession, not because they couldn't"cut it" (as if the first years of teaching were boot camp) butbecause the system failed them.

We also know that teachers are on the steepest points oftheir professional learning curves in their first few years ofpractice. Early on, teachers develop skills, habits, and beliefsthat determine whether they are likely to become expertprofessionals. Little wonder, then, that teachers who wereunsupported in their early years of teaching but remain inthe profession often move through their careers without muchevidence of accomplishment.

THE REVOLVING SCHOOLHOUSE DOOR

A recent study sponsored by the National Center forEducation Statistics (NCES) suggests that new teachers dropout of the profession at an alarming rate.' Thirty percent(and up to 50 percent in urban schools) leave the classroomby the end of their third teaching year. How do states andschool systems stop this hemorrhaging?

Well-crafted induction programs can improve teachingquality, help staunch the flow of novice teachers from theprofession, and, in doing so, decrease the overall cost ofrecruiting, preparing, and developing teachers.' The NCESstudy found that for new teachers who had participated inan induction program, the attrition rate within the first threeyears of teaching was only 15 percent, compared with 26percent for teachers who had not received any inductionsupport.' The difference in the two figures represents manythousands of teachers and many millions of (wasted) dollarsinvested in recruitment and undergraduate preparation.

A recent study in Texas showed that teacher attrition costsschool systems as much as $8,000 or more for each recruitwho leaves in the first few years of teachine The high attritionof beginning teachers in Texas, who increasingly enter withoutpreparation and often receive few supports in learning toteach, costs the State an amount estimated in the millionsof dollars per year.

Ironically, the rapid turnover of early-career teachers alsocompels states and districts to spend more and more onprograms that "address" the teacher shortage but do little toassure teacher quality. By failing to invest in high-qualityinduction programs, policy leaders end up practicing falseeconomy. A fledgling MBA student could point out thesolution: Spend less on supply. Invest in retention. And experienceproves this: Columbus, Ohio, has been able to retain 98percent of their entry-year teachers by providing them with acomprehensive induction program."

For urban and other hard-to-staff schools, the evidence is

mounting that induction programs with well-designedassessment and support components are one of the mosteffective ways to retain new teachers. These programs supportnovices as they develop the special knowledge and skillsneeded to be effective in high-poverty classrooms. Thesespecial skills are best learned on the job under the guidanceof a trained mentor.

Quality induction programs also provide novice teachers witha network of new and experienced teachers with whom theycan share concerns, discuss issues, and explore solutions. Inaddition to increasing retention among novice teachers, goodinduction programs attract new teachers to a district as the

6

school system's reputation for teacher support spreads.Finally, good programs increase teacher effectiveness acrossthe board as experienced teachers grow professionally byserving in mentor roles.

PROGRESS IN THE SOUTHEAST AND THEADVENT OF NCLB

States in the Southeast are providing energy and leadershipfor improving teaching quality. Many state leaders are alsoworking to strengthen assessment and support programs fortheir novice teachers.

In 1999, eight states in the region received major fundingfrom the U.S. Department of Education's Title II TeacherQuality Enhancement Grant program. These funds wereallocated to accelerate state efforts to systematically improveteacher recruitment and retention, including programs toassess and support new teachers. With passage of the NoChild Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB),12 which reauthorizesand significantly broadens the scope of the Elementary andSecondary Education Act (ESEA), states will be implementingnew accountability and testing systems targeted at closingthe achievement gap. The law also requires that every publicschool child have a "highly qualified" teacher by 2005-2006.

The ESEA legislation provides $2.85 billion to transformstate teacher development systems. The law includesprovisions to use these dollars for assessment and supportprograms that can help novices develop good teachingpractices and lead their students to higher levels of learning.Drawing on the available ESEA teacher-quality dollars,southeastern states have a prime opportunity to expand thenew-teacher development efforts already underway and learnmore from each other about what works in teacher inductionand support.

For example, NCLB provides that Title II monies can nowbe used to: (1) change teacher certification or licensingrequirements to ensure that teachers have the necessarysubject matter knowledge and teaching skills in the academicsubjects they teach; (2) implement programs that supportnew teachers, including mentoring, team teaching, andreduced class schedules; and (3) promote professional growthand multiple career paths in ways that support master andmentor teachers with pay differentiation. This means thatstates can use ESEA teacher quality funds for a wide range of new-teacher support services. They could redesign licensure, paymentor teachers, and retool school organizations in ways thatallow novices to learn much more from experienced, expertteachers.

Every state faces the same mandate. They must guarantee by2005-2006 that every teacher is highly qualified. States must

5

seize this opportunity not only to help every teacher whoenters the profession reach this quality goal, but also to ensurethat these teachers remain in the profession once they achievethis level of mastery.

The Southeast as a region has made strides. While progresstoward high quality induction systems in the region has beenslow, states can continue to build on successful strategiesalready developed through a variety of state initiatives. Forexample, Georgia's Board of Regents now guarantees thequality of each of its new teacher education graduates, creatinga potentially powerful lever for pushing induction as a K-16responsibility that requires collaboration among partners.Alabama now includes a student assessment component inits new-teacher evaluation system. South Carolina is in theprocess of implementing a portfolio as part of its new-teacherevaluation, but will need to focus on a rigorous content-specific assessment by highly trained assessors. Louisiana,building on the success of the Lafourche Parish FIRSTinduction program, has adopted that district's modelstatewide and now prepares, through three-day summerinstitutes, teams of mentors and mentor trainers from everydistrict to systematically train and support new teachersthrough the first two to three years. North Carolina'sinduction program has been a regional model in recent years,but must find ways to overcome capacity and infrastructurebarriers that threaten to stunt the development of a well-designed program. (See page 9.)

Despite these promising developments, much more needsto be done. Programs to assess and support new teachersneed to be better funded. They need to have a strong contentfocus, and they need more mentors who are contentspecialists. Mentors need to be well trained and must beable to help new teachers meet new-teacher standards.Mentors and novices must have more time to work together.Finally, performance-based assessments of new teachers needto be linked directly to induction and new-teacher support,so that assessment drives teacher development and thedemonstrated needs of new teachers help shape assessmentof their performance. These are issues that few states anywherein the nation have resolved. But given our region's increasingfocus on teaching and student achievement, we believe thesoutheastern states are well positioned to lead the nation tohigher levels of new-teacher development.

What follows is an overview of key facts and issues related tonew-teacher assessment and support initiatives, which moststates and districts identify as induction programs.

THE WHAT AND WHY OF INDUCTION

"Induction" refers to a structured process of teacher learning,conducted on-the-job, where novices are prepared in stages

6

over the first few years of teaching. David Berliner, one of thenation's most respected education psychologists, is well knownfor his research on teacher and teaching effectiveness. Teachersneed five to eight years to master the art and science ofteaching, Berliner says, and pre-service teacher education willnever "completely pre-train teachers."13

Even so, Berliner has found that teacher education providesan essential foundation for prospective teachers. In pre-serviceprograms teachers can learn, for example, how to teach corecontent (e.g., algebraic equations, the rain cycle, or theconcept of justice in the context of democracy), as well ashow young students learn best, how to assess what studentshave learned, and what and how students need to be taught.Based upon years of study about how expert teachers (andexperts in other fields) evolve, Berliner asserts:

Only through experiencing the complexity of theclassroom does a teacher learn....A college degree ineducation only takes you so far. It prepares you to be abeginner in a complex world. What expert teachers haveis case knowledge. They can go back in their memory banksto compare situations and figure out what to do. Whenexpert teachers encounter a new student, a new learningproblem, or new curriculum materials, they havereferences stored in memory. Expert teachers are alsomuch better at impromptu responses. They're muchbetter at capturing teachable moments. They know what'sgoing on in the classroom all the time. They know howto get the class from point A to point B. Novices haveno such experiences stored in their memory banks. Ofcourse, some novices never get a clue about what's goingon; they never learn from experience. But promisingteachers and experts are learning each year.m

More than anything else, induction provides a much-neededframework to ensure that novice teachers develop the kindsof knowledge and skills they need to become experts.Induction is the critical first step on the ladder that teachersmust climb if they are going to progress through Berliner'sstages of teaching expertise - from novice, to beginner, tocompetent, to proficient, to expert.

Berliner has found that the right kind of teacher preparationcan guide teachers from the novice stage, when they are"relatively inflexible" in their teaching routines, to the expertstage, when they often appear to teach effortlessly and "takeadvantage of new information, quickly bringing newinterpretations and representations of [a classroom] problemto light.""

Quality induction programs pay attention to where novicesare on the continuum. They use data to make soundjudgments about what individual new teachers do and what

7

impact they have on students. Quality programs also offersystematic feedback to novices so they can gain clarity aboutwhat they are doing and why. They push and help teachersto get better.

Novices in many other professions complete an inductionprocess: a clerkship in law, an internship in architecture, aresidency in medicine. Lessons learned from other professionssuggest that effective induction practices must:

Provide novices with the specific expectations andthe rites and rituals of the organization;Assist novices in transferring to their work theacquired knowledge, skills, beliefs,and attitudes needed to succeed;Provide novices with on-goingguidance and assessment by anexpert in the field, who has beentrained as a mentor;Reduce novices' work load toprovide more learning time; andAssist novices (usually throughmentor support) in their efforts tomeet licensure standards.

For the most part, new-teacherinduction programs are under-conceptualized, under-developed,under-supported, and under-funded inthe American public education system.As we describe below (see page 8),Connecticut has the most highlydeveloped induction model in thenation and has made the most progress

IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT NEW-TEACHERSUPPORT

A great deal of information about new-teacher induction hasbeen gathered over the past two decades. Here are some facts:

Data from 1999 reveal that only seventeen statesmandate district-level induction programs, and onlyseven of these provide funding.16As of 2001, fifteen states require and financeinduction for beginning teachers.17National data indicate that in 1993-1994, over 55percent of all new teachers were participating in a

formal induction program.18In 1999-

well-craftedproora 1/1/LS

Oa IA, I-Ka:prove teacki,K,0

quaLi.td, help staw.i&clithe flow of vliovizeteachers frovt,t theprofessi-ovu, avud

decrease the overallcost of recruiti,vt,s,

p rep a ri,A,g, awddeveLopi.ws teachers.

in connecting its assessment and support componentsthrough a well-institutionalized, performance-based licensing(PBL) system. The Connecticut system goes well beyond paperand pencil tests or classroom observations by administratorsor peers. Prospective teachers must demonstrate theireffectiveness through performance tasks aligned to the state'steaching standards.

To assure new-teacher competence, a PBL system mustexamine how and why teachers make decisions about theirteaching and how well teachers understand the relationshipbetween their teaching and their students' learning. EffectivePBL programs cannot rely upon a simple checklist of "desired"teaching characteristics.

North Carolina is the only state in the Southeast that hasmade an effort to fully launch a PBL assessment process.However, as we describe below (see page 9), the North Carolinasystem does not focus on developing content-specific teachingexpertise - a key component of Connecticut's program.

8

2000, that number rose to 60percent.19

Growth in the number ofinduction programs and mentorsrepresents a significant increase in theincidence of formal teacherinduction over the past twenty years,but there is little evidence about thequality of these various programs.

Some state programs require allnew teachers to participate ininduction programs while othersprovide strong incentives to do so.

The most common incentives formentors include very modeststipends (e.g., $1000 per mentor inNorth Carolina) and some releasetime.

Most mentor programs lack realstructure and rely on the motivation

of experienced and novice teachers to seek each otherout.A growing number of school districts team withuniversities (small districts often organize as consortia)to provide induction services.Early results from recent induction programevaluations in Texas and California suggest that thecosts associated with induction can be recovered bylower attrition rates, which reduce the cost of hiring,orienting, and evaluating new teachers.2°

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT EFFECTIVEINDUCTION

Most states now have some form of induction program inplace or under development. The content, focus, and qualityof these programs vary widely in the Southeast and acrossthe nation. The weakest programs simply orient new teachersto their schools, providing little in-depth assessment orongoing support. Some offer help from a colleague, while

7

Connecticut's Approachto New-TeacherAssessment and Support

Despite growing diversity in the state'sstudent population (increases in minority,poor, and language diverse students),student achievement increased continuallyand sharply throughout the 1990s.Connecticut students ranked at the top inperformance on the National Assessmentof Educational Progress in elementaryreading and mathematics, and in scienceand writing. The state increased teachersalaries significantly and ensured that low-wealth districts could compete for qualifiedteachers. State leaders also enforced astepped-up system of teacher standards andpushed forward with reforms in teachereducation. As a result, Connecticut has oneof the best-prepared teaching cadres in thenation.

One hallmark of Connecticut's BeginningEducator Support and Training (BEST)system, which was launched in the mid-1980s and has been continually improved,is its beginning teacher mentoring andassessment program. In explainingConnecticut's reading achievement gains, aNational Educational Goals Panel reportcited the state's teacher policies, especiallythose associated with its beginning teacherassessment and support system, as a criticalelement in its success.'

Connecticut replaced a traditional new-teacher "teaching observation" process withan ambitious subject-specific portfoliosystem based on a more sophisticatedapproach to teaching and learning. Eachdistrict provides ongoing support andportfolio assessment in English,mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics,earth science, general science, specialeducation, elementary education, middleschool (4.8) education, history/socialstudies, art, music, and physical education.Most recently, the state has piloted new-teacher assessments in world languages andbilingual education.

The highly structured teacher portfolio isdeveloped over a two-year period andcomprises lesson logs, videotapes, teachercommentaries, and student work. The newteacher documents a unit of instruction ona significant concept, producing a series of

subject specific lessons, assessing students'learning, and reflecting on the impact of theirteaching on student achievement. This systemis framed by an elaborate support structure,which spans up to three years of a new teacher'scareer. Provisional certification is contingenton successful portfolio completion, andbeginning teachers have learned to take theprogram seriously.

Mentors in Connecticut meet regularly withfirst-year teachers to plan instruction and assesstheir practices (although time available tomentors varies across districts). Mentorsobserve or videotape first-year teachers'classroom instruction and analyze theirteaching and student learning with them. Thestate currently requires mentors to participatein three days of standardized BEST support-teacher training. During this training, mentorsactually assess the work of novices, use specificskills to promote inquiry, relate instructionalpractice to teaching standards, and provideportfolio-related support.

Since the mid-1990s, the state has offeredcontent-specific seminars for its novice teachers.These seminars are designed by the stateDepartment of Education's teachers-in-residence and are facilitated by teachers,administrators, and teacher educators who arealso trained to score beginning teacherportfolios. The yearlong seminars (whichaverage 25-30 hours) help new teachers alignunit and lesson objectives, instructionalstrategies, and assessments. They emphasize thecritical connection between student andteacher performance and show novices howto analyze results with that connection in mind.In 2002-2003, the state will pilot distance-learning seminars that will cover portions ofthis program. The first and last seminars willbe regional, on-site sessions; those in betweenwill be accessible online.

Connecticut's portfolio process is reminiscentof the system developed for National BoardCertification. New teachers must include adescription of their teaching context, a set oflesson plans, two videotapes of instructionduring the unit(s), samples of student work,and written reflections on their planning,instruction, and assessment of student progress.The portfolio requirements are highlystructured and content-specific, revealing muchabout how new teachers think and how theyact on behalf of students. The portfolioassessors grade the novices on the logic andcoherence of their curriculum, the suitability

of instructional decisions, the scope ofteaching strategies they use effectively, thequality of their assignments, their skill inassessing student learning, and their capacityto shape new classroom practices based onevidence of student learning.

Each portfolio is scored by two trainedassessors who teach in the same content areaas the candidate they are judging. They usea content-specific instrument to rate thenovice. On average, it takes about five hoursfor the assessors to score a portfolio. Basedon recent data gathered from programadministrators, we learned that somewherebetween 85 and 92 percent (depending oncontent area) initially pass Connecticut'snew-teacher assessment. Pass rates appearto vary according to the university novicesattended, suggesting that some universityprograms do a better job of preparingnovices for the assessments and for teaching.The state predicts a 98 percent success ratewhen third-year candidates are re-examined.

The purpose of the Connecticut process isto develop new teachers, not simply to screenweaker candidates out of the profession.Still, program officials report that theprocess is sufficiently rigorous to convincesome weaker candidates to leave teachingbefore they complete the portfolioaccounting, at least in part, for the highinitial passing rates.

The total annual cost for the program isabout $3.6 million for 2800 teachers, orabout $1300 per new teacher, whichincludes small stipends to districts ($200per new teacher), clinics and seminars,portfolio scoring and training, regionalservice center support, teachers-in-residencewho lead training sessions, datamanagement, and validity studies. One ofthe hallmarks of Connecticut's program isthe state education department's scientificapproach to implementation. The agencynot only assesses content validity, it alsoexamines the relationship betweenparticipation, teaching practices, andstudent achievement - and the impact ofscorer training on teaching practice.

In districts where the program is mosteffective, more investments are made. InBristol, a senior advisor works with threeto five novices over a two-year period andoffers direct counsel on classroom

continued on page 14

8

9 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

North Carolina's Approachto New-TeacherAssessment and Support

With the passage of the Excellent SchoolsAct in 1997; the North Carolina legislaturecalled upon the State Board of Educationto develop new requirements that "reflectmore rigorous standards for continuingcertification." At that time, the State Boardimplemented a performance-basedassessment. All new teachers in NorthCarolina were required to participate in athree-year Initial Licensure Programdesigned "to provide new teachers with thesupport they need to succeed" in theclassroom. To gain a continuingprofessional license, each new teacher inNorth Carolina was to complete aPerformance-Based Licensure (PBL)product.

However, in the 2002 session, the NorthCarolina State legislature suspended theproduct requirement for at least two yearsand directed the State Board of Educationto study the continuing certification processto reduce the "burden" it places on newteachers and make recommendations abouta modified licensure process. A report fromthe State Board will be due to the JointLegislative Education Oversight Committeeon January 1, 2004.

In the meantime, the State Board mustimplement "interim requirements" forcontinuing certification that have yet to bedetermined. Ever since the productrequirement was first instituted for the1999 cohort of new teachers,implementation problems have abounded.Although the product requirement is nowsuspended, the state's new-teacher inductionprogram (in its previous form) has manyelements worth noting. As such, it isimportant to highlight what the state hastried, what has worked, and what has not.

The product was not designed as astructured portfolio, as in Connecticut, butas a documentation of evidence by second-year teachers of their "requisite knowledge,skills, and attitudes." The state describes theproduct, which is aligned with the InterstateNew Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium (INTASC) standards, as "acollection of evidence gathered over time inthe normal course of teaching, using a

systematic process of reflection." Evidence andartifacts were to be selected from classroomteaching and related professional experiencesand could include such items as unit and dailylesson plans, teacher-made assessmentmaterials, classroom management plans, parentcommunications logs, samples of student work,video and audio tapes, and summativeevaluations.

Legislators imagined the product would helpnew teachers learn to teach more effectivelyand would also serve as a tool to screen outweaker teachers. The PBL product went asignificant step beyond the traditional methodof vetting new teachers through classroomobservation. It included multiple sources ofdata gathered and developed in the teaching-learning process and focused on threecomponents: instructional practice, uniquelearner needs, and classroom climate. Noviceswere to meet a required cut score in each area,and candidates who did not earn the requiredminimum score had to rework and resubmitany portion of the product with identifiedweaknesses.

North Carolina's new-teacher assessment didnot focus intensely on how novices teach theirspecific content, as Connecticut does. Such afocus requires not only a greater initialinvestment (because teacher assessment in eachcontent area will be substantially different), butalso a different way of organizing resources andsupport systems.

The PBL product received a blind review by ateam of two trained assessors. Neither assessorcould work in the same district as the candidate.This provision limited the connections that mayneed to take place in the support and assessmentcomponents of the process. Unlike theConnecticut model, where both trainedassessors are content experts reviewing acontent-specific portfolio, North Carolinarequired that only one assessor be in thebeginning teacher's licensure area. Reviewerswere not expected to focus their assessmentprimarily on how the teacher teaches thecontent. The reviews were independentlyconducted and no "consensus" orcollaboration occurred among the reviewersas they assessed new-teacher learning. InConnecticut, such collaboration is requiredand has proven to be a major source of learningfor the state's veteran teachers.

North Carolina's alternatively certified (lateralentry and provisionally licensed) teachers had

to be within six semester hours ofcompleting their prescribed programs ofstudy before they submitted the product.Unfortunately, this provision made itpossible for such teachers to teach for upto five years before completing the PBLprocess.

In recognition of completion of theinduction milestone, the successfulcandidate received the largest increase(approximately 6%) on the teacher pay scaledefined by the Excellent Schools Act.

While the product may no longer berequired, all Initially Licensed Teachers(ILTs) are still assigned a trained mentorfor the first two years. This mentor is paid$100 per month. Selection of these mentorsis a local decision, but mentors are requiredto have career status, be successful teachers,have a commitment to mentoring, and agreeto twenty-four hours of mentor training,using one of the many training programsavailable in the state. The state also requireseach local district to provide an orientationfor new teachers and pays for three days ofrelease time. The state expects districts toprovide up to two years of support forbeginning teachers, using the Coach2Coachmodel developed under the state's Title IIteacher quality grant. Formal evaluationsof the new teacher by both administratorsand a teacher supplement this morecomprehensive mentoring system.

Although working conditions for newteachers vary widely across the state, theState Board of Education recommends thefollowing new-teacher practices to everylocal school system: (1) teaching assignmentonly in the area of licensure; (2) mentorassigned early, in the licensure area, and inclose proximity; (3) limited classpreparations, limited number ofexceptional or difficult students, minimalnon-instructional duties, and noextracurricular activities unless the ILTrequests the assignment in writing. However,there is no monitoring to determine howwell districts conform to these generalguidelines.

The state education department offersguidance to new teachers and districtmentors about these general guidelines, butthe actual implementation variesdramatically from school to school and

continued on page 15

9

1 0 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

others have trained mentors. Only a few measure the noviceteachers' performance against clear standards andexpectations. The best programs assess new teachers with aformal evaluation that links their teaching to studentachievement through observations and portfolios, is tied tostate standards, and has implications for certification orcontinued employment.

In a number of countries, new teachers are observed andcritiqued often. In Japan, for example, induction for newteachers lasts one year and includes weekly training both inand out of school. To lighten new teachers' workloads,accommodate their heavy training schedule, and allow releasetime for extensive mentoring, the program assigns one part-time experienced teacher to each new teacher or one full-time teacher for two new teachers. In Germany, new teacherinduction is a three-year process in which new teachers receivea reduced teaching load, participate in professionaldevelopment, and observe others. In France, beginningteachers are paired with their experienced counterparts for aperiod of two years.2'

Several years ago, the National Commission on Teaching andAmerica's Future reported on noteworthy new-teacherinduction programs in Rochester, New York; Albuquerque,New Mexico; and Santa Cruz, California." Rochester'sCareer in Teaching (CIT) program began in 1986 and servesall schools in the Rochester system. The city's teacher unionpartners closely with the district, and the classifications of"mentor" and "novice" fit within a larger differentiated careerpath and compensation system.

The Albuquerque Public Schools has two induction programsin place. The Resident Teacher Program (RTP) providesmentoring and support (eighteen mentor/support teachers)for a cohort of 360.400 new teachers (known as ResidentTeachers) who are simultaneously enrolled in a Master ofArts program at the University of New Mexico. The TeacherInduction Program (TIP) serves all other new teachers in thefour districts that participate in the program. The programshave been in place since 1984 for elementary teachers andsince 1986 for secondary teachers. The overall inductionprogram (encompassing both induction types) is a partnershipbetween the district, the union, and the university.

The New Teacher Project (NTP) of the New Teacher Centerat the University of California, Santa Cruz, serves newteachers in Santa Cruz and twenty-seven other districts infour counties. Established in 1988, the NTP is led by theUniversity's Teacher Education Program in collaboration withthe district offices of education and is part of California'sBeginning Teacher Support and Assessment Program. As oftwo years ago, the program included sixty mentors who servednine hundred new teachers over a two-year period.

10

Each of these three programs is noteworthy, but none isperfect. They share several important characteristics:

Each is the result of a collaboration involving one ormore school districts and either the union or a nearbyuniversity or both;Each has a rigorous process for selecting mentors; andEach seeks to assist new teachers as they develop theirpedagogical skills and to provide opportunities toassess new teachers' development and performance.

There are also some notable differences:

Rochester's program uses mentors who are still inthe classroom for at least half of the day. The othertwo programs take mentors out of the classroom fora period of two to three years.Rochester provides one year of mentor support;Santa Cruz and Albuquerque offer two years. InAlbuquerque and Santa Cruz, mentors may help newteachers meet evaluation requirements, but they donot evaluate new teachers themselves. In Rochester,mentors share the responsibility for evaluating newteachers with new teachers' supervisors.The caseloads for mentors vary widely among thethree programs. A fully released mentor inAlbuquerque serves twenty-five new teachers, whilea full-time mentor in Santa Cruz has a case load ofthirteen to fifteen new teachers. A half-time mentorin Rochester serves only four new teachers.The amount of training provided to mentors rangesfrom no formal training in Albuquerque, to anintensive three hours a week in Santa Cruz, to threedays plus two hours a month in Rochester.The costs for the programs vary, from no cost in theAlbuquerque program, which is based on an exchangeof services, to an average of $3688 per new teacher inRochester, to $10,500 for two years in Santa Cruz.

In a 2000 study, Humphrey, et al. identified a set ofinterrelated components that determine the quality of new-teacher induction programs, including content;participation; mentor role, selection, and training;institutional roles; and the balance between assessment andsupport. Connecticut has addressed these components morecomprehensively than any other state or district program.Connecticut's example is worth highlighting (see page 8) as abenchmark against which southeastern states can assess theirown efforts.

11

THE SOUTHEAST: BUILDING ON GOODBEGINNINGS

The southeastern states are making significant strides as theywork to develop better new-teacher induction programs.Most states have induction processes that includeorientations, the assignment of mentors, professionaldevelopment, and assessment specifically tailored to theexpectations for beginning teachers. Based on our interviewswith state leaders, seven of ten states in the region (Arkansas,Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, SouthCarolina, and Tennessee) have mandatory inductionprograms; five (Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, NorthCarolina, and South Carolina) provide state funding.Although it is difficult to pin down the actual costs of state-supported induction programs, the range is wide - from anestimated $500 per new teacher in Georgia (where districtselect to participate) to $2829 in North Carolina. None ofthe states appear to be investing the sums allocated forexemplary programs across the nation, which carry minimumprice tags of $3000 to $5000 per teacher per year.

Even so, the region is making progress. In addition to theaccomplishments in North Carolina, which are describedelsewhere herein (see page 9), the following are othernoteworthy highlights:"

Alabama (using PEPE, the state's teacher evaluationinstrument) and Arkansas (using PRAXIS III) havemore "generic" teacher evaluation systems, but thesestates are beginning to include in their assessmentcomponent work samples that capture why teachersmake certain instructional decisions that affectstudent achievement.Georgia has developed a rigorous training andcertification program for mentors.Georgia, Kentucky, and Louisiana are expectingteacher education graduates to demonstrate teachingperformance through "work sampling."Alabama's new-teacher evaluation is used to holdteacher education and universities accountable forpreparing novice teachers.Mississippi has developed multi-media modules foron-line support of beginning teachers and mentors.South Carolina's ADEPT induction program hasbegun to redesign its mentor training based on thehighly effective Santa Cruz model.Arkansas requires training designed to supportmentors and has put sufficient dollars into theirmentoring to ensure "one-on-one" support.Tennessee is collaborating with two universities, theUniversity of Tennessee at Knoxville and VanderbiltUniversity, to develop and deliver mentor trainingto school districts.

12

Induction Programs in the SoutheastMore Widespread

A new update of the federal Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS)offers important information about the working conditions ofthe nation's teachers. For example, in Louisiana and SouthCarolina, the percentage of new teachers reporting some formalinduction experience increased dramatically from 1994 to 2000.This is excellent news for the region. Georgia, Florida, and NorthCarolina (which has had a longer history of induction programs)experienced a modest drop-off in participation. Only half of thestates in the region had new teachers involved in inductionexperiences at a rate higher than the national average.

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Percent of new teachers*with some formal induction experience

Reports from teachers with less than five years experience

US AL AR FL GA KY LA MS NC SC TN

Source: Schools and Staffing Survey, 1999.2000

While the latest SASS information tells us something about thequantity of induction experiences, it does not speak to quality.However, the SASS survey does reveal something about theconnection between support and career persistence. The SASSasked a wide range of questions about teacher qualifications,preparation, professional development, working conditions, andcommitment to teaching. By conducting cross-tabular statisticalanalyses, we found strong positive relationships between specificsupports provided to new teachers and their willingness to stay inteaching. For example, 59 percent of new teachers' who had amentor who helped them with instructional methods said theywould certainly teach again, compared to 47 percent of thosewho did not.

' New teachers for these analyses include those in the survey samplewith less than 3 years of experience.

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

The Kentucky Teacher Internship Program (KTIP)offers assistance for beginners through a yearlongprocess of mentor support that culminates in thedevelopment of a portfolio required for certification.

Issue: Mentor training. No state in the Southeast providesassurances that a new teacher's mentor is an expert in thearea he or she teaches. While most states provide trainedmentors for their new teachers, the quality of the trainingvaries widely, and the mentors and novices frequently arenot matched by content area. Nor is there a strong focus oncontent-area support. While most states recommend "job-alike" pairing, no state mandates this arrangement or providescontent-specific training for their mentors.

Issue: Observation. Only a few states in the Southeast havedeveloped new classroom observation systems that go beyondthe usual process of documenting behaviors as the solemethod of assessing teaching practice.

Issue: High-need schools. No state has developed policiesrecognizing that new teachers are not uniformly distributed.The highest concentrations of new teachers are in urban andrural schools serving many disadvantaged students. However,when states fund induction programs, the costs are generallydetermined on a per-teacher (novice or mentor) basis and donot take into account the need for a higher ratio of expertmentors to novices in high-poverty schools. This issue hasyet to be raised among the programs we reviewed, althoughthere is evidence from our investigation into hard-to-staffschools" that many high-poverty schools in the region havesignificantly higher teacher turnover. In fact, these high-turnover schools have fewer expert teachers who can serve asmentors to their large numbers of new teachers, forcingschools to assign mentor responsibilities to less-than-accomplished teachers.

Issue: Lighter loads for new teachers. No southeastern statehas any statutory language about reduced teaching loads fornew teachers. Only one southeastern state has any languagethat encourages more favorable working conditions as theylearn on the job. A North Carolina statute says that noteacher in the first three years of his or her career may beassigned "extracurricular activities unless the...teacher requeststhe assignment in writing."" However, in a recent survey ofnew teachers who completed the portfolio requirement, afull 94 percent of those surveyed reported participating insome extracurricular role.26 These teachers take on these dutiesfor different reasons - sometimes because the principal expectsthem to, and sometimes because new-teacher pay is so lowthat these teachers need the extra money that comes withsome extra duties. Principals must ensure that new teachersare not expected to take on an overload of responsibilitieswhile beginning their career as a classroom teacher.

12

Many other nations guarantee a reduced teaching load forteachers in their first few years. They do it by investing newmonies and reallocating old monies to support new-teacherdevelopment. Although this may seem like an expensiveproposition, these nations have determined that these arewise investments when compared to the cost of teacherturnover. We have already cited the example of Texas, wherethe current attrition rate of 15.5 percent costs the statebetween $329 million and $2.1 billion per year, dependingon the private industry cost model used in the calculation.

Issue: The missing assessment piece. None of the southeasternstates has a fully developed system to assess which beginningteachers receive support and how the support impacts their

Local Induction Programs:A Mixed Picture

Our efforts to document promising initiatives at the local levelproduced mixed results. Through interviews with localimplementers, we were able to gather some information, butdifferences in the way programs are defined and success ismeasured make it difficult to determine comprehensiveness oreffectiveness. Sound cost-benefit analyses were nearly impossible.Most often, the per-teacher cost data reported to us did not takeinto account all of the cost factors involved in an inductionprogram.

Even so, we were able to pinpoint some promising local strategiesthat are worth noting. Mentor teachers in the Hamburg SchoolDistrict (Arkansas) must take a graduate level course on bestpractices and supervision before becoming a paid mentor;however, the program operates on a very small scale, with onlyeight novice teachers served last year. A program at FurmanUniversity in South Carolina works with two school districtsand releases mentors full time to work with novice teachers duringtheir first year. However, the retention rate after year three isonly 70 percent, which mirrors the rather dismal national average.

Kennesaw State University near Atlanta, Georgia, works withnine school districts. KSU sends faculty members to school sitesto work with and support mentor teachers and their novices,but this promising practice has been piloted in only one district.The extent of mentor training and support offered by theuniversity in the other districts is unclear. The Talladega County,Alabama, program requires mentors and beginning teachers tokeep reflective logs that document their experiences and sharethem with the program's coordinator quarterly. But mentorsand novices do not routinely gain release time to perform theseextra duties.

Clearly, states and districts need to do a better job of documentinghow their programs work and what effects they have. States alsoneed to provide local programs with more guidance and supportas they work to develop effective induction programs.

13 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

teaching performance, retention, and job satisfaction. Somestates (including Alabama, Georgia, and Kentucky) arebeginning to develop the necessary data systems to undertakesuch analysis. With these systems in place, policymakers andpractitioners will have new tools to make better decisionsand to direct scarce resources to where they are needed most.

WHAT WE MUST DO ABOUT NEW-TEACHERASSESSMENT AND SUPPORT

We know far more about effective new-teacher assessmentand support programs than we act upon. Other professionshave crafted formal, carefully tailored programs to supporteach new professional's continued growth on the job. Wehave no empirical studies that document whether doctors,nurses, architects, engineers, and pharmacists need aninternship to prepare them for the demands of everydaypractice. We simply take it for granted. Other professions donot wonder whether but how. "How will we implement theseprograms?" "How will we adapt our induction process tochanging conditions?" "How can we continue to ensure thatour novices will develop into seasoned professionals whoconsistently perform at acceptable levels of quality?"

Why haven't educators followed this same path? Publiceducation's induction problems are curious ones. They seemto be rooted in a long-held belief that adequate preparationand support of new teachers is optional: It's something that's"nice to do" but isn't essential to the success of the publiceducation enterprise.

The economics of schooling tend to reinforce this belief. Todo the induction job right, school and university leaderswill need to invest new dollars and reallocate existingresources. That requires leaders to make difficult decisionsabout the actions that are most likely to help them win (orstay in) the race to meet higher academic standards and closethe achievement gap.

Will an expensive program that supports and challenges newteachers through the first two or three years of their careershelp schools leap the hurdles of high-stakes accountability?Or is it enough for new teachers to be smart or caring orsteeped in their subject matter? Some policymakers andpractitioners think so. But the evidence supports a differentview - one that makes sense to many teachers, principals, andother education professionals who have worked on the "frontlines" in the most challenging schools. They quickly graspthe conclusions of David Berliner and many other researcherswho tell us that unless novice teachers gain expertise inteaching strategies, unless they develop a thoroughunderstanding of diverse learners, unless they equip themselveswith a well-stocked pedagogical toolbox, they will never makea difference for every student.

14

We do not mean to leave university-based teacher preparationprograms out of this mix. As the pressure mounts for suchprograms to guarantee the readiness of their graduates, teachereducators have a vested interest in supporting high-qualityinduction programs that bridge the gap between the collegeclassroom and the schoolhouse door. Much can be achievedif universities and school systems plan induction programstogether, each allocating resources and staff to an effort thatwill benefit both.

Some readers of this report may be weary of hearing aboutConnecticut and its comprehensive induction program. Butthe point needs to be made that the oil that greases the engineof new-teacher induction in the Bay State is a mixture ofconsensus and collaboration. Connecticut's political andeducation leaders agree that teaching is a profession, thatstudents and schools benefit from a professional approachto new-teacher induction, and that the resources invested intheir comprehensive program pay huge dividends.

These thoughts lead us to propose several recommendationswe believe can bolster the reputation of the southeasternstates as leaders and innovators in education reform:

First: Build ConsensusLeading policymakers and practitioners across the region needto develop a stronger consensus about the components ofan effective statewide new-teacher induction program. Statesneed to develop solid estimates of the costs of such programsand consider how they might be funded. These estimatesneed to be developed with the understanding that every statehas many high-need schools where a large proportion of newteachers begin their careers. The mix of dollars and resourcesmust be apportioned so that new teachers in these mostchallenged schools get the extra support they need to masterthe complex task of teaching and reaching diverse learners.

We call for the region to launch such efforts at a New TeacherSummit, a venue for states in the Southeast to continue tolearn from each other and to explore the cost savings thatcan be achieved by jointly developing materials and productsfor both new-teacher assessment and support programs.

Second: Strengthen CollaborationInside the borders of our states, we find the new-teacherinduction infrastructure wobbly at best. State leaders at thehighest levels need to act to bring together the resources andorganizational capacity of state agencies, school districts,universities, and teacher associations to make these new-teacher assessment and support programs work. Qualityprograms are not inexpensive, but leaders must ask how muchis wasted through ineffective collaboration and "disconnects"that prevent even the best-designed and most well-intentionedprograms from becoming fully operational. Without tighter

13

coordination, collaboration, and sharing of costs among allparties, implementation problems will continue to abound.For example, North Carolina has done more to advance new-teacher assessment and support than any other state in theregion, yet its program is in jeopardy because capacity issueshave not been resolved.

Third: Recognize the Critical Role of MentorsRegional leaders need to develop consensus about new-teachermentoring. What qualities describe an effective mentor? Whatis the mentor's job? How do we develop the mentors weneed? In regional meetings like a New Teacher Summit, leaderscould establish common criteria for program standards andfor mentor selection and training. They could explore theimportance of funding mentor coordinators who can serveas "mentors of mentors." They could consider ways topromote the matching of novices and mentors to ensure thatnew teachers get the help they need from experts in theirown teaching areas.

Cost-saving, web-based technologies can support thementoring process. But new teachers will also need directcontact and support from experts. There is no substitute forthe mentor who can observe and model in a novice's ownclassroom.

continued from page 8

management and instructional issues. Thedistrict pays senior advisors $3000 andoffers two days of release time per newteacher to support this relationship. Thedistrict supports new teachers with a peeradvisor at their school who teaches in thesame subject matter or at the same gradelevel. The district also provides additionalprofessional development not offered bythe state. The stipends for advisors attractsome of Bristol's most expert teachers tothis important work, and the district hasmore applicants than positions. Thescreening process is rigorous, and selectionis based in part on whether potentialadvisors are working at schools serving highpercentages of first- and second-yearteachers and whether they have experiencescoring BEST portfolios.'

By the year 2010, 80 percent of the state'selementary teachers, and nearly as manysecondary teachers, will have participatedin the subject-matter-specific portfolioassessment system, either as candidates forlicensing, as mentors, or as assessors.Connecticut developed and implemented

Fourth: Invest in Hard-to-Staff Schools FirstMost new teachers begin their, careers in high-poverty, hard-to-staff schools, where the challenges are great and teachingexpertise is hard to find. As the NCLB legislation and stateaccountability programs zero in on the racial andsocioeconomic achievement gaps, the stakes for these schoolswill only get higher. When it comes to new-teacher assessmentand induction programs, these schools must be each state'stop priority.

States should expect to pay average costs of about $6000 pernew teacher for quality programs - or about $1000 for eachnew-teacher assessment and $5000 for effective inductionover several years. Induction costs could and should vary bythe proportion of novice teachers to mentor teachers inparticular schools. The costs, at least in the beginning, couldbe much greater in high-need schools with their largepercentages of new teachers. These schools rarely have asufficient supply of expert mentors on staff. But when weconsider that the most conservative estimates put the cost oflosing one teacher at $8000, such investments are wise policy.Over time, as more new teachers gain the support they need,attrition will decline, the level of expertise in these schoolswill increase, and student achievement will rise, reducing theneed for extraordinary investments.

the portfolio model over an eight-year period,going to scale gradually, subject area by subjectarea. Connecticut's gradual implementationcreated the opportunity to build the capacityand infrastructure to ensure successful policyimplementation.

Connecticut's sustained effort is the mostambitious undertaking in any state to use high-leverage, performance-based teachingassessments as a tool to transform professionalpractice.

Visit www.teachingquality.org/resources/SECTQpublications/Inductionlinks.htm*CTfor more information about Connecticut'sprogram.

' Baron, J. B. (1999). Exploring high and improvingreading achievement in Connecticut. Washington:National Educational Goals Panel.2 Youngs, P. (2002). State and district policy tomentoring and new teacher induction in Connecticut.Prepared for the National Commission onTeaching and America's Future. Unpublishedmanuscript.

Estimated Costs: BEST PortfolioAssessment and Support Program(based on 2800 first year teachers)

District and Regional Support to New TeachersFunds to Districts ($200/BT) $600,000Regional Service Center Staffing $270,000Teachers-in-Residence $250,000Subtotal $1,120,000 (31%)

State-provided Professional DevelopmentClinics and seminars(BTs and Mentors) $375,000

Portfolio scoring and training $835,000Subtotal $1,210,000 (34%)

AdministrationData management, scoring,reporting, validation, technicalassistance to districts $1,270,000 (35%)

Total $3,600,000 (100%)

Cost per beginning teacherover 2 year period: $1,384

14

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Fifth: Find Out What WorksAll too often education policy and practice evolves in aninformation vacuum. States will never create and sustain high-quality assessment and induction programs for new teacherswithout the information they need to determine what works.

States need to press local implementers of assessment andinduction programs for better and comparable informationabout the programs they are implementing. Our own effortsto assemble reliable information for this report were oftenstymied by the lack of comprehensive, comparable data. Stateofficials could identify districts they believed were makingprogress, but the information needed to measure actualprogress was spotty and inconsistent.

We also recommend that a consortium of states in the regionadminister a new-teacher survey to a sample of novices atregular intervals. Learning from novice teachers themselvesabout what they want and need would be a powerful toolfor both public engagement and policy design andimplementation. Not only would such a survey offer insightinto induction program implementation issues, but it wouldhelp states develop comparable data about who is teachingwhere, how well they are doing, how long they are staying,and if they leave, where they are going and why. Such

continued from page 9

district to district. These variations appearto have had a notable impact on the abilityof new teachers to give sufficient attentionto the labor-intensive "product"requirements.

Some teachers and administratorsquestioned the value of the productdevelopment process, finding it far tooburdensome for a second-year teacher tomanage along with other teaching duties. Arecent newspaper account examined theissue. One teacher said that while "I'm allfor doing anything that can make me abetter teacher, this is hindering my teaching(and) taking time away from planning,grading, calling parents and from being aparent myself."' Anecdotal reports to thelegislature claimed that the product is "anadditional workload that is an extraburden," and some teachers noted theywould rather quit than complete theproduct. The frustration among newteachers must be traced, at least in part, toa perception that the time and energyrequired to complete the product is notcompensated by significant professional

information is critical to building political will in supportof better induction systems.

HONORING OUR NOVICE TEACHERS

No matter how strong their preparation, novice teachers faceenormous challenges as they enter their first classrooms andstruggle to manage and organize standards-based teaching andlearning. Part of our nation's commitment to leave no childbehind must be to leave no new teacher behind. We have askedthese new teachers to accept the call to teach, and we areobligated to give them every chance to succeed. We knowwhat we need to do. We have successful state and local modelsto draw upon. Now we must develop the political will to actin our own best interests and in the interests of every studentin our public schools.

growth. Unlike Connecticut, many of NorthCarolina's new teachers seemed to view the PBLprocess as "busywork" rather than a launchingpad into a successful teaching career.

The apparent unrest over the PBL program iscompounded by cutbacks in some materialsand resources to support new teachers andadministrators, due to capacity problems inthe state education department. Ourinterviews revealed that state agency personnelassigned to the program, who are critical tosuccessful implementation, are overcommitted,and the staff has experienced a great deal ofturnover. We also learned that the educationdepartment feels it is trapped in a bureaucraticCatch-22: Leaders know what they need to dobut lack the resources to do it. And when thedepartment fails to accomplish legislativemandates, the legislature eliminates thoseportions of the program. The state's majorbudget shortfalls of the last several yearsaggravate this situation.

North Carolina's new-teacher support andassessment initiative, which began in 1995, wasbrought to scale years ahead of its intended

time line due to legislative requirements. Thefast-track implementation made it difficultto build the program carefully from theground up. Without capacity andinfrastructure, well-intentioned policieshave little hope for surviving long term.

As mentioned earlier, the future of NorthCarolina's model is currently uncertain.While deleting the product requirementmay relieve new teachers of a perceivedburden, it will not move the state closer toreal performance-based licensure. 'WhileNorth Carolina's efforts are some distanceahead of its southeastern neighbors, thestate has a long way to go in building thekind of new-teacher assessment and supportone finds in Connecticut.

' Silberman, Todd. (2001, January 27). Youngteachers say licensing hurdle too high. TheRaleigh News and Observer.

15

16 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Endnotes' Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: Wiley.2 Kardos, S. M., Johnson, S. M., Peske, H. G., Kauffman, D., and Liu, E.(2001, April). Counting on colleagues: New teachers encounter theprofessional culture of their schools. Educational Administration Quarterly,37(2), 250-290.

Johnson, S.M. and Kardos, S.M. (2002, March). Keeping new teachers inmind. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 12-16.' Ibid.

Feiman-Nemser, S. (1983). Learning to teach. In L. Shulman and G. Sykes(Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 150.170). New York: Longman.6 Ingersoll, R. M. (2001, January). A different approach to solving the teachershortage problem. CTP Teaching Quality Policy Brief 3. University ofWashington: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.'National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Progress through the teacherpipeline: 1992-93 college graduates and elementary/secondary school teaching as of1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Humphrey, D. C., Adelman, N., Esch, C., Riehl, L. M., Shields, P. M., and

Tiffany, J. (2000, September). Preparing and supporting new teachers: A literaturereview. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.9 NCES, 2000.IS Southern Regional Education Board. (2001). Reduce your losses: Help newteachers become veteran teachers. Atlanta: Author.

Stroot, S. A., Fowlkes, J., Lingholz, J., Paxton, S., Stedman, P., Steffes, L.,& Valtman, A. (1999). Impact of a collaborative peer and assistance reviewmodel on entry-year teachers in a large urban school setting. Journal ofTeacher Education, 50(1), 27.41.12 (On- line]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/

Scherer, Marge. (2001, May). Improving the quality of the teaching force:A conversation with David C. Berliner. Education Leadership, 58(8).H Ibid. Emphasis ours.IS Berliner, David C. (1994). Expertise: The wonder of exemplaryperformances. In J. Mangieri and C. Collins-Block (Eds.), Creating powerfulthinking in teachers and students. Ft. Worth, TX; Holt, Rinehart & Winston.16 Quality counts 2000: Who should teach? Education Week, 19(18).17 Quality counts 2002: Building blocks for success. Education Week, 21(17).83 Gruber, K.J., Wiley, S.D., Broughman, S.P., Strizek, G.A., and Burian-Fitzgerald, M. (2002). Schools and Staffing Survey, 1999.2000: Overview of thedata for public, private, public charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary andsecondary schools. NCES 2002-313. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofEducation, National Center for Education Statistics.'9 Ibid.2° Humphrey, et al, 2000.21 Stoel, C.F. and Thant, T. (2002). Teachers' professional lives: A view from nineindustrialized countries. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Family Foundation.22 National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (2000, Summer).District induction programs that work. Urban Initiatives Newsletter, 2(2). NewYork: Author.25 For more details about each state, visit www.teachingquality.org/resources/SECTQpublications/InductionintheSE.htm.24 To view a copy of the report, visit www.teachingquality.org/resources/articles/htssbrief.htm.25 American Federation of Teachers. (2001, September). Beginning teacherinduction: The essential bridge. Educational Issues Policy Brief, 13. Washington,DC: Author.26 In a March 2002 survey of 811 new teachers who submitted productsduring the 2000-2001 school year, all but forty -nine reported they wereassigned some form of extra duty beyond their normal teaching assignment.Over a third of these respondents reported serving on two or more committeeswithin their school; others reported serving as club sponsors, coachingsports, tutoring, or serving as grade or department level chairpersons. SeeNorth Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2002, March). Report toState Board of Education at March 2002 Meeting.

16

THE SOUTHEAST CENTER FOR

(--AFACHING/uALITYECT,,tiThe University of North Carolina

Office of the PresidentPO Box 2688

Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27515-2688(919) 843-9519

(919) 843.7616 (fax)www.teachingquality.org

Barnett BerryExecutive Director

StaffTracey Aviles

Administrative Assistant

John D. DenningAssociate Director

Teresa DurnAdministrative 6' Grants Manager

Lisa EberhardtCommunications & Special Projects Coordinator

Mandy HokePolicy Associate

Dylan JohnsonResearch Associate

Tammy KingPolicy Associate

Matthew LeathermanPublic Policy Intern

Mary RaschkoCommunications Intern

Chad SpoonProgram Assistant

ConsultantsEd Crowe

Senior Policy Advisor

Diana MontgomeryResearch Consultant

John NortonSenior Communications Advisor

The Southeast Center for Teaching Qualityconducts research, informs policy, and engages leadershipin order to enhance opportunities for all students to have

competent, caring, and qualified teachers.

17BEST COPY AVAILABLE

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

National Library of Education (NLE)Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

-®

IC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket) form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form(either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").

EFF-089 (9/97)