New Teacher Induction and “Tenure with Teeth”

 Improving Hiring and Staffing in a Nation Where Teaching is At Risk (Part II)

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

 

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   In our last Blog, we initiated a four-part Series where we began to systematically dissect what districts and schools need to improve the teacher recruitment, selection, professional development/training, evaluation, tenure, and continuing appointment process.

   The ultimate goal of these processes is:

   To ensure that teachers consistently teach (a) academic and (b) individual and group social, emotional, and behavioral information, content, and skills to students in effective, differentiated ways such that, in a developmentally-sensitive way, they learn, master, and are able to independently apply these (a) to real-world problems or situations, and eventually (b) to successful employment and community functioning.

   To facilitate this process, we encouraged districts and schools to recognize that teacher evaluation needs to move away from an isolated “personnel appraisal” perspective that focuses on (a) “Should this teacher keep his/her job?” and/or (b) “How can I (financially) motivate this teacher to be a consistently effective teacher?”

   Instead, we pointed to the importance of a “professional development and growth” perspective where teachers (a) are continuously upgrading their instructional practices to align with the most-current research and content, and (b) are consistently demonstrating their dedication to their students, colleagues, schools, and communities because they are guided through training, coaching, consultation, and evaluations of their growth and efficacy.

   We noted that effective teachers almost always are individually or collegially motivated to positively impact their students. . . but they are also skilled in their craft. Critically, these skills develop over time, and are supported—once again, formally and informally—by district-provided training and coaching, as well as individually-selected opportunities to advance and specialize.

   We also stated:

Critically, if a teacher is not suitably skilled. . . just like one of their students, they may need modified or more intensive instruction, practice, and coaching.

 

But if a teacher is not motivated. . . this should eventually become an administrative—not a training or professional development—issue.

 

And at the far end of the spectrum of poor motivation or insubordinate behavior, a teacher should be put on a Professional Development Plan by their administrator, and—if unsuccessful—should be reassigned with continued oversight or, as necessary, terminated.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Revisiting the Four Pillars of Teacher Preparation and Proficiency

   In order to attain the ultimate goal above, we recommended that districts and schools focus consciously and planfully to four Pillars of Teacher Preparation and Proficiency:

·       Teacher Hiring and Orientation

·       Teacher Induction and Tenure

·       Continuing Teacher Appointments and Coaching, and

·       Teacher Leadership and Advancement

   In Part I of this Blog Series, we then addressed the first area.

[CLICK HERE for Part I of this Blog Series]

   Here, we noted that districts or schools—to ensure quality hires when they have open positions—must:

·       Know what they functionally need a new teacher to know and do in the classroom (described in observable, measurable, and behavioral terms); 

·       Determine—during the recruitment and interview process—what their candidates know and can do based on these needs;

·       Hire only the candidates that come closest to meeting these needs; 

·       Functionally orient their new hires as quickly as possible; and 

·       Simultaneously close candidates’ knowledge or skills gaps as quickly as possible.

   In the first phase of this process, the Search Committee reviews each candidate’s application portfolio (e.g., resume, transcripts, personal statements, recommendations, work samples) to determine whether they meet the required qualifications of the position, and if they are in the “top group” to be invited in for an interview. Critically, no one should be interviewed unless they meet these two criteria.

   In the second interview phase, we suggested that schools consider an “carousel” approach that:

·       Involves representative staff who serve the school in different capacities; 

·       Includes different interview formats, activities (e.g., live teaching simulations), and discussions to match every candidate to the desired climate and culture, functional job and position demands, and staff and school expectations; and 

·       Gives all interview participants a full and active voice in the final selection of the favored candidate(s).

   After a candidate is offered and accepts the position, we then described a Teacher Orientation process covering specific areas of emphasis, emphasizing that:

   Teachers need to be thoroughly, systematically, and functionally well-oriented to their new district and school as soon and as effectively as possible for them (a) to feel settled, safe, secure, comfortable, welcome, and integrated into their new setting(s); and (b) to successfully meet and exceed their instructional, collegial, and other professional responsibilities.

   We stated:

Critically, part of this orientation also includes an introduction—to all new hires—to specific initiatives or trainings that a district and/or school has embraced and started.

 

For example, if the school has adopted specific approaches to literacy or math instruction, to teaching social skills or other social-emotional strategies, or to providing remediation or interventions through computer-assisted supports. . . the new teachers should be (a) alerted—early on—to these approaches, (b) given the resources and an initial overview to help them support these initiatives in their classrooms, and (c) provided a schedule of how and when they will be formally trained to the same level of proficiency as their colleagues.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Pillar II: Teacher Induction and Tenure

   The second Pillar in the process of nurturing and sustaining consistently effective teachers through high quality recruitment, selection, professional development/training, evaluation, tenure, and continuing appointment processes. . . is the Teacher Induction and Teacher Tenure Pillar.

   In the Teacher Induction area, we recommend that teachers learn, master, and demonstrate a skills- and outcomes-based scope and sequence of professional content and skills in the specific domains needed by all teachers and students to be proficient.

   In the Teacher Tenure area, we recommend a multi-dimensional tenure process (“with teeth”) that evaluates teachers’ growth and competence in three areas: (a) Research and Curriculum Development; (b) Instruction and Student Learning; and (c) School, District, and/or Community Service.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Teacher Induction Process

   Many state departments of education or licensure have a required Beginning Teacher Program that moves teachers—who have just graduated from university teacher training programs or who have entered alternative certification programs—from Provisional State Certification to Full or Permanent State Certification. This typically occurs during their first formal year of teaching, and it often involves supervision by a teacher-mentor.

   While important, districts and schools should extend the new teacher induction process into a multi-year set of scaffolded activities and opportunities that teachers experience to fully prepare them to be effective, seasoned, and tenured professionals. The components of this process are detailed below.

_ _ _ _ _

Who

   Once hired, there are three kinds of “new” teachers:

·       Novice Teachers are both new to the school and district (unless they interned there), and new to the teaching profession. They enter their new jobs with no years of tenure-earning experience “in rank.” 

·       Transfer Teachers have teaching experience at another school, but they have been hired by a new school either from within their district or from a different district. These teachers are given credit for the number of documented and successful years of experience in rank.

If they are hired from within their district, they will retain their tenure status if already earned. If they are hired from outside their new district, given (a) the position they are filling, (b) their status as already-tenured, or (c) at least five years of documented and successful experience, they may be hired by their new district with tenure.

·       Transition Teachers are experienced teachers who are making a significant instructional shift to teach a new grade level (for example, from teaching Grade 5 to teaching Middle School) or in a new academic area (moving, for example, from teaching math to literacy, general high school to Advanced Placement courses, special education to general education).

As with the Transfer Teachers, if Transition Teachers are “hired” from within the district, they will retain their years of experience in rank, and their tenure status if already earned. If hired from outside of the district, they will receive credit for their previous successful years of experience in rank, and they may be hired by the new district, as appropriate, with tenure.

­­_ _ _ _ _

Who, How Long, and What

   As a foundation, we believe that teachers—who work in states offering this status—should receive tenure after five years in rank. We also believe, as noted above, that teachers earn tenure (we call this “Tenure with Teeth”) by successfully completing specific activities and demonstrating consistent and ongoing proficiency in three domains:

·       Research and Curriculum Development; 

·       Instruction and Student Learning; and 

·       School, District, and Community Service.

   In the first two of these three areas (the third area will be addressed below):

   Novice Teachers need to participate in a planned, systematic Induction Program for their first three years in rank, and then, if successful, they can continue to teach and go up for tenure after five years.

   Transfer Teachers need to go through a one to three year Induction process that is organized around their existing skills and experience, and—especially—their knowledge and skill gaps. These gaps typically involve (a) (a) professional development initiatives and/or (b) curriculum and instruction approaches that the district or school has committed to and adopted, and that are unfamiliar to the newly hired teacher.

   If, for example, the new teacher was hired with three years of experience in rank, they would proceed through the Induction process (optimally in two years or less), and then go up for tenure during their fifth year.

   If they are hired with tenure, they still would go through the Induction process. . . “exiting” this process when their knowledge and skill gaps have been successfully addressed.

_ _ _ _ _

   If hired from within the district, Transition Teachers also need to go through a one to three year Induction process, but it will be heavily focused on the curriculum and instruction knowledge and skills that they need to successfully transition to their new grade or academic level or area.

   If hired from outside the district, these teachers also will engage in training and supervision in any professional development initiatives being implemented by their new district or school that are unfamiliar to them.

   Once again, the Induction process can be aligned with the five-year tenure process as relevant.

­­­­_ _ _ _ _

More “What’s”

   Expanding on the three teacher tenure domains above, districts and schools need to develop a scaffolded, multi-year professional development process of training, implementation, coaching, consultation, and evaluation that includes activities and opportunities for teachers to learn specific content and skills in large and small group settings, with mentors and with peers at their same level of experience, and through collegial and independent study.

   From a content perspective, the professional development process should address (a) Research and Curriculum Development, and (b) Instruction and Student Learning in the following areas:

·       Academics. Every teacher, regardless of who and what they teach, should understand and be skilled in teaching the “Core Four” subject areas—literacy, mathematics, oral expression, and written expression; as well as the content in their specific academic area of emphasis.

All academic disciplines, at one point or another, depend on the Core Four in order for students to be learn and be fully successful—even music, art, or physical education. Thus, all teachers need know the foundational science-to-instruction practices for all Core Four disciplines, as well as how they apply to their specific area of emphasis.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Classroom Management and Social-Emotional Learning. Every teacher should know and be skilled in the science-to-practice of student behavior, motivation, engagement, and classroom management, and in how to teach students interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills... at the developmental level(s) of the students they are teaching. 

In their teacher training programs, too many teachers do not receive practical coursework and training, guided practice and coaching, or formal evaluation and feedback in classroom management organization and strategies, and/or in social-emotional learning and social skills training. As such, as they enter the field or a new grade or content area, they may have the skills to teach students from an academic perspective, but they never get the chance because their students are not motivated and attentive, and they are demonstrating inappropriate behavior or are engaged in peer conflict.

_ _ _ _ _ 

·       Technological- and Computer-Assisted Instruction and Application. Every teacher should know and be skilled in using essential computer software programs and applications, and they should be taught and master the more strategic technological and computer-assisted programs and applications purchased by their district or school to enhance or assess student learning.

This includes how to effectively use (a) computer-assisted instruction alongside core instruction, as well as (b) assistive supports—especially those accommodations and modifications (for example, speech-to-text and text-to-speech) that are built into most computers today.

_ _ _ _ _

·       District- or School-Specific Special Initiatives. As discussed above, districts and schools should additionally provide new teachers with the same training and coaching that their colleagues received relative to “special” district- or school-wide initiatives. While some of this training may overlap with the areas described above, some of the training may be unique, individualized, or proprietary to the school.

Examples here might include: Dyslexia or Orton-Gillingham training in literacy; Stop & Think Social Skills Program training in social-emotional learning; or Cooperative, Project-based, or Flipped Learning in instruction.

_ _ _ _ _

The How—Subset 1

   In order to actualize, for example, Novice teachers’ Research and Curriculum Development, and Instruction and Student Learning proficiencies in the content areas above over their first five years in rank, they must receive simultaneous training, coaching, and evaluation in the pedagogical processes that make teaching work.

   Using Danielson’s Framework for Teaching rubric as a professional development and growth (not a personnel appraisal) exemplar, these pedagogical processes might focus on:

Domain 1: PLANNING AND PREPARATION

 

1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy: What is the content being taught?  What prerequisite learning is required?

 

1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of Students: Characterize the class.  How will you modify this lesson for groups of individual students?

 

1c. Selecting Instructional Outcomes: What do you want the student to learn during the lesson?

 

1d. Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources: What resources were considered for this lesson and rejected?  Why?  What resources will be used?  Why?

 

1e. Designing Coherent Instruction: List very briefly the steps of the lesson.

 

1f. Designing Student Assessments: How will you measure the goals articulated in 1c?  What does success look like?

_ _ _ _ _

 

Domain 2: THE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

 

2a. Creating a Climate of Respect and Rapport: Teacher interaction with students. Student interactions with one another.

 

2b. Creating a Culture for Learning: Importance of Content. Expectations for learning and achievement.  Student Pride in work.

 

2c. Managing Classroom Procedures: Instructional Groups. Transitions. Materials & Supplies. Performance of non-instructional Duties.

 

2d.  Managing Student Behavior: Expectations. Monitoring Student Behavior.  Response to Student Behavior

 

2e.  Organizing the Physical Space: Safety and Accessibility. Arrangement of Furniture & Use of Physical Resources

_ _ _ _ _

 

Domain 3: INSTRUCTION

 

3a. Communication with Students: Expectations for learning.  Directions and Procedures.  Explanations of content. Use of Oral and Written Language.

 

3b. Using Questioning & Discussion Techniques: Quality of Questions/ Prompts.  Discussion Techniques.  Student Participation.

 

3c. Engaging Students in Learning: Activities & Assignments. Grouping of Students. Instructional Materials & Resources. Structure & Pacing.

 

3d. Assessing Student Learning: Assessment Criteria. Monitoring of Learning.  Student Feedback. Self-Assessment & Progress monitoring.

 

3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness: Lesson Adjustment.  Response to Students. Persistence.

_ _ _ _ _

 

Domain 4: PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES

 

4a.  Reflecting on Teaching: What reflections caused you to design the lesson as you did?  After the lesson, state whether the objectives have been met, specifically by whom, and how do you know.

 

4b. Growing and Developing Professionally: What aspects of this lesson are the result of some recent professional learning?

 

4c. Showing Professionalism: In what ways have you been an advocate for students that relate directly to your instruction?

_ _ _ _ _

   The expectation here is that (a) Novice (and other) teachers will receive embedded and ongoing feedback in the Framework areas above as there are embedded in the content areas specified; that (b) the teachers will learn how to evaluate themselves in these areas over time; and that (c) the teachers will become proficient, seasoned experts in their craft during their first five years in rank.

_ _ _ _ _

The How—Subset 2

   An additional facet of this professional development process is that new teachers also must learn how (a) to embed multi-cultural, multi-racial, gender-diverse, and socio-economic sensitivity into their classrooms, instruction, and interactions with students; and separately (b) to use effective instructional differentiation and multi-tiered interventions and supports.

   In the former area, new teachers need to learn how to consciously and planfully create and communicate the acceptance of individual differences across different student groups (even if they are not physically present in their classrooms) so that positive, nurturing, and supportive climates and academic and social interactions result.

   In the latter area, new teachers need to understand how to apply differentiated instruction, remediation, accommodation, and modification strategies, respectfully, to their classroom instruction and students. This needs to occur across all academic and the social, emotional, and behavioral domains. Moreover, this should include an understanding of how, when, and with whom to use each set of specific instructional strategies to target specific students’ needs and skills.

_ _ _ _ _

School, District, and Community Service

   In addition to proficiency in the Research and Curriculum Development, and the Instruction and Student Learning domains, new teachers (indeed, all teachers) should be required to participate (Domain C—from above) in ongoing School, District, and/or Community Service activities.

   These could be a mixture of required and self-selected activities, but—at the very least—it should include having all teachers and instructional staff participate as members of at least one school-level committee each year.

   This domain is not suggested in the spirit of teacher volunteerism. It is included as a professional role and responsibility of all teachers and support staff. . . something that should be contractually embedded as part of a teacher’s “day” (although in some districts, this may require changes or a renegotiation of specific facets of the teacher contract).

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Teacher Tenure Process

   As noted throughout this Blog, teachers should be formally evaluated from the beginning of their service, and we propose a system where teachers can receive tenure after five years of successful teaching. While districts and schools will need to determine more specific details and objective criteria, decisions on tenure would require teachers to demonstrate proficiency in the three domains discussed throughout this Blog:

·       Research and Curriculum Development; 

·       Instruction and Student Learning; and 

·       School, District, and Community Service.

   To “demonstrate proficiency,” teachers would submit a “Tenure Application Portfolio” that might include progressively-created lessons, instructional videotapes and work samples, coaching and evaluation protocols, letters of support and recommendation, demonstrated student outcomes, and school or district service documentation.

   The tenure application process could even involve a presentation by the candidate with a Question and Answer session with the Tenure Committee to follow.

   Relative to the latter, tenure (or non-tenure) should be recommended by a district-selected Tenure Committee that reviews the credentials and status of all teachers requesting tenure during a specific year. This Committee should include district and school administrators and supervisors, currently-tenured teachers and support staff, and other individuals as desired or relevant.

   The ultimate tenure decision would be made by the Superintendent or his/her administrative designee... based on the recommendations of the Tenure Committee and his/her own review of each candidate’s credentials.

   Although this may be pre-determined by state law or department of education regulations, the district could decide whether tenure is “for life,” or if a “continuing appointment provision” comes with tenure (more on this in the next Blog).

   If a candidate does not receive tenure, the Superintendent could (a) offer the teacher an additional one to three years to address any areas of concern, along with a commitment to reconsider the tenure decision; or (b) inform the teacher that they may remain in their current position for one additional year after which their contract would not be renewed.

   Relative to transitioning from Induction to Tenure, it is recommended that Novice Teachers go through a “Mid-Tenure Review” at the end of their third year. As noted earlier, Novice Teachers should participate in a planned, systematic Induction Program for their first three years in rank, and then, if successful, they can continue to teach and go up for tenure after five years.

   This “successful transition” could formally occur as a Novice Teacher completes a Mid-Tenure portfolio, comparable to the Tenure Application Portfolio. . . with documentation in the Research and Curriculum Development, Instruction and Student Learning, and School, District, and Community Service domains. This portfolio could be evaluated—with specific feedback—by the teacher’s school administrator and others, and a positive rating would mark the end of the induction process.

   This transition approach could be modified and used for Transfer and Transition Teachers.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This is Part II of a four-part Series discussing how districts and schools can improve the teacher recruitment, selection, professional development/training, evaluation, tenure, and continuing appointment process.

   The ultimate goal is:

   To ensure that teachers consistently teach (a) academic and (b) individual and group social, emotional, and behavioral information, content, and skills to students in effective, differentiated ways such that, in a developmentally-sensitive way, they learn, master, and are able to independently apply these (a) to real-world problems or situations, and eventually (b) to successful employment and community functioning.

   In order to attain this goal, we recommend that districts and schools focus on four Pillars of Teacher Preparation and Proficiency:

·       Teacher Hiring and Orientation

·       Teacher Induction and Tenure

·       Continuing Teacher Appointments and Coaching, and

·       Teacher Leadership and Advancement

   In Part I of this Blog Series, we addressed the first Pillar by noting that, to ensure quality hires when they have open positions—districts or schools must:

·       Know what they functionally need a new teacher to know and do in the classroom (described in observable, measurable, and behavioral terms); 

·       Determine—during the recruitment and interview process—what their candidates know and can do based on these needs;

·       Hire only the candidates that come closest to meeting these needs;

·       Functionally orient their new hires as quickly as possible; and

·       Simultaneously close candidates’ knowledge or skills gaps as quickly as possible.

[CLICK HERE for Part I of this Blog Series]

_ _ _ _ _

   In this Part II, we detailed the activities in the second Teacher Induction and Teacher Tenure Pillar.

   In the Teacher Induction area, we identified and described three kinds of “new” teachers when hired by a school: Novice, Transfer, and Transition Teachers, respectively. We then recommended that these teachers learn, master, and demonstrate content and skill proficiency in three specific outlined domains: (a) Research and Curriculum Development; (b) Instruction and Student Learning; and (c) School, District, and/or Community Service.

   These domains were interfaced with the pedagogical processes underlying successful classroom instruction by describing relevant areas from Danielson’s Framework for Teaching evaluation instrument. Critically, we emphasized using Danielson not for personnel appraisal, but as a professional development and growth framework and guide.

   In addition to proficiency in the Research and Curriculum Development and Instruction and Student Learning domains, we noted that new teachers (indeed, all teachers) should be required to participate in ongoing School, District, and/or Community Service activities.

_ _ _ _ _

   In the Teacher Tenure area, we proposed a system where teachers can receive tenure after five years of successful teaching. To demonstrate proficiency in the three domains above, teachers would submit a Tenure Application Portfolio that might include progressively-created lessons, instructional videotapes and work samples, coaching and evaluation protocols, letters of support and recommendation, demonstrated student outcomes, and school or district service documentation.

   Evaluated by a district-selected Tenure Committee of district and school administrators and supervisors, currently-tenured teachers and support staff, and other relevant individuals, the ultimate tenure decision would be made by the Superintendent or his/her administrative designee. Based on state law, tenure could be “for life” or part of a continuing appointment process.

   If a tenure is not secured, the Superintendent’s decision could be revisited after the teacher spends an additional one to three years addressing any areas of concern, or the teacher might be allowed to remain in their current position for one additional year after which their contract would not be renewed.

   The transition from Induction to Tenure would involve a Mid-Tenure Review at the end of a new teacher’s third year with the successful submission and review of a Mid-Tenure portfolio consisting of accomplishments to date in the Research and Curriculum Development, Instruction and Student Learning, and School, District, and Community Service domains.

   The next, Part III Blog of this Series will address the third Pillar: Continuing Teacher Appointments and Coaching.

_ _ _ _ _

   Thank you, as always, for reading and thinking about the issues and suggestions that we share in each Blog.

   As the school year winds down, know that this is the perfect time to collect and analyze your students’ experiences, accomplishments, and “lessons learned”. . . transitioning them systematically to the next year’s teaching team and/or school.

   It is also a great time to strategically assess your directions and needs for next year.

   Sometimes, all of this is facilitated by an outside partner who can synthesize the data and information, and provide an objective perspective on your strengths, resources, gaps, and next steps.

   If you are interested in discussing this process further, I am happy to provide a free one-hour consultation and discussion with your team at any time. Please feel free to reach out either by phone or e-mail.

Best,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

 

Improving Hiring and Staffing in a Nation Where Teaching is At Risk (Part I)

If Student Success Depends on Teachers, Why is the Selection Process so Simplistic?

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   Forty years ago (1983), the National Commission on Excellence in Education, created and assembled— in essence—by President Ronald Reagan, issued its 36-page report, A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. Documenting—with data and analyses that some educators then and now contest—that American schools were failing, the Report initiated the contemporary “school reform and improvement” movement that continues to this day.

   The Report made 38 recommendations in five major areas: Content, Standards and Expectations, Time, Teaching, and Leadership and Fiscal Support. An historical account of the recommendations on the U.S. Department of Education’s website noted the following:

Content: "4 years of English; (b) 3 years of mathematics; (c) 3 years of science; (d) 3 years of social studies; and (e) one-half year of computer science" for high school students." The commission also recommends that students work toward proficiency in a foreign language starting in the elementary grades.

 

Standards and Expectations: The commission cautioned against grade inflation and recommends that four-year colleges raise admissions standards and standardized tests of achievement at "major transition points from one level of schooling to another and particularly from high school to college or work."

 

Time: The commission recommended that "school districts and State legislatures should strongly consider 7-hour school days, as well as a 200- to 220-day school year."

 

Teaching: The commission recommended that salaries for teachers be "professionally competitive, market-sensitive, and performance-based," and that teachers demonstrate "competence in an academic discipline."

 

Leadership and Fiscal Support: The commission noted that the Federal government plays an essential role in helping "meet the needs of key groups of students such as the gifted and talented, the socioeconomically disadvantaged, minority and language minority students, and the handicapped." The commission also noted that the Federal government must help ensure compliance with "constitutional and civil rights," "provide students with financial assistance and research graduate training."

   Focusing this Blog discussion in the Teaching area of this Report, the Commissioners noted that (a) teacher preparation programs needed to improve in quality and rigor; (b) shortages in science and math needed to be immediately addressed; and (c) teacher pay needed to be increased and tied directly to student achievement.

   Due to the Report, many significant policy and practice, instruction and accountability changes occurred. These included:

·       Extended school hours and, for some, extended school years; 

·       Increases in high school graduation coursework requirements and end-of-course assessments; 

·       More rigorous teacher certification or licensure requirements and required observations and evaluations of teacher efficacy; 

·       Data-based evaluations of annual school and district staff and student outcomes; and 

·       More demanding state curricular standards complemented by high-stakes student proficiency testing.

_ _ _ _ _

   Forty years later, especially in the Teaching area, the long-term reviews and results are mixed at best.

·       While teacher training programs are more instructionally rigorous, the research—for example, in how to teach reading and literacy—is not well-integrated into programs’ coursework, and explicit training in classroom management and enhancing students’ social-emotional skills is notably absent;

·       The depth and breadth of supervision and evaluation of prospective teachers’ actual (practicum or internship) classroom instruction continues to vary from program to program, and most graduates still do not begin their first teaching assignments at a high level of effectiveness; and

·       Low teacher pay remains a significant issue, and the importance of supporting teachers on social, emotional, collegial, and professional levels is just starting to be taken seriously.

  In essence, the system is still “at risk” and, in many areas, it is broken.

  _ _ _ _ _

   Over the next four Blogs, we are going to systematically dissect what districts and schools need to do to begin fixing the teacher-instructional part of our still-at-risk educational system.

   The ultimate goal is to ensure that all teachers are teaching in pedagogically-sound and effective ways such that the academic and social-emotional learning, mastery, and progress of all students occurs from preschool through high school.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Four Pillars of Teacher Preparation and Proficiency

   While an ongoing topic in education, a few months ago, there was an Education Week article that discussed whether students should be involved in teacher tenure and evaluation decisions. This opens up the entire discussion regarding teacher recruitment, selection, professional development/training, evaluation, tenure, and continuing appointment, and how all of this relates to effective instruction and demonstrable student outcomes.

   In some states, teachers are simply employed “at will,” and they are tendered new one-year appointments or contracts annually by notifying them on a specific date (e.g., April 30). Once re-appointed for a specific year, some states do not allow teachers to resign to take another position. . . under threat of refusal, decertification, or a lawsuit.

   Putting these state variations aside, it is important to think again about the critical reasons and desired outcomes relative to teacher recruitment and selection through evaluation and tenure.

   Expanding our initial statement above, the primary outcome is:

   To ensure that teachers consistently teach (a) academic and (b) individual and group social, emotional, and behavioral information, content, and skills to students in effective, differentiated ways such that, in a developmentally-sensitive way, they learn, master, and are able to independently apply these (a) to real-world problems or situations, and eventually (b) to successful employment and community functioning.

   Simplistically, this suggests that we would then need to evaluate (a) how well teachers teach in the classroom; and (b) whether students learn.

   But this has not worked.

   Over the past decade, administrators have conducted teacher walk-throughs and/or teacher observations (for example, using some variation of Danielson’s rubric), pairing these with clinical supervision discussions, and the result has consistently been that 97% or more of the teachers across this nation are “proficient” or above.

   And yet, we all know that teachers’ instructional effectiveness naturally varies over time, content, students, curricula, and resources; and that some teachers—while momentarily “proficient” on Danielson during their observations, should not be in teaching in the classroom.

   In addition, over the past decade or more, we have learned that tying teachers’ evaluations to student outcomes (typically, their proficiency on a state standards or high-stakes benchmark test) simply (a) does not dramatically improve either teachers’ instruction or students’ scores; and (b) it is not fair—because teachers have no control over some students’ readiness to learn or the previous instruction they have received.

_ _ _ _ _

   And yet, the solution here is not to eliminate teacher evaluation or student assessment.

   The solution is to recognize that effective instruction is based more on training, coaching, consultation, and the evaluation of teacher growth and efficacy, than on financially motivating, controlling, or “catching” teachers “being good.”

   Indeed, effective teachers almost always are individually or collegially motivated to positively impact their students. But effective teachers are also skilled in their craft, and these skills develop over time, supported by district-provided and individually-selected training and coaching (whether formal or informal).

   Critically, if a teacher is not suitably skilled. . . just like one of their students, they may need modified or more intensive instruction, practice, and coaching.

   But if a teacher is not motivated. . . this should eventually become an administrative—not a training or professional development—issue.

   And at the far end of the spectrum of poor motivation or insubordinate behavior, a teacher should be put on a Professional Development Plan by their administrator, and—if unsuccessful—should be reassigned with continued oversight or, as necessary, terminated.

_ _ _ _ _

   Ultimately, there is no perfect teacher preparation through proficiency process. If there were, districts and schools would all be using it, and the teaching issues identified in A Nation At Risk would have been solved a long time ago.

   At the same time, we would like to suggest that there are four “pillars” important to the process. These involve districts’ and schools’ attention to:  

·       Teacher Hiring and Orientation

·       Teacher Induction and Tenure

·       Continuing Teacher Appointments and Coaching, and

·       Teacher Leadership and Advancement

   This first Blog (of four) will address the first of these areas.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Teacher Hiring Process

   While it is easy to look at our university-based teacher training programs, celebrating the good ones and cursing the poor ones, unless a formal and direct university-to-district pipeline has been established, districts and schools have little control over teachers’ pre-service preparation for the classroom.

   This is compounded by the “alternative certification” process now in virtually every state where there typically is no teacher training program or pre-certification experience to point to.

   So what should districts and schools do to ensure quality hires?

   Before even posting an open position, Districts need to:

·       Know what they functionally need the new teacher to know and do in the classroom (described in observable, measurable, and behavioral terms);

·       Determine what their candidates know and can do based on these needs;

·       Hire only the candidates that come closest to meeting these needs (meaning that you hire on “prerequisite rather than prayers”;

·       Functionally orient their new hires as quickly as possible; and

·       Simultaneously close candidates’ knowledge or skills gaps as quickly as possible.

   In the first area above, districts and schools need to explicitly identify (a) the academic, instructional, and pedagogical content and skills they need when recruiting teachers for specific positions; (b) the interpersonal and team-related skills they need; and (c) the self-motivation and self-accountability beliefs and aspirations they need as related to students, colleagues, and the educational process.

   And then they need to interview based on these needs.

_ _ _ _ _

An Analogous Aside

   When I was the Director of the Ed.S. specialist and Ph.D. doctoral School Psychology Program at the University of South Florida—after the application and initial screening process that generated an invitation—we interviewed prospective students using a “carousel” approach.

   Involving both professors and current students, each candidate (a) participated in an presentation of the Program, focusing on its professional and student-centered orientation, beliefs, goals, and objectives; (b) was interviewed by at least two separate panels of professors and students; (c) completed a writing sample that asked them to solve an important psychoeducational dilemma; and (d) got to informally “hang out” with other students so that they could ask questions.

   Critically, our students were accepted into the Program based more on their interview than on their credentials. As no one was interviewed unless they met our required credentials, we were interviewing students to determine who “best fit” our Program’s culture and who had the best chance of growth and success—both in our Program and in their post-graduation professional careers.

   As such, the interview panels helped to formally determine one part of a student’s “best fit.” The writing sample evaluated one of the biggest predictors of students’ academic success. And the informal “hanging out,” was really for our current students to gauge how well a candidate would fit in—socially, emotionally, multiculturally, and attitudinally—in our high-powered, high-stress full-time program.

   After every interview (our carousels usually were full-day multi-candidate affairs), both students and faculty crowded into a large conference room to discuss every candidate. At the very least, everyone had an equal voice in each decision. At the very most, our current students’ appraisals often had “more voice.”

   Significantly, we never had problems getting enough current students to participate in our interview days. Our students saw this as their responsibility, as a way to “pay forward” the Program’s contributions to their professional lives, and as an “insurance policy” to ensure that the multi-dimensional quality of the Program would be maintained.

_ _ _ _ _

Applying the Analogy

   Applying my little story above to how districts and schools currently interview new candidates. . . it is important to note that most new teacher candidates (whether already experienced in the field or just out of their teacher training programs) are interviewed:

·       Typically, just by a school principal (or small administrative team) during the summer;

·       Sometimes, by an Interview Team that includes teachers and other support staff, but does not include most or all of the elements above and below; and

·       At times (often in the case of large districts that practice “top-down” leadership), by a district “Human Resources” Director.

   Clearly, my anecdotal analogy above suggests that there may be significant flaws in all three of these common approaches.

   And while I understand the time involved when using a more extensive interview process, I also know that (a) it takes even more time to supervise and (if needed) terminate (or tolerate) a teacher (or any educational staff person) who was the wrong candidate from the beginning; and that (b) even after terminated, some teachers’ negative or destructive legacies “live on” long after they have left. . . for both staff and especially students.

   I also know that—even in the midst of a teacher shortage—the districts and schools that have exceptional reputations for teacher quality, support, collaboration, and satisfaction are the ones that attract (and retain) the best candidates. . . when these candidates have multiple job offers to choose from.

   Hence, as they consciously connect what they need a teacher to do (see above) with their interview preparations, schools should consider an interview carousel that:

·       Involves representative staff who serve the school in different capacities;

·       Includes different interview formats, activities, and discussions to match every candidate to the desired climate and culture, functional job and position demands, and staff and school expectations; and

·       Gives all interview participants a full and active voice in the final selection of the favored candidate(s).

   Relative to the interview activities noted above, this could (should) include, for example, live simulations where candidates teach a prescribed skill or lesson in a classroom setting (prepared by the candidates in advance), and/or “case study” simulations where candidates discuss or demonstrate how they would approach or resolve different instructional or behavioral classroom challenges.

   In summary, the teacher hiring process is one of the most important components of a successful school. While the “perfect” candidates may be unavailable, when schools consciously match what they need to their candidates’ strengths and weaknesses, they can move into the Orientation, Induction, and Teacher Tenure phases knowing what training, coaching, and evaluation is needed to close any important gaps.

   At the same time, in the absence of an “acceptable” candidate, some schools may have the option of (a) hiring candidates on a one-year temporary or probationary basis; (b) asking an existing staff member— like a “Utility Player” in baseball—to consider a one-year reassignment so that a candidate can be placed into a grade or course area where they will have the greatest potential of success; or (c) adjusting some instructional configurations and leaving the position vacant for one year—rather than hiring a person who clearly is not well-matched to the position or school.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Teacher Orientation Process

   By “Teacher Orientation,” we mean the activities—right before the school year begins—that introduce newly-hired teachers to their district, school, department or grade-level, and individual classroom(s) and students.

   Clearly, there is an over-abundance of information that all new teachers need to know before they walk into their classrooms on the very first day of school. Thus, districts and schools need to prioritize and choose the most essential information, how best to communicate it to new hires, how long the “orientation” period should last, and who is responsible for working with their new colleagues.

   Critically, some of this information can be provided in written form, some through on-demand webinars or podcasts, some in virtual or live large-group forums, and some in more intimate small-group sessions.

   Moreover, some of this information can be provided in the weeks before everyone shows up for the beginning-of-the-school year orientation required of all staff, some of this information can be shared one or two extra days before the all-staff orientation, and—with strategic planning and scheduling—some information is best discussed during an “orientation” that extends into the first quarter of the new school year.

   The essential point is:

   Teachers need to be thoroughly, systematically, and functionally well-oriented to their new district and school as soon and as effectively as possible for them (a) to feel settled, safe, secure, comfortable, welcome, and integrated into their new setting(s); and (b) to successfully meet and exceed their instructional, collegial, and other professional responsibilities.

   And yet, too many districts and schools do not fully meet this goal. . . often, for example, because administrators and others are focused on other “higher priority” tasks; delegate the orientation to others without structure or support; do not want to (or cannot—per the Union) pay the new hires for extra, non-contractual days or responsibilities; or cannot (or will not) “fit” this around everyone’s vacation schedules.

   I get all this.

   And yet, if you ask new hires who have experienced a well-organized orientation program—versus those experiencing a “catch as catch can” or no orientation program—for feedback or which they preferred, you know what they will say.

   And I speak from experience.

_ _ _ _ _

   Once again, by way of analogy, as Director of the School Psychology Program at the University of South Florida, I instituted a required full week orientation program for our new graduate students every year for over fifteen years.

   Involving our entire core faculty and many current students (who volunteered their time), the orientation included important campus, college, and Program-specific pre-academic activities; and opportunities to visit and meet with important university sites and resource people, respectfully. The orientation also incorporated teaming activities, as well as formal and informal student-faculty and student-student social events that began the process of building strong student relationships, collaboration, and interdependence.

_ _ _ _ _

   From a content perspective, a district and/or school orientation might provide information to new staff members in the following areas:

·       Administrative, Contractual, Job-Related/Employment, and Human Resources policies and procedures

·       Supervision, Evaluation, Professional Development, Mentoring, and Certification/Licensure policies and procedures

·       Building Administrator and School-specific policies, procedures, and practices

·       District and School Technology policies, procedures, resources, and support personnel

·       General, Special Education, English Second Language policies, procedures, resources, and health, mental health, and related services personnel

·       School Support Staff resources, roles, and responsibilities (for example, relative to secretaries, paraprofessionals, cafeteria and custodial staff, bus drivers, etc.)

·       Safety and Crisis-Oriented building and classroom procedures

·       Curriculum and Instruction policies, procedures, practices, interventions, and resources

·       Common Classroom and Building (Common Area) expectations, responsibilities, routines, and procedures

·       District/School Discipline Code contents, decisions, procedures, and resources

·       Social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health procedures, curricula, practices, interventions, and resources

·       Family and community outreach roles, responsibilities, procedures, laws, and resources

·       Data, documentation, and evaluation roles, responsibilities, procedures, accountability, and resources

_ _ _ _ _

   Critically, part of this orientation also includes an introduction—to all new hires—to specific initiatives or trainings that a district and/or school has embraced and started.

   For example, if the school has adopted specific approaches to literacy or math instruction, to teaching social skills or other social-emotional strategies, or to providing remediation or interventions through computer-assisted supports. . . the new teachers should be (a) alerted—early on—to these approaches, (b) given the resources and an initial overview to help them support these initiatives in their classrooms, and (c) provided a schedule of how and when they will be formally trained to the same level of proficiency as their colleagues.

_ _ _ _ _

   In summary, the Teacher Orientation process is essential to the early success and comfort of every newly-hired teacher. The process not only helps teachers begin their new school experience in a positive and effective way, but it also helps the school to proactively integrate them into the culture and climate, roles and responsibilities, and functions and modus operandi of the staff and school.

   In the long run, this maintains the consistency of the procedures and practices that make the school successful.

   In the short run, it communicates to all new staff that:

   “We care about you as a person and a professional. Your success is our success.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   We began this Blog by commemorating the 40^th “anniversary” of the National Commission on Excellence in Education’s 1983 report, A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. Overviewing the recommendations detailed in the Report’s five major areas, we focused on those related to Teaching.

   Critically, despite the significant policy and practice changes prompted by the Report, we discuss how little things have actually changed. For example, while teacher training programs are more instructionally rigorous, they still struggle to effectively integrate research in academic and social-emotional curriculum and instruction. Moreover, low teacher pay remains a significant issue, as is teacher recruitment, retention, and efficacy.

   The Blog then identified the four “Pillars” needed to address these important issues: Teacher Hiring and Orientation; Teacher Induction and Tenure; Continuing Teacher Appointments and Coaching, and Teacher Leadership and Advancement.

   Ultimately, these Pillars’ primary goal is to:

   Ensure that teachers consistently teach (a) academic and (b) individual and group social, emotional, and behavioral information, content, and skills to students in effective, differentiated ways such that, in a developmentally-sensitive way, they learn, master, and are able to independently apply these (a) to real-world problems or situations, and eventually (b) to successful employment and community functioning.

   We then focused on the first Pillar, Teacher Hiring and Orientation, describing—sometimes using a personal analogy—what districts and schools need to consider and do to be successful. The process begins as districts and schools identify ahead of time what they need a new teacher to be able to do—in general and specific to a new position.

   The process continues through the hiring process that matches candidates to these needs. And it continues as newly hiring teachers are effectively oriented to their new positions and schools in a wide range of specified policy, procedure, and practice areas.

   Here, we emphasized that:

   Teachers need to be thoroughly, systematically, and functionally well-oriented to their new district and school as soon and as effectively as possible for them (a) to feel settled, safe, secure, comfortable, welcome, and integrated into their new setting(s); and (b) to successfully meet and exceed their instructional, collegial, and other professional responsibilities.

   We continue this discussion—relative to the remaining three Pillars—in the next series of Blogs.  Stay tuned!

_ _ _ _ _

   As always, I appreciate everyone who reads this bi-monthly Blog and thinks about the issues or recommendations that we share.

   As we continue to focus on our students’ progress and needed accomplishments, know that there are many Project ACHIEVE resources to help you (see our Website Store: www.projectachieve.info/store), and that I am always available for a free one-hour consultation conference call to help you to move “to the next level of excellence” from a student, staff, school, or organizational perspective.

   Please feel free to reach out if you would like to begin this process with me.

Best,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]