high impact philanthropy to improve teaching quality: focus on high-need secondary students

8/7/2019 High Impact Philanthropy to Improve Teaching Quality: Focus on High-Need Secondary Students

1/104

Th Cntr fr Hih Ipct PhinthrpSchool of Social Pol icy & Pract ice | University of Pennsylvania

Kate Barrett , Katherine Hovde, Zehua Li Hahn, Katherina Rosqueta

High Impact Philanthropy to Improve Teaching Qual

Fcs n Hih-N Scnr Stnts

Wintr 201

Spci R


2/104

THe CeNTeR FoR HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPyii

Kate Barrett j y C H I Py qy . P j

C, K MKy & Cy, y ,

y, z , .

Katherine H. Hovde, MIA, y, . S 990,

W B y j L A, S A, E E. I U.S.,

C Py R E Uy Py z

. S M I A C Uy.

Zehua Li Hahn, PhD, C H I Py. P j C,

I Ly I, - y UNESCO P, P

y , y, , , .

Katherina Rosqueta, MBA, C H I Py. Py,

MKy & Cy. P j MKy, y , ,

y.

T ... 25.57.7266.

Richard Ingersoll, PhD, Proessor, Graduate School o Education, University o Pennsylvania

Carol McLaughlin, MD, MPH, Research Director or Global Public Health, Center or High Impact PhilanthropyKathleen Noonan, JD, Clinical Associate Proessor o Law, University o Wisconsin Law School

Hilary Rhodes, PhD, Senior Associate, Abt Associates

About the Center for high i mpACt philAnthropy

T C H I Py 2006 y W Uy

Py S S Py & P. O C y,

. O y , - ,

j y .

SouRCeS oF INFoRmaTIoN

Field experience

Practitioner insights Performance assessments In-depth case studies

inFormed opinion

Expert opinion Stakeholder input Policy analyses

research

Randomized controlled trialsand quasi-experimental studies

Modeled analyses(e.g., cost-effectiveness)

Field

experience

inFormed

opinion

research

most promising

, , yz : , , . By ,

z . W

.

our multi -perspeCtive, ev idenCe- informed ApproACh

About the Authors

projeCt Advisors


3/104

HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPy To ImPRove TeaCHINg qualITy i

exeCutive summAry

Wh this, wh nw?

O y y, -

, y

, , U.S.

y .

R, ,

y

,

.

Whts in this rprt?

T y

, ,

:

Part 1: Improving individual teachers skills

:

I

y y y,

- y

- .

P , -

.

I

,

.

Part 2: Creating an environment or great teaching

:

I -,

, - ,

--j y

y.

R y

. T -

. I

.

I , :

Ay .

D y

.

M P

,

. T

y .

A y z

.

Part 3: What donors should know about the

broader policy environment :G y

.

A y.

y y.

E ,

.

For donors seeking to improve student outcomes, the critical question is:

How can my funds improve teaching quality?


4/104

THe CeNTeR FoR HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPyiv

I P 2, y

. I ,

y : . A ,

y y

. Ay, j

,

y

.

A ,

, ,

. I . W

y

.

,

@2...


5/104

HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPy To ImPRove TeaCHINg qualITy v

Table of ContentsintroduCtion: sCope, ApproACh, And key ConCepts 1

Includes: Context, Why focus on teachers, Our focus on secondary, Our approach, and Key

concepts for donors

pArt i: improving individuAl teAChers skills 5

The situation

How donors can change the situation

Stin 1: Iprin pr-sric tchr prprtin 11

What donors should look for

Model in Practice: Pre-service teacher preparation

Beyond our Model in Practice: Other resources for donors

Stin 2: Priin spprt t nw tchrs 19


Model in Practice: Support for new teachers


Stin 3: Instin in tchrs nin pnt 26What donors should look for

District example: Ongoing development for teachers

Beyond our district example: Other resources for donors

C t ctin: Iprin inii tchrs skis 29

pArt i i : CreAting An environm ent for greAt teAChing 31

The situation

How donors can change the situation

Stin 1: Iprin princip trinin n spprt 37


Model in Practice: Principal training and support


Stin 2: Spprtin ffcti wh-sch rfr s 43


Models in Practice: Whole-school reform

Beyond our Models in Practice: Other resources for donors

C t ctin: Crtin n nirnnt fr rt tchin 59

pArt iii: whAt donors should know About the broAder poliCy environment 61

Hot topics

Resources for donors on the broader policy environment

Bringing it all together: District turnaround p rofiles

C t ctin: Wht nrs sh knw t th rr pic nirnnt 73

ConClusion 74

Appendix: Cost And impACt CAlCulAtions 75

lists of nonprofits , d istriCts, funders, And other resourCes

ment ioned in th is report 78

referenCes 84

ACknowledgme nts inside bACk Cover


6/104

THe CeNTeR FoR HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPyvi


7/104

HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPy To ImPRove TeaCHINg qualITy

introduCtion: sCope, ApproACh, And key ConCepts

Cntt

A U S, y 0%

y

y .

I

y, y

50%. E

, jy

q y -y , 2

q

q

. M,

y , ,

y.4

Wh fcs n tchrs

-

.5 A

z, ,

.6 S qy

y .7

. S y y

y

qy

y 50 8

.

or fcs n scnr

T qy.

W y

- y ,

62

.

T

. I

,

y

y

y . A q

y

y -

y .

(see chart 1: ederal spending on education.)

D ,

y . I

qy y y y

y

. A

, -

y y

y qy

y .

W -

y y, y

y K2

. I

,

y y

Py S S (2008),

-

, y

.
http://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-educationpathways/http://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-educationpathways/http://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-educationpathways/


8/104

THe CeNTeR FoR HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPy2

or pprch

z

, y

z y,

, ,

, , , ,

, . W

, , ,

. W

,

y I A F,

A E R A,

A I, C PyR E S M

H C , E Py

I, A E I. I

, y E

W, E S, N C

Qy, E C

S, ,

qy

y. O

y

y . (See inside back cover or the

ull list o individuals who contributed to this

report.)

K cncpts fr nrs

Ml P

y

- ,

M P . E

,

y

j. O

qy.

H, z

y

. W ,

CHaRT 1: FedeRal SPeNdINg oN eduCaTIoN

* P-K6: M I: I A A D, H S, C C D B G; G 72: M I: I A A D, FP L P, F P; Py: M F P L P.

S: A T M M, y A E E, 200, R N 5, 200, ://.4.//MM_FY200.. Cy 200 y A E E.A .

Pre-K6 Graes 79 Graes 1012 Pstsecar

$25

$20

$15

$10

$5

$0

Fiscal Year 2010

amount(in

billions)

grade level*


9/104

HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPy To ImPRove TeaCHINg qualITy 3

;

;

y y y;

.

M mpvm qly

H y

,

y y y

. Cy,

y qy. Uy,

.

qy y

y :

.

Student outcomes

F ,

y

,

, ,

j q.9 I , ,

. I,

y , qy

, ,

.

A z

y

,

z

,

, .0 B

y y , y

-

.

F ,

, .

My -

y . A

y ,

, ,

. My z

y -

. (See Part 3 or

our discussion o teacher evaluation.)

eacher outcomes

W qy,

.

T y

,

y, j

y

. I ,

:

( )

(

). B :

,

qy

, y

y

. l

q

. T y

-y ,

50% f

.2 Iy,

y

(.., , ).

I ,

y y,

y y

.

O

qy ,

, .


10/104


Lk mp

Oy y

y -

. N y,

, y, y j

- - y

, .

D, ,

. S y

,

M P y

. W

, --

. D z,

,

qy y .

Ky

T , -

, - , qy,

-qy . T

y :

High-need students

y

,

y . F

y , -

y -

y .

High-need schools

- . Ty

y -, y

.

eaching quality

y

, ,4

.

High-quality teachers

. Ty

j , ,

. I

j

, -qy ,

y ,

,

y q

. Ty

. Ty

.


11/104

SoluTIoNS FeaTuRed:

Iprin trinin fr tchr cnits fr th r f p e.g.,

through year-long apprenticeships in high-need schools where theory can be linked to

real-world practice.

Priin spprt t nw tchrs e.g., through in-school mentoring focused on

improving the teaching skills of novice teachers.

Instin in tchrs nin pnt e.g., through professional developmentprograms that integrate district and school goals, as well as the learning needs of individual

teachers.

Iprin Inii

Tchrs Skis

part 1:


12/104


pArt i : improving indiv iduAl teAChers skills

S

:

y , y -

; y ,

;

y, ,

.

T y

,

- y .

T

y

:

H

U.S. . S

-y y

-y .5 (For a

state example, see chart : Highest-Povert

and Highest-Minorit Schools in Wisconsin are

more likel to be assigned novice teachers.)

R

y. S

(

y ) y

y

y .6 I ,

y

v .7 G

-

y y ,

qy y

.

Ay - K2 y j,

y y ,8 y

y . T

y. R

$0,000 $8,000

. I ,

- . (A 9% 26%

y.9) S z y . R

y

.20

I

. (See page 1

or How donors can change the situation.)

Secondary students with the greatest needs are often taught by a revolving

door of teachers with the least experience and skill to address those needs.

Many challenges exist in improving this situation. Luckily, there are promising

models that address these challenges.


13/104


Th sittin

- y q

. R

:

. C y j (..,

y, , )

2. Py .., y

q

. C q

4. C

5. A y q

6. S

W ,

z y

. F ,

y

y ,

y

. T ,

y y

.

Uy, y ,

,

. O

y y

. T :

. L y

2.

-

. L

y

4. P

CHaRT 2: HIgHeST-PoveRTy aNd HIgHeST-mINoRITy SCHoolS IN WISCoNSIN aRe moRe lIKely To

be aSSIgNed NovICe TeaCHeRS (


14/104


Lk lvy m p

C

- ,

y 2% ;

, j 4% -y .2 S j

y .

T

;22

;2

.24

T y

y y

j y

, , .

I ,

AC

.25 Iy,

y (

F, S K, S)

y

.26

A y y MKy & Cy

y

.27 H,

y ,

y .

(See Part 3 or more on teacher compensation.)

I , A (FA)

z

y ,

. A y FA

y,28

y.29 T

.

k

v-b p

, y- 70% 80% .0

R y ,

-

q -

.

P- y y-

,

. R, ,

yy

. F

y

y

-

, y y,

,

q.

I,

K2 . W y

(y

),

y

qy . C

, ,

. T

y

.2


15/104


Y (..,

y ,

,

y ) q

. O

y

, , , ,

- . P-

(.., ),

q

y .4

Ll l pp

y

S

qy - y

q

, . ,

, . A

, y

qy.

I ,

. R -

K2 q

y j, y y . 6

W y y , :

y y -.7 T

y y

,

y q y

y.8

R

y . F , y

j , , , , qy.9 A

y y ,

,

j .40 T

j P 2

.

Pl vlpm

k l l

T A y

y , $ y.42

Uy,

y y . I

y, y 59% j

-

y , y

- y

.4 I , -y

, y y

.44

A

; , q

y

,

y

y .

My friend and I both teach the same grade, same

type of kids. But while I had an amazing mentor

in my district, his district assigned him the school

librarian who had never taught students, and she

never once observed his teaching.

F y 9 y , Cl4

I do not feel I was prepared for the realities of life

in a school and a classroom as a teacher. There is

so much more than I was exposed to in a college

classroom studying textbooks. I needed real-life

classroom experience.

E l lm5


16/104


P

. T q :

y y

.45 T

: T W E,

2

(A, O, C, I),

U S.

Sy 5,000

,00 jy

q y .

O y, 7%

y y

;

, y

.46(See Part 3 or more

on teacher evaluation.)

N,

y, ,

y

. My

z ,

y y, ,

y, , y ,

z .47 I

, q y y

j

, y

yy z

j .48

Hw nrs cn chn th sittin

O y , ,

:

. Improving pre-service teacher preparation.

E

y y

. D y

y ,

z -

,

y -

.

(See Pages 11 1.)

2. Providing support to new teachers.

P

. E

,

y ,

-

.

(See Pages 1 .)

. Investing in teachers ongoing development.P

(

-y ), -

,

, ,

. (See Pages

.)


17/104


T

y

8 9.

Wht nrs sh k fr

. Selective recruitment o teacher candidates

based on characteristics necessary or teaching

high-need students. T :

S

y j .

I ,

-

-- j . A y

y

,

-

.49

P q,

,

. P

.50 T y

y

- .5

Dy y .

R y

,

, y ,52

, y

y

.5 Sy,

y .54

T, -

,55

y

.

2. Rigorous selection process that uses multiple

assessment techniques. T

, , -y ,

, y

- .

Iy, y

, y -

z y

.

solution 1 : improving pre-serviCe teACher prepArAtion

gReaT baNg FoR buCK: ImPRovINg PRe-SeRvICe TeaCHeR PRePaRaTIoN

Teacher Residency Programs

e : $60 - $134 y taght b a resiec prgram graate.

Represetatie impacts base the Bettcher Teachers Prgram, Clra:

m, i ke ctet areas sch as reaig. Fr high ee stets, sch

accelerate aal grwth is critical r clsig achieemet gaps.

66% - 84% , ee i high-ee schls. Fr a istrict, this represets

sigifcat saigs, sice replacemet csts are estimate at $10,000 - $18,000 per teacher lst. 20

(SEE ModEL In PRACTICE FoR Sou RCES, And SEE THE APPEndIx FoR dETAILS on ouR CALCuL ATIonS.)


18/104


. Course work that is evidence-based, practical,

and covers content required or teaching high-

need students. T :

C j-

(.., , ) y (..,

q

). C

y q

y - y

y .56

L y (..,

y

y ).

E ,

q q,

C S

.57 D

L y (

y ,58)

. (See page

or more on Lemovs axonom.)

4. Required participation in a sustained classroom

apprenticeship in which student teachers take

on increasing responsibility or students. T

:

P

y - (..,

7 , E

)

.

P

.

E (..,

y ),

y,

y,

--

.

G

,

,

.

5. Feedback loop between the program and theschool system where teachers will work. U

y , U S

,

y , , . (See page

or more on common core standards.) T

z

y

y

, y .

m in Prctic: Pr-sric tchr

prprtin

,

y. Ry

,

, y. R

,

: -

y -

. F M P,

y

z .

The best programs integrate theory and practice,

but there is generally a chasm between theory

and practice in teacher education. Academics are

primary and clinical education is secondary. There

is little connection between what students learn

in university classes and what they learn in the

schools. Time in clinical settings is too short and

involvement of university professors in the schools

is insufficient. Too often, student teaching sites

are not appropriate and performance of student

teachers is insufficiently monitored.

A Lv, m p Cll,

Clmb Uvy59


19/104

HIgH ImPaCT PHIlaNTHRoPy To ImPRove TeaCHINg qualITy13

a : My ew tecers re uprepredfr te reities f tecig, especiy i ig-eed

sc. Empyig pprc brrwed frm te medic

prfessi, tecer residecy prgrms ddress tis

prbem by redesigig tecer pre-service triig. Tecer

residecies cmbie yer-g cssrm ppreticesip

wit msters-eve curse wrk s tt by te time

grdute becmes fu-time tecer, e r se s redy

spet sigifict mut f t ime i frt f studets, i

K12 cssrm, wrkig gside veter tecer. By

preprig tecers trug prctic erig, ds-

eperiece, d strg supprt etwrk, tecer residecy

prgrms re ttemptig t cge te wy tecers retried s tt tey c be effective frm te very strt f

teir tecig creers. I tis Mde i Prctice, we prfie

Urb Tecer Residecy Uited, etwrk f residecy

prgrms tt fcus recruitig d triig ew tecers

fr ig-eed urb pubic scs.

n : I 2004, te tis eistig Urb

Tecer Residecy prgrms (cted i Bst, Cicg,

d Dever) frmed ifrm prtersip t ecge

best prctices d prmte te ccept f residecy-bsed

tecer preprti. Frm tis prtersip, Urb Tecer

Residecy Uited (UTRU) emerged s cective effrt tuc d supprt eceet residecy prgrms i ig-

eed urb districts. Iiti fudig ws prvided by Bst

fudti, Strtegic Grt Prters. Mre recety, UTRU

creted te Residecy fr Residecies Prgrm (RRP) t

ep sc districts, uiversities, d prfits uc

ew tecer residecy prgrms. Tis tw-yer prgrm

cmbies itesive erig istitutes wit fcused, idividu

csutti t ep emergig prgrms desig, devep,

d uc ig-perfrmig residecies. T dte, UTRU

s prtered wit 18 residecy prgrms i 16 districts

tiwide. (SEE PaGE 17 FoR ThE FUll lIST oF PRoGRaMS anD

DISTRICTS.) UTRU prter prgrms tried 500 tecerscrss te cutry i 2009, d te rgizti ps

t icrese tt umber s ew residecy prgrms re

creted.

h : Urb Tecer Residecies Uited prterprgrms fcus preprig tecers fr creers i ig-

eed urb scs. atug prgrms c be used i

differet pces, ivve prtersips betwee uiversity

tt prvides curse wrk d sc district i wic

prticipts serve s residets fr yer. Ec residet

receives stiped fr ivig epeses durig te triig

yer d subsidized msters degree up cmpeti f

te prgrm.60 Residecy prgrms i te UTRU etwrk re

crcterized by te fwig eemets:

Rigorous recruitment and selection of candidates: Ec

prgrm seects diverse d ig-perfrmig grup f

recet cege grdutes, creer cgers, d cmmuity

members t becme residets. Recruitmet fcuses

ttrctig mirity tecers d tecers i ig-eed

subject res, suc s mt, sciece, d speci educti.

Prgrm cdidtes re seected trug mutipe iterviews

wit re pys, cse studies, d crefu ssessmet f

ctet kwedge.

Three-year teaching commitment: I retur fr te stiped d

subsidized msters degree, residets cmmit t tecig i

ig-eed pubic sc fr t est tree yers.

Careful selection and training of mentors: Ec residet ispired wit metr tecer w is eperieced tecer

frm te district. Te metr tecer is seected d tried

t py si epicit res: effective tecer, cc, ciic

fcuty member, prgrm eder, erer, d ssessr.61

Apprenticeship year with ample opportunities for practice:

Durig te ppreticesip yer, residets grduy mve

frm cbrtive c-tecig re t icresigy

demdig, ed-tecig re. Te metr tecer serves

s cc d re mde, d metrs receive gig

supprt d triig t esure tt te cssrm eperiece

is we-structured d iged wit te uiversity curse

wrk. Te curse wrk vries by prgrm, but prgrms

i te UTRU etwrk empsize mstery f cssrm

mgemet, cutur wreess, d ssessmet

teciques tt ebe tecer cdidtes t guge studet

prgress d uderstdig. a residets er t egge

studets i prbem svig, critic tikig, d prject-

bsed erig t mke subject mtter mre meigfu.

m o d e l i n p r a ct i ce

lrnin t tch thrh r- n pprnt icships in h ih-n schs :

urn Tchr Rsincis


20/104


Peer network: Residets tri s prt f peer grup crttt prvides supprt d cbrtive erig trugut

te residecy yer d beyd. Grups f residets re

pced i te sme sc, d residets cmpete teir

msters degree curse wrk wit teir crts. I iterviews

wit residets, te imprtce f te crt cmmuity ws

recurrig teme. as e frmer residet sid, crt

semirs d supprt grup cmpet, wic ws rey

epfuEve fter ffici gterigs stpped, residets

ctiued t cme tgeter t see d supprt ec t er,

d I ve remied very cse t sever f my crt

members.62

Post-residency program support: after cmpetig te

residecy yer, residets re give ssistce wit jb

pcemet i e f te districts scs, s we s cc ess

t -site iducti prgrm tt icudes e--e

csutti wit cssrm bservtis d trgeted

feedbck trugut te first tw yers f s tecig.

Residecy prgrms smetimes prter wit te new

Tecer Ceter (PRoFIlED on PaGES 21-23) te iducti

cmpet. UTRU prgrms s ve ctive umi

etwrk, wic serves s resurce s grdutes pursue

furter prfessi grwt.

Professional advancement for mentors: Beyd preprig

residets t it te grud ruig we tey becme fu-

time tecers, tecer residecies crete ew creer pts

fr te eperieced tecers w serve s metr tecers

d tecer eders, tereby buidig cpcit y i ig-eed

scs.

i: Tecer residecy prgrms re retivey ew

ivti i tecer preprti. as resut, rigrus

efficcy r cst-effectiveess studies eist t substtite

teir impct. neverteess, ur ysis f eistig dt

pits t te mdes prmise.

Student outcomes: Te best vibe dt cme frm

evuti f e f te fudig prgrms i te UTRU

etwrk, te Bettcer Tecers Prgrm i Crd.

Te evuti, cducted by Te Evuti Ceter f

te Uiversity f Crd Devers Sc f Educti &

hum Devepmet, ked t studet test scre dt.63

our ysis f tis study fud: Redig test scre gis fr studets f Bettcer tecers

were pprimtey 70% iger t te redig test

scre gis f studets tugt by -Bettcer tried

ew tecers i simir scs, represetig stt isticy

sigifict differece (4.5 percetie gi versus 2.6

percetie gi64). I ter wrds, studet w ws

perfrmig better t 20% f peers is w perfrmig

better t 24.5% f peers, suggestig tt te studets

rte f erig cceerted. Fr ig-eed studets,

gis ike tis re critic t csig cievemet gps.

Studets f Bettcer tecers swed gis crss ter tested subjects, tug y redig gis were

sttisticy sigifict.

Studets f Bettcer mentor tecers swed

sigificty greter gis i subjects cmpred wit

studets f bt Bettcertried ew tecers d

ter ew tecers. Tis is t be epected, sice metr

tecers ve mre tecig eperiece, yet tis fidig

supprts te prgrms stregt i seectig metrs w

ve demstrted effectiveess i tecig ig-eed

studets. Sme yptesize tt servig s metr

c imprve eperieced tecers prctice, tugfurter studies re eeded t vidte tis yptesis.

Scs wit ig ccetrtis f Bettcer tecers

swed greter gis t te stte medi i t e st tw

subjects. Fr 2009, five triig site scs swed

rtes f studet grwt tt eceeded te stte medi.


21/104


Mre dt te effect f residecy triig studet

utcmes is epected t be reesed i 2011 r 2012 by

Tms Ke, prfessr t te hr vrd Grdute Sc f

Educti, w is edig study f te Bst Tecer

Residecy prgrm.

Teacher outcomes: Tecer reteti is usefu idictr

becuse ig eves f tecer turver c be dmgig

t scs d studets, s we s ficiy csty tdistricts.65 Fr drs, reteti is prticury imprtt

becuse residecies require csiderbe upfrt ivestmet

i seectig d triig tecer cdidtes. UTRU prter

prgrms ve trcked reteti rtes f frmer residets

d ve fud rtes sigificty iger t tse typic

f urb districts.66 Te fudig prgrms i te etwrk

acdemy fr Urb Sc ledersip (aUSl) i

Cicg, te Bettcer Tecers prgrm, d te Bst

Tecer Residecy (BTR) ve bee rud g eug

t ve dt swig tt te mjrity f tecers t ey tri

sty beyd te required tree-yer cmmitmet. after five

yers:67

Te reteti rtes fr te tree fudig prgrms

represet imprvemet f 66% t 84% ver te

ti five-yer reteti rte f 50%.68

83% f aUSl tecers re sti tecig, cmpred wit

verge f 33% fr te Cicg distric t, represetig

151% imprvemet i reteti.69

85% f BTR tecers re sti tecig, cmpred wit

verge f 50% fr te Bst district fter y fur

yers, represetig imprvemet f mre t 70%.70

CHaRT 3: aveRage STudeNT gRoWTH oN maP* SubTeSTS, Fall 2008 SPRINg 2009

* MAP M A P. T .

N: R y B y ; . R B y j. R y y .

S: A y A L, E D U Ry U, MA200. A .

averagepercentilegrowth

Reaig Lagage Math

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

2.58

4.5

5.68

4.1

2.92

6.78

1.98

0.210.79

~70%

= statisticallY signiFicant

Finding For boettcher teachers

non-boettcher teachers

boettcher teachers

boettcher mentors


22/104


92% f Bettcer tecers re sti tecig cmpred

wit estimted verge f 60% i Crd fter y

tree yers, represetig imprvemet f mre t

53%.71

Principal satisfaction: Pricips rted 88% f Bst

Tecer Residecy grdutes s equy effective r mre

effective t t er first-yer tecers. a mjrity were rted

s sigificty mre ef fective. Mre t 94% f pricips

idicted teir desire t ire dditi BTR grdutes.72

a UTRU prter prgrms re currety cductig prgrm

evutis.73

c/ q:74 Te tt prgrm cst

per residet rges frm $37,350 t $84,000, depedig

te city, wit verge cst per residet f $50,000.

Te Bettcer prgrm is te w ed, t pprimtey

$38,000.

Csts icude metr d residet stipeds, prgrm

perse, recruitig epeses, prgrm mteris, d

metr triig. of tese csts, t e residet stiped vries

te mst, depedig te c cst f ivig. Stipeds

re typicy $10,000 $11,000 but c be s ig s

$32,000. Mst residecy prgrms require residets t

py tuiti, but tuiti cst s re mst wys subsidized r

discuted i sme wy. Te verge tuiti cst is but

$7,400.75 T dte, te csts ve bee cvered by mi f

privte pitrpy, district fuds, d feder fuds trug

prgrms ike ameriCrps.76

Wie resercig tis mde, we frequety erd ccers

but te ig upfrt csts f tecer residecy prgrms.

Fr drs seekig impct, mdes csts eed t be

uderstd i reti t its impct. as te c st-per-impct

estimte bew iustrtes, residecy prgrms ffer te

prmise f gret pitrpic bg fr buck. neteess,

residecy prgrms rud te cutry re kig fr wys

t reduce r redistribute teir csts. Sme ides icude

substitutig s fr cs pymets t residets, d

requirig sc districts t py metrs frm prfessi

devepmet budgets.

c : Bsed curret prgrm csts d te

resuts f te Bettcer prgrm, we estimte tt, fr $60

t $134 per secdry studet, Urb Tecer Residecies

c ed t te fwig impcts:

Improved student outcomes. Mesurbe gis i studet

mstery f ctet i imprtt res suc s redig.

Studets tugt by Bettcer-tried ew tecers

demstrted sttisticy sigifict redig gis tt

were pprimtey 70% iger t gis by tse tugt

by -Bettcer ew t ecers.77

Improved school functioning s idicted by ig rtes

f pricip stisfct i d icresed tecer reteti.78

after five yers, te BTR, aUSl, d Bettcer prgrms

d tecer reteti rtes sigificty iger t district

d stte verges, d rtes represet imprvemet

f 66% t 84% ver ti five-yer reteti rtes, 79

despite te fct tt te residecy grdutes were

tecig i ig-eed scs.

Savings to school districts. Te csts f residecy

prgrms sud be weiged gist te ig cst f

tecer turver. I Cicg, fr empe, repcig

tecer csts pprimtey $18,000,80 d five-yerreteti rtes fr Cicgs aUSl grdutes represet

imprvemet f 151% ver te curret dist rict verge.81 at

tt rte, Cicg wud sve $900,000 per 100 tecer s

ver perid f five yers. Yet te cst fr 100 tecers t

g trug te aUSl prgrm wud be ess t tt

pprimtey $840,000. I ter wrds, ver five yers,

district c esiy sped mre repcemet csts t

it wud t prepre gret tecers w sty.

Fr detied eptis f w we rrived t cst d

impct estimtes, see te ppedi.

n : aiss listk, UTRU eecutive

directr, t (312) 397-8878 114, r vi sit t e UTRU Website

t www.utruited.rg . Ctct ifrmti fr fudig

prgrms: aUSl t www.us-cicg.rg , BTR t www.

bsttecerresidecy.rg , d Bettcer t www.

bettcertecers.rg.


23/104


bn r m in Prctic: othr

rsrcs fr nrs

U Ry U z

. B

y ,

z

.

M m

y pm

T URU ,

. F ,

y ,

y y .

A, ,

M P . F

y , URU

, 200:

Ay U S L, C

B P, D

D Ry

B Ry

P Ry

M Ry

I-SAR, N Y Cy

N V P S-H C

U Ry, N Y Cy

Uy C U EP, C

A Ry P, O, CA

I U Ry

L A M S Ry

/H, C K, N

A Ry

P Ry P

R Ry

C C, M

S. P, MN

R pp vy-b

pp pm

W y

, . B

y- .

A , y jy ( 70%

80%) y,

82

y

y . W y-

,

j . A

,8 y

-2.

F , National Council

on eacher Quality (NCQ) y

9

y y

. NCQ ,

- , .

q.// . T

: Dallas Baptist University,

Southern Methodist University, University

o exas Pan-American, University o

exas at Austin. (A , I-

, .q.

// .) NCQ

U.S. N W R

20.84
http://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.nctq.org/edschoolreports/illinoishttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.nctq.org/edschoolreports/illinoishttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.nctq.org/edschoolreports/illinoishttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.nctq.org/edschoolreports/illinoishttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.nctq.org/edschoolreports/illinois


24/104


A L,

C C Uy,

2006 ( ..).

A L y ,

y: Alverno College M, Te

eachers College o Emporia State University

K, University o Virginia Cy S

E, Stanord University School o

Education C.

A -

y- Woodrow

Wilson eaching Fellowship (WWF). L

, WWF

(F),

-

y y-

- . U

y y , WWF

,

y

y .85

T W W N F

F y

q, y- , y, y .

T y

y. O

, y 28

W

W.

A WWF

.

N, q

y :86

T y-

.

T

( ,

j

).

T y ,

y- y. (T

y--y .)

T -

,

.

P y

y .

S y y , WWF

y F

I,

M O. I I, , y

20 F y, . E F

$0,000 (

)

y

- y

.87 M

.. .


25/104


My

q ,

- .P

y

qy , y,

.

Wht nrs sh k fr

P

,

y. S

. (For example,

New eacher Center, proiled on pages 1-3.)

O -

(For example, eacher U and he New

eacher Proect programs, described on pages -

), y y

.

H

:

. Selective recruitment o instructors, mentors,

or coaches who are eective teachers o students

and adults. T y:

R , y

-

.

A ,

,

y qy .88

F - ,

.

solution 2 : provid ing support to new teAChers

gReaT baNg FoR buCK: PRovIdINg SuPPoRT To NeW TeaCHeRS

Two-year comprehensive in-school mentoring programs

e : $34 - $ 40 y taght b a ew teacher, base the prit new

Teacher Ceters reprte csts.

Represetatie impacts:

g z that are egh t me the aerage stet 4 percetile pits i reaig a 8 perce-

tile pits i math impremets that ca make a imprtat ierece r high-ee stets wh ee acceler-

ate learig t clse achieemet gaps.

t -y tha the aerage thir-ear teacher a eqal tthe aerage rth-ear teacher.

76% .

(SEE ModEL In PRACTICE FoR SouRC ES, And SEE THE APPEndIx FoR dETAILS on ouR CALCuL ATIonS.)


26/104


2. raining and support or instructors, mentors,

or coaches on specifc ways to coach and interact

with new teachers. E :

H yz

, ,

y.

F , (..,

U T N Pj

),

.

F (.., N

C), y

(.., ).

S -

,89

q

.90

. Interactions between the new teacher and mentor

or coach that ocus on the novice teachers actual

work in the classroom. T y

, -, y

, y

. By

,

,

.

4. Regular and sustained interaction that involves

at least two years o regular usually weekly

meetings. E

y

y .9

m in Prctic: Spprt fr nw

tchrs

M P z, N C,

y

- .

N

--

. F M

P,

,

-

.


27/104


a : o-te-jb supprt fr ew tecersis tremedusy imprtt give te wekesses f mst

tecer preprti prgrms tdy. I cmpreesive

ew tecer iducti prgrm, metrs wrk e--e

wit vice tecers t yze teir tecig d suggest

imprvemets. Effective metrs re eperieced tecers

frm te prticiptig district w ve bee successfu

wit studets i teir w cssrms d re be t

wrk cbrtivey d cstructivey wit duts. Idey,

metrs re reesed fu time t wrk wit prt fi f ew

tecers mtced by ctet d grde eve. I tis Mde

i Prctice, we prfie te prfit new Tecer Ceter,

eder i prvidig cmpreesive supprt t ew tecersrud te cutr y.

n : Te new Tecer Ceter (nTC) ws

estbised i 1998 s prt f te Uiversity f Cifri

St Cruz by CEo d frmer tecer Ee Mir t supprt

ew tecers i erby sc districts. Tdy, nTC pertes

s idepedet prfit rgizti, impemetig i-

sc metrig prgrms i 30 U.S. sc districts. I

dditi t its i-sc prgrms, nTC ffers ie

metrig prgrm e-Metrig fr Studet Success

(eMSS) trug wic begiig mt, sciece, d

speci educti tecers c fid metrs wit eperiecei teir subjects d grde eves. Te rgizti s

mged t sce up quicky d effectivey; tdy nTC is

$17 mii rgizti wit mre t 200 empyees92

d presece i 50 sttes, eiter trug its i-sc

metrig mde r trug eMSS. Sice 1998, nTC s

served mre t 49,000 tecers d 5,000 metrs

crss te cutr y,93 mre t y ter prgrm prfied

i tis reprt.

h : nTC prters wit sc districts,

picymkers, d educti eders t desig d impemet

iducti prgrms tt icrese te effectiveess f ew

tecers. Wie sme prgrm detis vry frm district t

district, tere re certi nTC requiremets:

Metrs ve cted, sctied time fr weeky e-

-e meetigs wit ew tecers.

Metrs pr ticip te i 12 dys f prfessi devepmet

per yer.

Metrs serve tree-yer term s metr.

Te prgrm sps te first tw yers f ew tecers

creer.

oter key fetures f te prgrm re:

Selection and training of mentors: nTC reies prter

districts, pricips, d eistig metrs fr referrs f

strg metr cdidtes. Tis referr-bsed pipeie s

fciitted te impressive scig up f te prgrm. oce

cdidtes re seected, metrs re tried i wide rry

f tecer ssessmet ts desiged t ep yze d

imprve ew tecers prctices. Fr empe, nTC ts

give metrs guidce w t bserve ew tecer

d prvide specific, cstructive feedbck; w t ssist

ew tecers i yzig teir w prctice d idetif yig

gs; d w t cc ew tecers effective wys t

egge prets.

Differentiation of mentors role and principals role: atug

metrs re ecurged t wrk csey wit pricips i

supprtig ew tecers, tere is cer disticti betwee

te metrs re s istructi c c d te pricips

re s bt cc d evutr. Metrs d t tke prt

i evutig teir metees fr purpses f prmti r

dismiss by sc edersip. Prgrm eders uderscre

te imprtce f tis disticti. Witut it, fer f sig

teir jb r gettig bd evuti c prevet ew tecers

frm seekig ep f rm metrs.94

Professional advancement of mentors and capacity building

for districts: Te nTC prgrm beefits ew tecers,

but it s represets ivestmet i te prfessi

devepmet f metr tecers d ver cpci ty f t e

district. Metrs meet weeky t discuss teir devepmet

s istructi cces, tus buidig teir w prctice

s tecers d sc eders. My nTC metrs cite

teir weeky metr frums d ter triig s te bestprfessi devepmet f teir tecig creers, d

umerus nTC metrs ve mved it sc edersip

res fwig teir eperiece wit nTC.95


Cprhnsi in-sch ntr in spprt fr nw tchrs: Nw Tchr

Cntr


28/104


i: nTCs wrk s bee te subject f iter

ssessmets, d te rgizti prticipted i study cmpreesive iducti cducted by Mtemtic Picy

Reserc. Fidigs regrdig studet d tecer utcmes

supprt te stregt f te mde.

Student outcomes: ayses f studet gis u

cievemet tests fud mesurbe impcts studet

utcmes:

Iter ssessmets f studet test scres fud tt nTC

tecers w d cmpeted te nTC tw-yer iducti

prgrm were, verge, mre effective t tird-yer

tecers d s effective s furt-yer tecers w d

t prticipted i te prgrm.96 I ter wrds, nTCs

tecers mve up te prfessi erig curve fster

t ter ew tecers. Tis differece is critic, sice

ig-eed studets re disprprtitey tugt by ew

tecers.97

Iter ssessmets s fud tt studets f nTC

tecers cieved redig gis tt were equivet t te

gis f studets tugt by mre eperieced tecers,

despite beig i cssrms wit ig percetges f w-

cievig studets d Egis guge erers.98

a recet Mtemtic Picy Reserc study fud tttw yers f t e kid f cmpreesive iducti prvided

by nTC c resut i sigifict studet erig gis i

tecers tird yer f tecig. Tese gis re eug

t mve te verge studet frm te 50t percetie

up 4 percetie pits i redig d 8 percetie pits

i mt.99 Fr ig-eed secdry studets w fte

eter midde r ig sc redy beid, tis type f

cceerted erig is ecessry t cse cievemet

gps.

Teacher outcomes: Tecer reteti is usefu fctr t

csider sice ig tecer turver c be dmgig tscs d studets d ficiy csty t districts.100

Equy imprtt fr drs, reteti f tese mre effective

tecers is imprtt idictr f te sustibiity,

r stickiess, f te ivestmet. nTCs iter impct

evuti fud:

Si-yer tecer reteti rtes fr nTC represet

imprvemet f 16% ver te Cifri verge: 88% f

nTC tecers were sti tecig fter si yers, cmpred

wit 76% sttewide.101 Tese rtes were fr scs

served i St Cruz d Siic Vey i Cifri.

(Fr drs utside Cifri, Cifri reteti rtesmy t prvide te best becmrk sice sme frm f

iducti is prvided t tecers i te stte.)

Si-yer tecer reteti rtes fr nTC represet

imprvemet f 76% ver eve te ti five-yer

reteti rte: 88% fr nTC, cmpred wit te 50%

ti five-yer verge.102 agi, tese rtes were

fr scs served i St Cruz d Siic Vey i

Cifri.

atug te Mtemtic Picy Reserc evuti fud

effect tecer reteti, nTCs iter ssessmets

my be mre reevt becuse tey ked t nTCs specific

mde ver ger time frme.103 oter reserc cfirms

tt iger eves f iducti supprt re crreted wit

imprved tecer reteti.104


29/104


c/ q:

105

Te u cst-per-tecer fr nTC iducti prgrm is $6,000 $7,000

(r tt f $12,000 $14,000 fr te tw-yer prg rm).

Te mi csts re sries fr directrs, dmiistrtive

supprt, d prfessi devepmet crditrs, s

we s fciities, mteris, d equipmet. I Cifri, te

district pys but 35% f prgrm csts, d te stte

pys but 56% trug te Begiig Tecer Supprt

d assessmet (BTSa) prgrm; te remiig 9% refects

te dditi time burde dmiistrtrs d tecers

f impemetig te prgrm. Pitrpic cpit pys

critic re i brigig tis mde t ter cmmuities,

esurig quity ctr, d cverig perti csts tpid fr by pubic f icig.

c : Fr estimted $34 $40 per

secdry studet, nTCs cmpreesive iducti prgrms

c resut i te fwig impcts:

Improved teacher effectiveness (as measured by student

test score growth). after cmpetig te tw-yer

cmpreesive iducti prgrm:

Tecers re, verge, mre effective t

tird-yer tecers d s effective s furt -yer

tecers.106

Studets eperiece erig gis tt re

eug t mve te verge studet frm te 50t

percetie up 4 percetie pits i redig d 8

percetie pits i mt.107

Improved teacher retention. Si-yer tecer retetirtes fr nTC108 represet imprvemet f 76% ver

te ti verge.109

Savings to society. a cst-beefit study cducted by

nTC resercers aty Vir d Mice Strg t te

Uiversity f Cifri St Cruz fud tt fr every

$1 ivested i ig-quity tecer iducti prgrms,

$1.66 is retured t sciety fter five yers s resut

f reduced tecer turver csts d icresed tecer

effectiveess.110 Wie te study ws imited by te ck f

strg cmpris grup, it prvides dditi idict i

f te prmise f tis mde.



n : Bri h. Kp, vice presidet f

devepmet, t (650) 265-7675, r visit te new Tecer

Ceter Website twww.newteachercenter.org.


30/104



rsrcs fr nrs

B,

: - , y N C,

y

y--y . W

, y

9-20

.

A xmpl m pm mb l: El Sv

T Educational esting Service (ES)

P F I

P,

. T ES

M Py R

,

N C. (Proiled on pages 1-3.)

ES P

, ..

/.

xmpl p-b p-

m: U T N Pj

eacher U, H C N Y

Cy, -y -

. G

, U y

y . C

y . T

;

y N Y Cy

, N Jy,

C, N Y .

T U z y

:

Instructors who have recently demonstrated

classroom gains: U

y

K2 .

Ty -q

q

.

Hands-on, tactical curriculum tailored to subject

and grade-level needs: C ,

y,

.., yz

. S y j,

q

. T

y U S

D L,

L y. E L

q -

q

y ,

, q .

Graduation contingent on student gains:

U,

y

. U ,

,

. A ,

, jy y

y .
http://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.ets.org/pathwisehttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.ets.org/pathwisehttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.ets.org/pathwisehttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.ets.org/pathwisehttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/us-domestic-issues/view-teachingquality/www.ets.org/pathwise


31/104


U ,

A 200. O ,

92% ,2

y U

y y .O , U 200

. y . F

U, ...

Te New eacher Project (NP)

z z , ,

- . A

, z

z y

U ( y

). T ,

P P, z

y

-

y K2 . P

y NP

Rl , y -

, . U

,

y q q.4

A U,

. C

,

, ,

y . I ,

K2 .5

NP

:

C O P

P

D C D C

P P

L L P

P

My My P

P

R I R I F

F

Py P P

P

P

P

, NP 2,800

. I 200, 85%

Rl

. T

y .

I y - y y L, NP L P

P y

: , , , E

.6 T

://...//PA/200/V_

_08-26-0..
http://regents.state.la.us/pdfs/PubAff/2010/Value_added_08-26-10.pdfhttp://regents.state.la.us/pdfs/PubAff/2010/Value_added_08-26-10.pdfhttp://regents.state.la.us/pdfs/PubAff/2010/Value_added_08-26-10.pdfhttp://regents.state.la.us/pdfs/PubAff/2010/Value_added_08-26-10.pdfhttp://regents.state.la.us/pdfs/PubAff/2010/Value_added_08-26-10.pdf


32/104


O

,

-

. M

-

, P 2 .

A ,

, , . M

q

y . R

. (See pages - or more on teacher

evaluation.)7

W ,

.

Wht nrs sh k fr

T

:

. Connection to teachers classroom practice and

clear alignment with the schools priorities and

goals.8 R

qy

y.9 T

y

y .

I

, ,

, y

.

2. Intensive and ongoing training. F y,

y

0 00 6

2

.20

. Focus on building strong working relationships

among teachers.2 T y

, -

, y

. Ay,

- ,

y .22

4. Use o active learning strategies. F ,

y -y

.2

5. Evaluation to identiy areas o need and enable

continual improvement. T :

D y .

S- y .

M .

E .

district ep: onin pnt

fr tchrs

T

--, -

z, ,

, , .

D

.

O, qy

.

solution 3 : investing in teAChers ongoing development


33/104


W

,

, y

. A ,

, , . T

y y ,

y

;

,

y y y

.

B,

D Cy,

F

. T

y , D q

. F

,

.

effcti Prfssin dpnt: d Cnt n th Schtz Cntr fr

Tchin n lrship

Sice 2002, te Duv Cuty pubic sc district i Frid,

ecmpssig te city f Jcksvie, s prtered wit

te Scutz Ceter fr Tecig d ledersip t pieer

wide rge f prfessi erig prgrms t t ve d

psitive impct studet erig. Te Scutz Ceter is

prfit rgizti fuded i 1997 wit pitrpic

supprt frm Fred Scutz, c busiessm. Scutzs

$1 mii dti ws mtced by stte grts d

suppemeted by c fudrisig.124

T ddress te demds f te stdrds- d ssessmet-

bsed refrms tt dmited te ery 2000s, Duv

Cuty d te Scutz Ceter b ded te gstdig

mde f tecer prfessi devepmet tt d fcused

isted wrksps. Isted, tey istituted ciic, site-

bsed, d stdrds-drive pprtuities fr tecers t

e teir crft. Duv Cuty tecers d dmiistrtrs

ve ccess t dzes f prfessi devepmet prgrms,

specific t teir erig eeds. Te Scutz Ceter ffers

tw-wy vide cferecig tt ws eductrs t bserve

cegues i cti d tke prt i cverstis wit

tried fciittrs. Prgrms icude st te-mdted ctet

csses, eiter ie r i-pers; tree-yer cdemies

fr metrs, dmiistrtrs, cces, d tecer eders;

d Ctiuus lerig Cyce curses, wic tri sc

stff -site i sef-directed prgrm f dt gterig d

ysis fcused idetifyig studet eeds d cmig up

wit wys t djust istructi t better meet tem.125

Duv Cutys wrk is s tbe fr its tteti

t evuti. Te Scutz Ceter s reserc d

evuti directr w cbrtes wit prgrm desig

tems d tecers i te fied t guge te effects f te

Ceters prgrmmig. a ysis perfrmed itery d

cfirmed by idepedet evuti rgizti fud

crreti betwee te umber f urs t ecers egged i

Scutz Ceter prfessi devepmet d teir st udets

scres te Frid Cmpreesive assessmet Test

(FCaT).126 Fr ec dditi si-ur dy f itercy t riig

tecer received, studet scres te FCaT icresed by

f pit. Te fidigs idicted tt studets f tecers

w cmpeted te Scutz Ceters litercy 101 prgrm

( 14-dy, 84-ur curse) cud be epected t scre

seve pits iger t studets wse tecers d

itercy triig. Tis psitive crreti ws mpified we

sciecmic sttus ws tke it ccut: w-icme

studets were mre ikey t scre iger te FCaT if teir

tecers d tke prt i te mimum umber f mt d

itercy prgrm urs t t e Scutz Ceter.127 I 2009-10,

te Scutz Ceter tried mre t 38,000 tecers fr tt f pprimtey 400,000 urs.128


34/104


bn r istrict p: othr

rsrcs fr nrs

D ,

z, y y y y.

T N S D C,

Learning Forward,

qy

. T z

40 .

T y

, z, , y

. T

../..

O National Commission

on eaching and Americas Future (..

//_/_)

National Board or Proessional eaching

Standards (..). T N B P S ,

j-

y

.


35/104


Call To aCTIoN: ImPRovINg INdIvIdual TeaCHeRS SKIllS

In this chapter, we described high impact models that increase individual teachers

skills and eectiveness. These models include eective strategies or training teacher

candidates beore they are ully employed, supporting novice teachers during the

critical irst ew years on the job, and providing ongoing proessional development

opportunities that urther develop and retain the best teachers.

d y:

iy .The nonproits proiled

in our Models in Practice are examples o organizations that have implemented

these models successully. For example, Urban Teacher Residency programs

and the New Teacher Center have documented results. Other organizations have

adopted similar models, as we discuss on pages 17-18 and 24-25.

i . The models we describe canhelp donors understand how to enhance the impact o education organizations they

already und. For example, a donor who supports an organization providing coaching

to novice teachers could consider ways to ensure that coaching includes eective

techniques or helping teachers assess individual students comprehension o a new

lesson.

u y .The models we discuss

are not the only potential solutions or improving the skills o individual teachers.

Entrepreneurial donors can avoid needlessly reinventing the wheel by using our

analysis to develop new, cost-eective solutions that build o a growing body o

evidence o what works and what doesnt.


36/104



37/104


38/104


y

y y

qy

, ,

,

y,

.29

A , y

y

, y

, ,

, y.0 A y

j

y ,

.

A y

y

.2 E

y

qy y .

I ,

. I P ,

y .

Th sittin . E

y

U S y. W

,

y,

,

. Uy, -

q.

y

- y

qy . A P , y

- K2

y j, y

y y .4 S

, y

y . P

y

U.S. :

y j y y y

,

y

-y y

. H,

( ) 5

y

. -y 50%

Nearly every urban district includes some schools that are extremely troubled

and some that, despite facing similar challenges and serving similar populations

of students, are succeeding. The main difference between the two is an enabling

environment for teacher performance and, in turn, student performance.

Improving student learning, especially in high-

need, low-income schools, requires increasing

the professional capacity of schools. This is an

organizational challenge that calls for a well-

designed organizational response. Staffing weak

and dysfunctional schools with a steady stream of

talented and motivated individuals may serve some

students in the short run, but it will not strengthen

their schools in the long run.

S M J, E.D. p,

Hv G Sl E

pArt 2 : CreAting An environment for greAt teAChing


39/104


-y .6 W

,

9% 26%

y -y 7

.8

W

,

qy, y

- . T

:

S

, ,

L y

U y

L -

Sl b m lp

p, , p

T y

, ,

y. F, y y

,

. S,

j.

A y 00 25

y, 20

y y .42 T

y

. T, y

, y .

Fy, y y, y

,

. I ,

U S -

y y

; U.S.

80%

60%

J.4

Th csts f tchr trnr fr stnts n schs

Consequences o high turnover in schools: R

.

9

T , z y .

Consequences o high turnover within the proession: R

$0,000 $8,000 (..,

, , )

.40 W y y

, y .

from an organizational perspective, some

teacher turnover, especially of ineffective teachers,

is necessary and beneficial. But high rates of

teacher turnover are of concern not only because

they may be an outcome indicating underlying

problems in how well schools function, but

also because they can be disruptive, in and of

themselves, for the quality of school community

and per formance.

R Ill, P.D., p,

Uvy Pylv4


40/104


I

qy

. T qy

y . E

, ,

;

,

.44

I , y , ,

. T

. T y 20%

qy

.45 S

. A y

C

y

.46 I ,

y,

.

.A y R

I D P,

, , . (See chart :

Sources o teacher dissatisaction.)

CHaRT 4: SouRCeS oF TeaCHeR dISSaTISFaCTIoN (20002001)

S: A S R, y R. M. I, 2009, C Py R E, Uy Py. R N 8, 200, ://../VACE%20..A .

0 20 40 60 80 100

Too LITTLE PREP TIME

Too HEAvy TEACHInG LoAd

PooR SALARy oR BEnEFITS

CLASS SIzE Too LARGE

STudEnT BEHAvIoRAL PRoBLEMS

LACK oF FACuLTy InFLuEnCE

Too LITTLE PAREnTAL SuPPoRT

no oPPoRTunITIES FoRPRoFESSIonAL AdvAnCEMEnT

Too LITTLE CoLLABoRATIon TIME

64%

57%

54%

54%

52%

50 %

40%

39%

38%

Percent of public school teachers reporting various sources of dissatisfaction


41/104


Lk pl l py

pm

L y

, ,

, I

P y. N y

. O y

y

y y y

.47

A y y y

y

,48 (See pages -

or more details)

. T

, y

, -

, y

, y y , .

M, P , y y

MKy & Cy

y .49

U pyl vm

bvl pblm

T -

, -

y . My -

y

y .50 D

2009-0 y C, , 260 y

.5 S

.

My , ,

y

. I

, ,

. S

q y ,

.

Lk l l - l

P y

j - . A CEO,

,

. N ,

-

,52 y y

.

F -

. O 67%

72%

y.5 A

, y ,

q

, y

y, , .54 My

: y y ; y

y y

, ,

; y

y

.55


42/104


P, ,

j. A y

y

y

j

. T

y y .57 B y

y ,

.58

Hw nrs cn chn th sittin

B ,

, ,

:

. Improving principal training and support.

C

- .

D y

y , , .

(See pages 3-.)

2. Supporting eective whole-school reorm

models. S y

z

. (See pages 3-.)

B

j ,

-

y.

Leadership is not something that is developed in a

lecture hall, but rather learned through the ongoing

interactions with students, parents, teachers, and

community members.

Ppl by N L

N Sl, Blm, MD56


43/104


A , y

-

.60 S

y

-y .6 T y

,

.62 E

, ,

,

, ,

, ,

y . F, ,

.

Cqy,

.6

Wht nrs sh k fr

By

,

-qy .

H

:

. A rigorous process or choosing candidates,

. T :

S ,

,

q ,

. A P ,

- .

C

.

If you get the principal piece right, the rest will fall

into place An atmosphere of strong and ef fective

leadership is critical in the neediest schools.

Kv N, p m

, Fx Cy, VA Pbl Sl59

solution 1 : improving prinCipAl trAining And support

gReaT baNg FoR buCK: ImPRovINg PRINCIPal TRaININg aNd SuPPoRT

Analysis based on the nonprofit New Leaders for New Schools

e :$170 y i a schl le b a pricipal wh receie high qalit traiig

a spprt.

Represetatie impacts:

m, i ke sbject areas sch as math a reaig. Fr high-ee stets,

accelerate aal grwth is critical t clsig achieemet gaps.

Apprimatel2.5 90%

withi fe t see ears. Sch gais are sigifcat i high-ee schls, where stets

te eter seeral grae leels behi.

14% er the istrict aerage, espite a higher-ee stet pplati.

(SEE ModEL In PRACTICE FoR SouRC ES, And SEE THE APPEndIx FoR dETAILS on ouR CALCuL ATIonS.)


44/104


2. An emphasis on practical, hands-on training,

tailored to specifc principal needs,

y:

(.., ),

(..,

), (..,

).

. F ,

y

j- . I -

y j . I ,

- y

, ,

.

y

. T y ,

,

, -y,

y .

. Sustained support or principals, including

access to a network o ellow principals and

coaches. S

, , y y,

y . A

y , y

.

m in Prctic: Princip Trinin

n Spprt

,

z, N L

N S,

-

. F

M P,

z .


45/104


a : Effective pricips c ve sigifict impct studets d tecers i ig-eed

secdry scs, d te system t rge. I tis

Mde i Prctice, we prfie new leders fr new Scs,

rgizti tt successfuy ddresses tree critic

cmpets fr esurig strg edersip f ig-eed

scs: seective recruitmet f ew pricips, etesive

triig f cdidtes, d gig prfessi supprt

ce pricips re pced i fu-time sc edersip

psitis.

n : new leders fr new Scs (nlnS)

ws fuded i 2000 by five busiess d educti

grdute studets w submitted ide fr t e rgizti

t te u busiess p cmpetiti t hrvrd Busiess

Sc. Tey were fiists i te cmpetiti, beg

receivig fudig ffers, d strted te prgrm. Te

rgizti s grw frm iiti crt f 13 spirig

pricips i Cicg d new Yrk City i 2001 t mre

t 700 new leder s s f 2010.164 Te rgizti wrks

wit bt district d crter scs i 12 gegrpic sites

i te Uited Sttes: Cicg, Il; new Yrk City; newrk,

nJ; Btimre d Price Gerges Cuty, MD; Wsigt

DC; te Cifri By a re; Mempis, Tn; Miwukee, WI;

Crtte, nC; d new ores d Jeffers Pris, la.

h : nlnSs wrk is crcterized by crefuy

desiged recruitig, triig, d supprt structures fr

pricips, s we s dt-drive decisi mkig. Te

rgizti s mkes sigifict ivestmets i evuti

d reserc, wic t y ep nlnS imprve its w

prgrm, but s pricip effectiveess mre brdy

trug nlnSs ifuece district picies d ter

pricip devepmet prgrms. Key fetures f te mde

re:

Highly selective recruiting process: Recruiters cst wide et

t idetify utst dig cdidtes frm diverse bckgrudsw ve tecig eperiece. nlnS ggressivey recruits

i cmmuities were it wrks, d tps peer rgiztis

ike Tec fr americ d Te new Tecer Prject t

ep idetify pteti ppicts. nlnS s reies eviy

its w umi etwrks t mite strg cdidtes.

appicts w pss te iiti screeig prcess prticipte

i set f itesive iterviews, icudig cse studies d

re-mdeig sceris, desiged t ssess pers distructi edersip quities. Te rgizti ks fr

eders wit reetess drive d strg pers beief i

every studets biity t succeed. admissi t te prgrm

is very cmpetitive, wit but 6% f ppicts ccepted

ec yer.165

Six-year commitment: If seected, ec prticipt mkes

cmmitmet t serve s sc eder fr t est si yers

(icudig te first triig yer) i prticur gegrpic

prgrm site.166

Intensive, practical preparation for the principal position:

Prticipts begi te first yer ced te FudtiYer wit fur-week summer triig prgrm.

Te triig is desiged t devep istructi d

rgizti edersip skis d is eviy ifrmed by

nlnSs Urb Eceece Frmewrk, set f pricip

prctices d respsibiities bsed esss ered

frm urb pubic scs tt ve mde sigifict gis

i studet cievemet. Te frmewrk rgizes pricip

respsibiities it five mjr ctegries: 1) studet

cievemet-bsed erig d tecig, 2) cievemet

d beief-bsed sc cuture, 3) ig-quity stff iged

t te scs visi, 4) systems d pertis tt drive

erig d cuture, d 5) pers edersip.

Fr te first cdemic yer, cdidtes re te pced i

Residecies i urb pubic scs, i wic tey tke

edersip res d re pid by te district. as pr t f

te Residecy, te prticipt ssumes re-wrd eder-

sip respsibiities d is ed ccutbe fr epig te

sc imprve studet utcmes. Residets receive guid-

ce frm metr pricips d nlnS cces d tted

tw e-week Fudtis Semirs. Residets re evu-

ted trugut te yer gist defied set f edersip

cmpetecies, wit iput prvided by te metr pricip,

nlnS cc, d nlnS c eecutive directr. at teed f te Fudti Yer, cdidtes re edrsed s

pricip cdidtes r ssistt pr icip cdidtes, r

re dismissed frm te prgrm. abut 80% re recm-

meded fr fu-time pricip psitis t te ed f te

Residecy yer. Remiig cdidtes cmpete yer s

ssistt pricip i rder t demstrte rediess fr

te pricip re.167


Rcri t in, t r in in, n spprt in nw pr incips fr h ih-n schs :

Nw lrs fr Nw Schs


46/104


Ongoing network of support: oce ired by district dmtced t sc, nlnS pricips d ssistt pricips

ve ctiued ccess t vriet y f prfessi resurces

frm nlnS d receive itesive ccig supprt fr e t

tw yers. Mre geer supprt ctiues beyd tse tw

yers trug te rger etwrk f nlnS-tried pricips.

Pricips reprt tt te etwrk is ivube gig

resurce.168

Performance management systems and culture: nlnS is

crcterized by dt-drive cuture d uwverig

fcus resuts fr studet s. Fr empe, nlnS s uced

itesive erig ged t imprve te perfrmce f

ig scs ed by nlnS-tried pricips, wic, despite

sme prmisig resuts, ve t sw studet test scre

gis cmprbe t tse see i eemetry d midde

scs (see Impct secti bew). nlnS cducted mre

t 30 visits t successfu ig scs iside d utside

te nlnS etwrk. Isigts gied frm tt prcess ve

ifrmed revisi f te Urb Eceece Frmewrk d

f te triig curricuum fr secdry sc cdidtes.

nlnS s s cmmissied evuti f its etire

prgrm by te RanD Crprti.

i: I dditi t te RanD evuti, nlnS cducts

gig iter ssessmets f impct. Resuts frm bt

effrts cfirm te stregt f te rgiztis mde.

Student outcomes: Give te idirect ture f te

retisip betwee pricips d studets, nlnS resuts

re impressive.

Ery resuts frm RanD sw tt i K8 scs ed

by nlnS-tried pricips fr tree r mre yers, te

verge studet gied 2.4 percetie pits i mt d

2.5 percetie pits i redig stdrdized tests,

cmpred wit simir studets i te district.169 Put

ter wy, studet w ws perfrmig better t20% f peers i mt d redig eded up perfrmig

better t 22.4% f peers i mt d 22.5% f peers

i redig meig tt te studets rte f erig

cceerted. Tese resuts re sttisticy sigifict,

wic is especiy cmpeig give te retivey sm

size f te curret smpe.

Studet s e-yer gis refected seve-fd imprvemetver verge district gis i mt d Egis guge

rts (Ela) test scres cmbied, ccrdig t iter

ssessmets; nlnS-ed scs gied 8% versus 1%

verge fr te district.170

18% f new leder-ed midde scs demstrted

brektrug gis i mt d El a cmbied, versus

y 5% f district scs, ccrdig t nlnS iter

ssessmet.171 Mkig brektrug gis mes tt

te sc is trck t ve 90% r mre studets

perfrmig t grde eve witi five t seve yers.172

Tis represets tw d f times imprvemet i te

percet f scs mkig tese gis.

nlnS s fud tt ig scs ed by new leders ve

iger grduti rtes t district verges. Ery resuts

frm te RanD study pit t grduti effects tt grw

wit nlnS pricips epsure t teir scs.173 Iter

ssessmets fud tt i 2009, te verge grduti

rte fr sc ed by nlnS pricip fr tw r

mre yers ws 74%, cmpred wit rte f 65% fr

district scs.174 Tis represets 14% imprvemet i

grduti rtes ver te district verge, despite te fct

tt nlnS pricips wrk i te igest-eed scs.

Placement, commitment, and reach of New Leaders: Te

percetge f grdutes w g t becme pricips

is imprtt iterim impct mesure f pricip

recruitmet d triig prgrm. here, nlnS utperfrms

trditi prgrms:

Cmpred wit trditi prgrms, sigificty rger

sre f nlnS grdutes becme pricips i te f irst few

yers: 81% f nlnS grdutes175 cmpred wit 20%

30% tiy.176


47/104


c/ q:

177

nlnS estimtes te cstf recruitig d triig pricip t be $112,000 per

residet. Tis tt icudes stff d trve time devted

t recruitmet d seecti, te fur-week summer triig

prgrm, semirs trugut te Fudti Yer, d

sm stiped fr metr pricips. Te u cst t

suppr t prcticig pri cip is but $13,000, wic cvers

ccig, gig triig d cmmuity-buidig effrts,

d supprt ts suc s sc digstic istrumets.

nlnS geery receives but 10% f its fudig frm

sc districts, but 10% trug feder fudig, d

but 80% frm privte surces.

c : Fr estimted $170 per secdry

studet i sc ed by new leder, resuts icude:

Improved student achievement

Midde sc studets i scs wit nlnS-

tried pricips fr tree r mre yers imprved

teir stdrdized test scres by 2.4 percetie

pits i mt d 2.5 percetie pits i redig

verge, s cmpred wit simir studets i

te district, idictig cceerted erig.178

Midde sc studets e-yer gis refected

seve-fd imprvemet ver verge district gis

i mt d Egis guge rts ( Ela) test scres

cmbied.179

new leder-ed midde scs utperfrmed

district scs (by tw d f times) i terms

f te percet f scs mkig brektrug

gis.180

Higher student graduation rates. new leder-ed igscs swed 14% imprvemet i grduti rtes

ver te district verge.181



n : Fr mre ifrmti, pese

ctct Juie hrwitz, cief eter ffirs fficer, t

[email protected], r visit te nlnS Website t

www.s.rg.


48/104



rsrcs fr nrs

W N L N S,

, ,

- . O z

. O

,

(N Y, A, C, D

) z

y

.

T y y

,

y,

y y . TA D

. (See pages -.)

Te NYC Leadership Academy

. A

y y

y N Y Cy,

z y y

-- N Y

Cy D E. I :

;

;

-y ; -

y -

; NY Cy D E. I ,

z

,

,

,

,

. T z y

, -

z

,

.82

R NYC LAy .yy..


49/104


A

qy

. N, - , j

z

. W-

y

. T y

,

, , y. L y

y,

zz -

y . J

y

, -

.

T - -

qy y.

I , -

z

. W-

y y y

- y

;

, y

, ,

, , ,

y .8 S

,

, .

E -

, y

, y . My

- -

. T

, y

. T

,

z 47-

52. T . C

y. (See page or more onCharter Schools.)

Wht nrs sh k fr

By

, , ,

. H

-

, , y :

. Processes and structures that strengthen

individual teachers skills. T : S

C

O

solution 2 : supporting effeCtive whole-sChool reform models


50/104


greAt bAng for buCk: supporting effeCtive whole-sChool

reform models

The llwig aalses are base reprte ttal (istrict speig pls philathrpic s), per-ppil cstsa cmete reslts Caliria-base Gree dt Pblic Schls a new yrk-base Geerati Schls.

C l:

F $8,400 i Ls Ageles, stets atteig a Gree

dt charter schl eperiece:

F as measre b a ariet acaemic measres, cmpare with ther

pblic high schls i the same eighbrh a istrict. 12% r Gree dt schls er cmparable schls. 86% - -y , espite serig high-ee

stet pplatis.

C mm z (CMO) kv x l:

F $9,800 i Ls Ageles, reslts the irst tw ears

Gree dts takeer Lcke Seir High Schl icle:

50% -y . 48% 75% q

.

R l:

F xy $15,000 per ear rig the start-p ears (with a epecte

lwer cst ~$12,500 ater ear three), atteig Brkl Geerati Schl has reslte i the llwig

impacts r stets:

70% x q , espite the act that l 20% stets etere

the schl perrmig at grae leel. m - .

Note: Per-pupil spending varies widely by district and state. For example, average annual per pupil district spending over the

last couple years was approximately $10,500 in Los Angeles and $12,500 in New York City.

(SEE THE ModELS In PRACTIC E FoR SouRCES, And SEE THE APPEndIx FoR dETAILS on ouR CALCuL ATIonS.)


51/104


2. High perormance expectations and the systems

required to reach them. T :

F ,

,

/ ,

y y y

F , y

;

z, y, y

y;

. Mechanisms that allow teachers and

administrators to know and keep track o all

students. T :

C j (..,

z

y )

C

M

4. School day and school year that are scheduled

to maximize learning time or teachers and

students, y:

E y y

(

y

)

C

5. Curriculum that is rigorous, relevant and

engaging to high-need secondary students. T

:

M

- (.., j

- )

C-

O

S

E (.., y)

6. School perormance management strategy,

y:

S (..,

, y ,

y )

A , z

y, y -

A ,

, , ,

,


52/104


ms in Prctic: Wh-sch

rfr

O

- . O

, , -

. F M P,

y

- .

T , G D P

S,

. W

y -

,

G D . F,

y , G D

,

y

y .

S, G D

.T, jy

z,

y

.

W y y, -

, G S,

. I

y

qy , y, .

G S y

z

.

CHaRTeR SCHoolS: a PRImeR

over te st decde, debte s rged betwee tse w fvr crter scs d tse w ppse tem.

Prpets ve rgued tt crter scs permit eeded ivtis tt re impssibe witi te etreced

bureucrcy d ui rues f te verge sc district. oppets crge tt crter scs crem ff district

fuds d te best studets, udermiig pubic educti. I trut, it is ery impssibe t geerize but cr ter scsbecuse f sigifict vr itis i teir desig, cti, strtegy, d resuts. here re te fct s:

Crter scs re pubic scs: tey re utrized trug stte egisti, d tey usuy receive te sme

per-studet cti s ter pubic scs i te district r stte i wic te cr ter is estbised.

Crters fte ve mre utmy t regur district scs we it cmes t irig d firig, cmpesti,

curricuum, d sc struct ure.

Mst sttes set cp te umber f crter scs tt c be peed ec yer, tug recet feder picy

s put pressure sttes t rise r remve suc cps.

Crter scs educte y sm frcti f K12 studets currety fewer t 3%.184

Crter scs c be perted s sige scs r etwrks f scs ru by crter mgemetrgizti (CMo).

Sever studies ve sw tt, i terms f studet cievemet, te verge crter sc is dig better t te

verge pubic sc.185

It is becmig icresigy cer tt t crter scs re creted equ; just s i te pubic sc system, tere re

eceet crter scs, terribe crter scs, d everytig i betwee.


53/104


a : T my ig-eed secdry studetsre i pubic scs were epecttis fr studets

re w, discipie issues disrupt erig, curricuum is

iceret, tecers re ieffective, d prets re t

egged. atug tere is wide vriti i te quity f

crter scs (SEE PaGE 46), crter scs c be mre

ggressive d ivtive i ddressig suc issues sice

teir crters free tem frm sme f te district bureucrcy

d ui ctrcts tt c impede refrm. Etedig te

sc dy, wig tecers t give mre time t struggig

studets, icresig py fr effective tecers, firig

ieffective es, d cgig te curricuum re just few

empes f cges tt c be esier fr crter sct impemet. Tis Mde i Prctice prvides iustrti

f w e crter mgemet rgizti (CMo)

Gree Dt Pubic Scs s used its biity t wrk

utside te trditi system t imprve te evirmet i

wic tecers tec d studets er.

n : Gree Dt Pubic Scs ws fuded

i ls agees i 1999 i respse t te fiures f pubic

ig scs i te re. Sice its icepti, Gree Dt s

peed 17 crter ig scs i te mst vuerbe res

f ls agees. Tis umber icudes te turrud f

rge pubic ig sc tt resuted i t e creti f eigtGree Dt scs. Gree Dt serves primriy ig-eed

studets: 93% f its studets quify fr free r reduced-

price uc, 25% re Egis guge erers, 80% re

lti, d 19% re afric -americ.186 accrdig t te

rgizti, Gree Dt evisis pubic sc system

i ls agees mde up f sm, ig-perfrmig scs

tt ec ecmpss beief i te pteti f studets,

fster tecer cretivity, ecurge pret ivvemet,

d utimtey prepre studets fr cege, edersip, d

ife.187

h : Gree Dt eders, ike tse f my fte best kw crter sc mgemet rgiztis,

describe dig wtever it tkes t imprve studet

erig. Fr Gree Dt tis s icuded:

Engaging unions for change: Uike my crter

rgiztis, Gree Dt empys uiized tecers, d

te ui ws ivved i desigig te sc mde.188

Gree Dt tecers ve vice i sc picy d

curricuum d wrk urs tt re t cstried by set

umber f miutes s specified i mst ui ctrcts.

Selective recruitment of teachers: Gree Dt tecers ted tbe firy yug, wit verge ge f 28 yers d verge

tecig eperiece f 4.5 yers.189 Te rgizti seects

cdidtes crefuy, empsizig crcteristics f umiity,

refective prctice, d wiigess t er d imprve.190

Tecer recruitmet ivves sever iterview ruds d

writte test t t screes fr vues iged wit Gree Dts

cuture d rediess t wrk i urb scs.191

Performance management tied to standards: a scs

re required t use iterim ssessmets t guge studet

prgress trugut te yer, s we s t ffer studets

ger sc dy, ctc-up pprtuities, d cege

kwedge prgrmmig. a scs f fer te cre curses

required by te stte f Cifri fr ig sc grduti

d cege etry. Gree Dt s s dpted redig

prgrm d rubric iged wit Te Cifri Writig

Prject t sce up studet writig t cege eve ver te

fur yers f ig sc. Scs wit prmisig studet

utcmes re wed mre eewy i csig cu

high impact philanthropy to improve teaching quality: focus on high-need secondary students

Documents