THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

 

TO:	Committee on Higher Education and Professional Practice
FROM:	Johanna Duncan-Poitier
SUBJECT:	Update on Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs
DATE:	January 26, 2006
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goals 2 and 3
AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

SUMMARY

 

Issue for Discussion

 

This item provides the 2004-2005 annual report on alternative teacher preparation programs.

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

For information.

 

Proposed Handling

 

The item will come before the Higher Education and Professional Practice Committee for discussion at its February 2006 meeting. 

 

Procedural History

 

In July 2000 alternative teacher preparation programs were created in Section 52.21(b)(3)(xvii) of Commissioner’s Regulations.

 

Background Information

 

Each year, the Department reports on the activities and status of the State's alternative teacher preparation (ATP) programs, including data on ATP candidates.  The 2004-05 report is attached for your information.  ATP programs, a small but important source of highly qualified teachers, reflect partnerships between institutions of higher education and local school districts, as well as collaborations with teachers’ unions.  These programs serve candidates who hold postsecondary degrees in fields other than teaching, preparing them within a compressed schedule to be classroom teachers.  The New York City Teaching Fellows Program is the State's largest alternative program.  Other, smaller ATP programs exist in New York City and upstate. 

 

          ATP programs meet the same requirements as traditional programs and provide a built-in mechanism of new teacher induction that appears to be effective in preparing new teachers.  During the 2004-2005 school year, 11 colleges and universities offered alternative teacher preparation programs through the Teaching Fellows Program in New York City, another 7 institutions provided non-Teaching Fellows alternative programs in New York City, and 6 institutions offered ATP programs upstate.  The number of candidates enrolled in these programs for 2004-2005 totaled 2,621; more than 2,500 of those actually began teaching during that academic year.

 

          Department staff continue to monitor ATP programs through dedicated on-site visits or as part of teacher education program accreditation visits.  During the 2004-2005 academic year, five institutions (four in New York City, and one upstate) offering ATP programs underwent teacher accreditation site visits.  Three institutions received full accreditation, and two institutions received provisional accreditation from their chosen accrediting body.  Accreditors found no issues specific to the ATP programs.

 

          During the 2004-2005 reporting year, the Department also participated in the second Annual Statewide Meeting on Alternative Teacher Preparation.  The conference, sponsored by the Project Leadership Team of the Teacher Recruitment and Transition to Teaching projects, focused on the retention of ATP-prepared teachers.  The issue of retention framed group discussions on candidate selection, pre-service and introductory components, new teacher induction, and the potential impact of new education opportunities for alternatively prepared teachers. A summary of the meeting is included as Attachment 2.

 

Lastly, the Department is looking carefully at the relationship between alternatively prepared teachers and student success as part of our commitment to review and evaluate Regents teaching policy.  Last month, Dr. James Wyckoff and Dr. Donald Boyd of the University at Albany presented preliminary results of an independent study they are conducting that examines the various pathways for teacher preparation and their impact on student achievement.  A considerable part of that discussion centered upon teachers prepared through alternative pathways, including graduates of ATP programs. Preliminary data suggest that over time, with appropriate support, these teachers have a significant impact on student learning.  These findings, along with input from the field and other pertinent data and information, will help guide our work to continue to strengthen and support the preparation of high quality teachers into the future.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

N/A

 

 

Timetable for Implementation

 

N/A

 

 

 

Attachment

Alternative Teacher Preparation in New York State

2004-2005 Annual Report

 

          Alternative teacher preparation is a relatively small but important source of highly qualified teachers for schools in New York State.  By design, alternative teacher preparation programs are partnerships between institutions of higher education (IHEs) and local school districts, as well as collaborations with teachers’ unions, for the purpose of preparing teachers in a compressed time schedule.  Although candidates complete their programs in two to three years, they must meet all the requirements for initial teaching certificates by the end of their programs. This year’s report includes data on the largest program in the State, the New York City Teaching Fellows Program, as well as smaller alternative preparation programs in New York City and upstate.

 

          This report describes New York State alternative teacher preparation programs as of June 2005.  Part I provides a general update of all alternative teacher preparation programs in New York State.  Part II discusses support and outreach efforts to alternative teacher preparation programs.  The New York City Teaching Fellows program is the focus of Part III.  Part IV focuses on New York City non-Teaching Fellows alternative teacher preparation program data and Part V concludes by summarizing upstate alternative teacher preparation program data. 

 

Note: This report contains information and data on transitional B candidates only, as there were no transitional C candidates during the 2004-2005 school year.  Also, the tables in this report are descriptive; they are not intended to imply cause and effect.

 

PART I – General Program Update

 

          Scope. During the 2004-2005 school year, there were 11 colleges and universities offering alternative teacher preparation programs through the Teaching Fellows Program in New York City, 7 colleges and universities offering non-Teaching Fellows alternative teacher preparation programs in New York City, and 6 colleges and universities offering alternative teacher preparation programs upstate.  The number of candidates enrolled in these programs for 2004-2005 totaled 2,621.  Of this total, 2,543 actually began teaching in 2004-2005. See Attachment 1 for the names of institutions offering alternative teacher preparation programs in 2004-2005, as well as the certificate areas offered by each.

 

          As shown in Table 1.1, both the number of teachers prepared through alternative preparation programs and the number of institutions of higher education offering such programs peaked in 2003-2004. For 2004-2005, the number of teachers prepared dropped, but was higher than other years except 2003-2004.

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1.1
Alternative Teacher Preparation Program Growth
Fall 2000 through January 2005
Based on the Number of Candidates Starting to Teach
Academic Year	Cohort	Colleges and Universities Participating Each Year			New ATP Candidates
		NYC TF	Upstate and Non-TF	Total	NYC	Upstate and Non-TF	Total
00-01	2000 Fall	3	0	3	314	0	385
00-01	2001 January	2	0	2	71	0
01-02	2001 Fall	13	2	15	1,094	62	1,192
01-02	2002 January	1	0	1	36	0
02-03	2002 Fall	15	3	18	1,829	82	1,911
03-04	2003 Fall	12	6	18	2,442	79	2,833
03-04	2003 Rolling	1	0	1	83	143
03-04	2004 January	2	0	2	86	0
04-05	2004 Fall	11	13	24	1,785	473	2,543
04-05	2004 Midyear	1	4	5	197	88
Total new candidates prepared through New York State alternative teacher preparation programs					7,937	927	8,864
SOURCES:  NYC DOE (updated data) and upstate participating colleges, fall 2005.
NOTE:  Colleges with Rolling, January and Midyear cohorts also had fall cohorts. Non-Teaching Fellows from NYC institutions were first included in 2004-2005.

 

          Focus. In keeping with the intent of the regulation to focus on shortage areas, 65 percent of Teaching Fellows were certified in the areas of mathematics, the sciences, special education, and ESL.  The percentage of New York City non-Teaching Fellows certified in these shortage areas is 59. Upstate programs have always focused on locally identified shortage areas, including the above areas and foreign languages. 

 

          Impact. Since the inception of alternative teacher preparation programs in 2000-2001, over 8,500 individuals have been prepared to teach through this route. 

 

Mentoring. The New York City Department of Education budgeted $36 million for 2004-05 to implement a citywide mentoring program for all first-year teachers, including first-year Teaching Fellows.  Approximately 300 mentors were trained by the New Teacher Center from the University of California, Santa Cruz.   Anecdotal evidence from institutions indicates that the process for matching mentors to first year teachers has improved since the inception of the mentoring program.  Program directors also report that most 2004-2005 Fellows had mentors assigned and in place early in the fall semester. This was an improvement over previous years, and indications are that improvement is continuing.

 

          Mentoring in the upstate programs continues to be a function of the partnerships between school districts and college programs. Peer coaching and traditional mentoring models are being used to the satisfaction of all partners.

 

          Oversight. Staff in the Office of College and University Evaluation continue to monitor the implementation of alternative teacher preparation programs.  When a college or university with alternative teacher preparation programs is scheduled for a teacher education program accreditation site visit, a review of alternative teacher preparation programs becomes a focus of the visit.  During the 2004-2005 academic year, teacher accreditation site visits were conducted at five institutions (4 NYC, 1 upstate) offering alternative teacher preparation programs.  Three institutions received full accreditation and two institutions received provisional accreditation from their chosen accrediting body, with no issues specific to these programs being identified.

 

PART II – Program Support and Outreach

 

          Continuation of Federal Grants. Based on annual progress reports submitted to the U.S. Department of Education, the Teacher Quality Enhancement ($464,815) and the Transition to Teaching ($400,000) grants were continued for 2004-2005. Grant funds are awarded on a competitive basis to independent institutions working as partners with the New York City Teaching Fellows Program. For 2004-2005, four universities received Teacher Quality Enhancement awards and three received Transition to Teaching awards totaling over $850,000. In addition, the Department received supplemental Teacher Quality Enhancement funds totaling $67,000 in 2004-2005.  These funds were used to support two special projects:

 

·       St. John’s University is conducting a mathematics resource project.  The project’s goal is to create and disseminate exemplary lesson plans for middle and high school mathematics topics. A compact disc of mathematics lessons, including video demonstrations, is being created to aid math teachers in creating lesson plans.

 

·       Long Island University-Brooklyn is undertaking a research project that brings together various faculty, administrators, and students in their Teaching Fellows program to analyze first-year student teaching portfolios for trends, themes, etc., regarding the support and growth of new teachers. Project participants are publishing a monograph of the results.

 

The 2004-2005 award year was the last funded year of the three-year Teacher Quality Enhancement grant, although the programs will continue on a no-cost extension for 2005-2006 to complete project goals.  The five-year Transition to Teaching grant will continue for two more years.

 

Project Leadership Team. The Project Leadership Team is comprised of representatives from institutions receiving Teacher Quality Enhancement and Transition to Teaching project funds, the New York City Department of Education, and the State Education Department. During 2004-2005 the Project Leadership Team met ­four times to discuss issues and strategies for improving alternative teacher preparation programs and to share best practices. 

 

On March 7, 2005 the Project Leadership Team sponsored a statewide meeting of institutional representatives from alternative teacher preparation programs. The focus of the meeting was retaining alternatively prepared teachers in New York State. Sixty participants from around the state attended, including Deans, program directors, program faculty, PreK-12 school representatives from New York City, New York City Department of Education staff, as well as representatives of Teach for America, the United Federation of Teachers, and the New York State Professional Standards and Practices Board for Teaching.  The meeting consisted of presentations and roundtable discussions focusing on four topics related to retention—selection, pre-service program components, new teacher induction, and long-term retention. Featured speakers included Dr. James Wyckoff, Professor of Public Policy, SUNY Albany; Dr. Elizabeth Arons, Chief Executive Officer for Human Resources, New York City Department of Education, and Vicki Bernstein, Director of the Office of Alternative Certification, New York City Department of Education. Dr. Wyckoff presented preliminary results of the Pathways to Teaching study as a way to focus the retention discussion. Summary comments of the meeting are attached as Attachment 2. 

 

Another project supported by the Project Leadership Team involved the Department evaluator for the two grants conducting focus group interviews with first- and second-year special education Teaching Fellows during the spring of 2005.  Results of the interviews have been compiled and are being reviewed by members of the Project Leadership Team. When complete, the report is expected to provide insight into the retention of special education Teaching Fellows and will be used as part of project evaluation requirements.

 

Outreach. As an outreach effort, a brochure was again distributed in Spanish and English for use at the 18^th annual Somos El Futuro Conference in April.  The brochure introduces prospective candidates to alternative teacher preparation programs and includes contact information for colleges offering these programs.

         

PART III – The New York City Teaching Fellows Program

 

          For the first year since the inception of the Teaching Fellows Program, the number of candidates admitted has decreased from a high of 2,442 in fall 2003 to 1,785 in fall 2004.  In addition, the Teaching Fellows Program prepared 197 midyear Fellows in 2004-2005 compared with 169 in 2003-2004. The trend is moving toward more focused preparation of teachers for the shortage areas of special education, mathematics, English as a Second Language, and bilingual education.

 

          Age of Candidates. Compared with the fall 2003 cohort of Teaching Fellows, a higher percentage of fall 2004 Teaching Fellows were age 25 or less—37 percent in 2003 and 47 percent in 2004.  The breakdown for other age groups represented is 26 to 35 years, 31 percent; 36 to 45 years, 9 percent; and over 45 years, 6 percent. Age information was unavailable for 7 percent of the candidates. Of the total number of Fellows, almost 80 percent self-identified as being under age 36. (See Table 3.1) 

 

 

          Certification Areas. Fall 2004 Fellows were enrolled in graduate programs in 17 certification areas.  The five areas with the largest numbers of fall 2004 Fellows were special education, 557; mathematics/Math Immersion combined, 322; elementary education, 268; English, 246; and the sciences, 100.  (See Table 3.2)

 

 

          Schools with Fall 2004 Fellows. The 1,785 Fellows who began teaching in fall 2004 were assigned to 684 public schools, approximately 60 percent of which were located in the Bronx and Brooklyn.  Fellows continue to be assigned to schools in every borough.  (See Table 3.3)

 

 

          Fellows per School. Forty-four percent of the schools with fall 2004 Fellows had only one new Fellow.  Fifty-seven percent of fall 2004 Fellows worked in a school with four or fewer new Fellows.  (See Table 3.4) In 2003-2004, the presence of several new Fellows in the same school resulted in higher retention rates; however, this was not indicated in the 2004-2005 data.

 

 

          Performance Categories of Schools with Fall 2004 Fellows. Sixty percent of fall 2004 Fellows were assigned to schools not identified as low-performing, 39 percent were assigned to Schools in Need of Improvement (SINI), and 6 percent were assigned to Schools Under Registration Review (SURR).  There were 39 schools classified as both SINI and SURR schools that employed 102 Fellows.  SURR schools represented 4 percent of all schools with fall 2004 Fellows and were located in every borough except Staten Island.  SINI schools represented 31.5 percent of all schools with fall 2004 Fellows and were located in every borough of the city.  (See Tables 3.5 and 3.6)

 

 

 

 

         

          Graduate Institutions. Fall 2004 Fellows were in graduate programs at 11 colleges and universities.  Seven institutions enrolled more than 100 Fellows, two institutions enrolled between 50 and 100 Fellows, and two institutions enrolled less than 50 Fellows.  (See Table 3.7)

 

 

          First Year Retention. First year retention rates for fall 2004 Fellows varied slightly by borough, school performance category, and certification area. These variations are correlations, but imply no causation. (See Tables 3.8-3.10) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

          Long-term Retention Rates. Since 2000, retention rates for June cohorts, which include the vast majority of Fellows, have fluctuated, but show an increase from 86 percent in 2000 to 93 percent in 2004. Table 3.11 shows five years of retention rates for cohorts beginning with the fall 2000 cohort and ending with the fall 2004 cohort.  (See Table 3.12)

 

PART IV – New York City Non-Teaching Fellows Programs

 

          An increasing number of candidates are entering teaching in New York City through alternative preparation programs that are not part of the New York City Teaching Fellows Program. Therefore, beginning with 2004-2005, data has been collected on these candidates. Seven institutions offered such programs in this year, enrolling 501 candidates, 485 of whom began teaching in 2004-2005.

 

Age of Candidates. Table 4.1 shows the age distribution of New York City non-Teaching Fellows alternative teacher preparation program candidates.  Ninety-two percent of candidates who reported their age are 35 years or less.  (See Table 4.1)

 

 

          Certification Areas. New York City non-Teaching Fellows candidates sought certification in 16 areas.  The top five areas for certification, in descending order, are elementary education, special education 1-6, mathematics, special education B-2, and English.  (See Table 4.2)

 

Table 4.2 Distribution of 2004-2005 NYC Non-Teaching Fellow Alternative Teacher Preparation Certificates by Certification Area
Certification Area	Number of Certificates		Percent of Certificates
Elementary Education	124		26
Elementary Education (Bilingual)	20		4
Special Education, B-2	54		11
Special Education, 1-6	95		20
Special Education, 7-12	2		0
Social Studies	18		4
English	41		8
Spanish	14		3
Math	65		13
General Science	18		4
Biology	16		3
Earth Science	5		1
Chemistry	4		1
Physics	4		1
Bilingual Extension	3		1
Other	1		0
Totals	4841		100
SOURCE: New York City IHEs, Fall 2005 1 The number of certificates is less than the number of candidates because data was not reported for all candidates.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Schools Served. Based on available data, 2004-2005 New York City non-Teaching Fellows alternative teacher preparation candidates served in 258 schools.  A SINI or SURR classification applied to 38 percent of the schools in which candidates served. (See Table 4.3) This is down from 42 percent in 2003-2004.

 

Table 4.3 Distribution of Schools Served by Districts and School Performance Category 2004-2005
Category	Number of Districts/Schools	Percent of Schools
SINI Schools	58	22
SURR Schools	42	16
Not SINI/SURR Schools	158	61
Total Number of Schools	258	100*
SOURCE: New York City IHEs, Fall 2005 1 The total number of schools and number of schools per classification area is based on available data and  may not be complete. * Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

 

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Graduate Institutions. New York City non-Teaching Fellows candidates were enrolled in programs at seven colleges and universities.  Two institutions enrolled more than 100 candidates, two enrolled between 50 and 100 candidates, and three enrolled less than 50 candidates.  (See Table 4.4)

 

 

          Retention Rates. Candidates in non-Teaching Fellows programs in New York City had retention rates similar to Teaching Fellows, with 90 percent of the 2003-2004 cohort completing year 1, as compared with 93 percent for Teaching Fellows. Both groups of the 2004-2005 cohort had 93 percent retention rates for year 1.  (See Table 4.5)

 

Table 4.5 New York City Non-Teaching Fellows Retention Rates for 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 Cohorts
	2003-2004 Cohort		2004-2005 Cohort
	Number	Percent	Number	Percent
Started Teaching Year 1 Finished Teaching Year 1	396 355	100 90	497 461	100 93
Started Teaching Year 2 Finished Teaching Year 2	320* 314	81 79

SOURCE: Participating Institutions, Fall 2005

*27 candidates are unaccounted for

 

PART V – Upstate Alternative Teacher Preparation Programs

 

Age of Candidates. Table 5.1 shows the age distribution of 2004-2005 upstate alternative teacher preparation candidates.  When the age of candidates is available, 64 percent of candidates are over the age of 36.  (See Table 5.1)

 

 

          Certification Areas. Upstate 2004-2005 alternative teacher preparation candidates were enrolled in teacher education programs in 13 certification areas.  Many candidates sought multiple certifications.  For example, of the 18 candidates pursuing elementary education, 14 were concurrently pursuing special education 1-6 and 5-9 certifications.  The top five categories, in descending order, were mathematics, biology, childhood education, students with disabilities 1-6, and students with disabilities 5-9.  (See Table 5.2)

 

Table 5.2 Distribution of 2004-2005 Upstate Alternative Teacher Preparation Certificates by Certification Area
Certification Area	Number of Certificates		Percent of Certificates
Childhood Education	18		10
Special Education, 1-6	14		8
Special Education, 5-9	14		8
Social Studies	7		4
English	13		8
Spanish	12		7
French	3		2
Math	37		22
General Science	6		3
Biology	27		16
Earth Science	6		3
Chemistry	6		3
Physics	9		5
Totals	172		100*
SOURCE: Participating institutions, fall 2005 NOTE: Total number of certificates is higher than the total number of candidates receiving certificates because one candidate can have multiple certification areas. * Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding

 

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Schools Served. Based on available data, 37 districts and 27 schools were served by upstate alternative teacher preparation candidates in 2004-2005.  Of the schools served, 26% were classified as SINI or SURR schools.  (See Table 5.3)

 

Table 5.3 Distribution of Schools Served by Districts and School Performance Category
Category	Number of Districts/Schools		Percent of Schools
Districts1	37		N/A
Total Number of Schools2	27		100
SINI Schools	5		19
SURR Schools	2		7
Not SINI/SURR Schools	20		74
SOURCE: Upstate IHEs, Fall 2005 1 The total number of districts is based on available data. 2 The total number of schools is lower than the number of districts because information about individual schools was not available for some IHEs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Institutions. Upstate alternative teacher preparation candidates were in graduate programs at six colleges and universities during 2004-2005.  One institution enrolled over 50 students, two institutions enrolled 20 to 50 students, and three enrolled fewer than 20 students.  (See Table 5.4)

 

 

Retention Rates. The cumulative first year retention rate for 2004-2005 upstate alternative teacher preparation candidates was 99 percent.  For the 2003-2004 cohort of upstate alternative teacher preparation candidates, the first and second year retention rates were 96 percent and 92 percent, respectively.  (See Table 5.5)  The first year retention rates are in the same range as other rates reported across the nation for teachers with 1-3 years of experience.  (NCES, 2004) 

 

Table 5.5 Retention Rates for 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 Cohorts Upstate Alternative Teacher Preparation Candidates
	2003-2004 Cohort	2004-2005 Cohort
Started Teaching Year 1 Finished Teaching Year 1	100 96	100 99
Started Teaching Year 2 Finished Teaching Year 2	92 92

 

 

References

 

National Center for Education Statistics.  Teacher Attrition and Mobility: Results from the Teacher Follow-up Survey, 2000-01.  E.D. Tabs, NCES-2004-301.  August 2004.  Table 2, page 9, shows one-year retention rates for U.S. teachers with 1-3 years of teaching experience, with retention defined as staying in the teaching profession.  The range is 91.5 to 92.8 percent.

 

                                               

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Attachment 2

 

Second Annual Alternative Teacher Preparation Conference:

Retention of Alternatively Prepared Teachers in New York State

 

            On Monday March 7^th over sixty people participated in the Second Annual Statewide Meeting on Alternative Teacher Preparation, held at St. John’s University in Manhattan and sponsored by the Project Leadership Team of the federally funded Teacher Recruitment and Transition to Teaching projects.  The conference addressed the retention of alternatively prepared teachers in New York State, but focused primarily on New York City and the New York City Teaching Fellows Program.  The purpose of the conference was to share experiences and best practices in order to facilitate learning and understanding about retention of alternatively prepared teachers.  The following is a synopsis of the conference.

 

Introductions:  Ruth Pagerey, Supervisor of Teacher Education Programs in the New York State Education Department’s Office of College and University Evaluation, and Dr. Elizabeth Arons, Director of Human Resources for the New York City Department of Education, made opening remarks and comments. 

 

Presentations:  Dr. James Wyckoff, Professor of Public Administration and Policy at the State University of New York at Albany, presented data on teacher characteristics and retention in New York City and surrounding districts.  Dr. Wyckoff is currently conducting extensive research in New York City on how teacher preparation relates to teacher retention and student outcomes.  One of his findings is that a teacher who was a resident of New York City at the time of certification is ten times more likely than teachers from outside of New York City to continue teaching in New York City after his/her first year teaching.  Vicki Bernstein, Director of the Office of Alternative Certification for the New York City Department of Education, explained the perception and reality of retention for alternatively prepared teachers, primarily the New York City Teaching Fellows.  She noted that alternatively prepared teachers have approximately the same retention rate as traditionally prepared teachers, and that myths about Teaching Fellows are not supported by data. 

           

The remainder of the day was spent in group discussions focused on four topics and action steps to improve retention of alternatively prepared teachers.  The following is a summary of the discussions. 

 

Selection and Program Information:  The discussion centered on the selection criteria and limitations of the Teaching Fellows selection process.  The selection process begins with pre-screening of a candidate’s written materials.  This is followed by an interview session where candidates teach a sample lesson, are given a brief description of the Teaching Fellows Program, have a personal interview, and complete a writing sample.  Based upon the interview and written materials, a recommendation is made.  The ideal candidates possess strong verbal skills, are accountable, and have a bright disposition.  Some of the limitations in the selection process are legal constraints that hinder the staff’s ability to evaluate candidates.  Other restrictions include limited interactions with candidates and subjective results.  The group felt constant feedback from universities about fellows would be one way to help strengthen the selection process. 

 

Pre-Service/Introductory Component:  The group agreed that this is an important and influential time for prospective teachers.  The group stressed the importance of relationships between the administration and Teaching Fellows, and the need to understand personal differences among Fellows.  A few of the group’s ideas for this portion of the program were to create a “Fellow buddy” program to help Fellows support one another, and to incorporate more teaching rotations during the summer portion of the program so that Fellows have more varied experiences before beginning their teaching.

 

New Teacher Induction: The group felt communication was key to the support of new teachers.  Communication should be continuous and include teachers, mentors, and school leaders.  Communication could also be enhanced through the use of technology.  The group proposed creating online work or discussion groups, to facilitate communication between teachers, mentors, and administrators to support the Fellows.  Another idea was to build a stronger relationship between the universities and the public schools where Fellows are placed.    

 

Long-Term Retention:  The group defined long-term retention as completion of the Transitional B certification.  The group felt that encouraging teachers to explore new educational opportunities would help increase retention.  Some of the discussed opportunities included: educational research, pursuing new certifications, and educational leadership programs.  The group indicated that keeping alternatively prepared teachers involved in education would increase the likelihood that teachers would stay in their schools.

 

Further references:  Research findings from Dr. Wyckoff and his colleagues are available at http://www.teacherpolicyresearch.org/.    Another resource on teacher retention is: E. Hanushek, J. Kain, and S. Rivkin. “The Revolving Door: A Path-Breaking Study of Teachers in Texas Reveals that Working Conditions Matter More than Salary.” Education Next 4, no. 1 (Winter 2004): 77-82. Full Text at:

http://www.educationnext.org/unabridged/20041/76.pdf