Addressing the ‘Urban Teacher Quality Gap’: Two Approaches

1. Addressing the ‘Urban Teacher Quality Gap’: Two Approaches National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education AACTE New Orleans February 2008

2. The Problem • Inadequate access to well-qualified teachers in urban areas • Need for more appropriate high quality preparation AND INDUCTION SUPPORT for teachers in urban schools

3. Two Approaches • Urban Teacher Residency Model • PDS-based Preparation and Induction

4. Urban Teacher Residencies Seven principles: • Tightly weave education theory and classroom practice together • Focus on learning alongside an experienced, effective mentor • Group teacher candidates in cohorts • Build constructive partnerships with districts, schools, communities, universities and unions • Serve school districts • Support Residents once they are hired as teachers of record • Establish and support differentiated career roles for veteran teachers (www.teacherresidencies.org)

5. PDS Based Preparation & Induction Six Principles: • Connecting theory and practice by grounding new teacher learning in the real life of schools. • Partnerships that extend across the communities of interest, involving the university, the school district, the school, and teacher organizations. • Assessment appropriate for what new teachers have to learn. • Qualified mentors specifically trained and compensated to mentor novice teachers. • Focus on student learning by embedding novice learning in the cycle of teaching practice. • Restructuring. time, roles, and resources to create an effective learning community for students and professionals.

6. Similarities • Comprehensive teacher development system (prep. – professional development) • Based on medical residency model – situated learning • Prep. includes full year residency/not teacher of record • Continuing support for induction phase • School structures support teacher learning • Partnership-based

7. UTR Model Full year paid residency in prep. phase Facilitating third party entity Prep. and induction geared toward needs of specific district PDS-Based Model Full year unpaid internship in prep. phase University/district/union partners Prep. more generic; Induction district specific Differences

8. Shared Challenges • Policy context • Conflicting local, state, and federal policies • Capacity • Scale-up requirements • Communication • Cross institutional partnerships • Financing • Requires front end investment in teacher recruitment, preparation, and induction • Jurisdictional control • Who prepares and inducts new teachers

9. Panelists • Catherine Emihovich U. of Florida, Gainesville • Mark Larson National-Louis University • Jon Snyder Bank Street College of Ed. • Michael Whitmore Academy for Urban School Leadership • Jesse Solomon Boston Teacher Residency

10. Discussion Questions • What is the nature of the partnership in your program? • What do you believe is important for new teachers to know? When, where, and how do they learn it in your program? • How does your program address the needs of diverse learners? • What are the challenges and benefits of situated learning for teachers? • How might your programs influence teacher education and school reform more broadly?