Advancing the Teaching Profession

Page 1Advancing the Teaching Profession

12/9/2011 2:15:06 PMhttp://teachingquality.typepad.com/

Advancing the Teaching Profession

TLNHome

TLN Featured BlogsDecember 02, 2011

Teacher WhisperersWanted

By Alaina Adams

Alaina Adams is a National Board Certified teacher in Phoenix, Arizona. In addition to teaching high school English, she serves as a cognitive coach and professionaldevelopment coordinator at the Phoenix Union High School District and the Arizona K12 Center . You can read her blog at Stories from School AZ .

In my endeavors to elevate the teaching profession, I am fortunate enough to bepart of the work that the Arizona K12 Center crafts around vision , leadership, learning , andtechnology in education. Recently, I was chosen as one of 20 teachers across the state to work as part of a TeacherSolutions team designed to improve teaching and learningin Arizona. This work will be based on the framework outlined in TEACHING 2030. On November 16th and 17th, I spent some time with Barnett Berry and CTQ staff todream, play, and plan.

Asmy group explored teacherpreneurism and a future of innovation, phrases like "a league of extraordinary educators" and "teacher whisperers" playfully came up inconversations. At the end of my last day with the team, I foundmyself returning to an Outlook mailbox full of the current realities of teaching that I "have to" dealwith. I'm

frustrated that I don't have more cognitive coaches available to help advancemy practice. I'm also frustrated that TV shows and movies (like Jersey Shore and The HorseWhisperer) will earn more money in one shot than I'll ever make in my entire career as an educator. To clarify my thoughts, I ended my day by posting this comparisonbetween "horse whisperers" and "teacher whisperers."

***

Horse Whisperer: Horses that have suffered abuse from people or been traumatized through an accident may develop changed behavior that their owners find difficult todealwith, or may even result in the horse being labeled dangerous.

Teacher Whisperer: Teachers that have been traumatized by things like excessive testing, narrow teacher evaluation, misuse of national curriculum, data -driveninstruction, stifling teacher accountability, elimination of tenure, competition for funding, punitive school labels , "education reform," and misguided philanthropists maydevelop changed behavior that some may find difficult to deal with, or may even result in the teacher being labeled dangerous.

***

Horse Whisperers spend years studying the horse and its behavior in natural surroundings. They learn to read the silent but incredibly powerful communication we callbody language.

Teacher whisperers, given appropriate release time, can study the behavior of teachers in their classrooms. There, they can study body language like the elevation ofvoice, eye-rolling, head flopping on the desk, and sporadic tears to understand a teacher ’s entire language of communication to best gauge their needs.

***

Horse Whisperer: Young horses that had received little handling but were destined to be riding horses, for example, were once trained to work using quiet, brutalmethods of coercion . This system was called ‘breaking .’ ‘Making’ a horse is preferable to breaking one.

Teacher Whisperer: Probationary teachers that received littlementoring but were destined to be classroom teachers, for example, might have been ones hustledthrough subpar certification programs. This system is called ‘fast tracking. ’ ‘Making’ a quality teacher is preferable to rushing one.

***

In some public demonstrations , a horse whisperer will stand in an enclosure, which a young untrained horse is released into . The horse ’s natural instinct is to fight orflight. The whisperer becomes the herd , the safe place to be, by his use of body language. First, he sends the horse away; he has not yet invited it to join his herd ! He drivesthe horse forward and keeps him away.

In some school districts , only one teacher whisperer stands per campus, of unreasonable sizes , in which un-mentored teachers are released into. The teacher’s naturalinstinct is to sink or swim. Though the teacher whisperer becomes the safe place to be, he or she is often busy corralling other un-mentored teachers , and the un-mentoredteacher-in-immediate-need is often driven away.

***

Horse Whisperer: During this training period, the horse's body language is clearly visible to people watching. The horse whisperer approaches as if he or she has all day tostand there. The result is a clear understanding that can be successfully built on. No shouting, no fear, no pain. A calm and positive mutual understanding provides a soundbasis for true partnership between man and horse .

Teacher Whisperer: Given ample exposure to teacher whispering methods, teachers can change their body language and perform better on evaluations. This processcan take several weeks or years . It is always approached as if the teacher whisperer has all the time in the world to stand there. No shouting, no fear, no pain. A calm and

positive mutual understanding provides a sound basis for true partnership between teacher and whisperer.

Summary:

The horse whisperer does not perform tricks . He, or she, uses the oldest language in the world in order to read the horse and communicate with the horse, combined withequine psychology, to achieve partnership.

The teacher whisperer does not perform tricks. He, or she, uses the oldest language in the world in order to read the teacher and communicate with the teacher,combined with human psychology and compassion , to achieve partnership.

Posted at 10:15 AM in Future of Teaching, School Reform, Teaching 2030, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

November 22, 2011

Preparing Teachers for Schools WeWant

By Kristoffer Kohl

Kristoffer Kohl is a former classroom teacher working currently as a policy associate at CTQ to further the vision of TEACHING 2030. He previously collaborated with ateam of accomplished teachers to produce the report “Transforming School Conditions : Building Bridges to the Education System that Students and Teachers Deserve.”

During recent visits to a few schools known for their innovative practices, I was struck by one school leaderwho lamented, “We are not preparing teachers for the schools thatwewant; we are preparing teachers for the same schools we’ve had for years.”

By the time teachers have gone through the traditional channels to become instructional experts, they are indeed experts when it comes to school—old school .



Posted at 10:15 AM in Future of Teaching, School Reform, Teaching 2030, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

November 22, 2011

Preparing Teachers for Schools WeWant

By Kristoffer Kohl

Kristoffer Kohl is a former classroom teacher working currently as a policy associate at CTQ to further the vision of TEACHING 2030. He previously collaborated with ateam of accomplished teachers to produce the report “Transforming School Conditions : Building Bridges to the Education System that Students and Teachers Deserve.”

During recent visits to a few schools known for their innovative practices, I was struck by one school leaderwho lamented, “We are not preparing teachers for the schools thatwewant; we are preparing teachers for the same schools we’ve had for years.”

By the time teachers have gone through the traditional channels to become instructional experts, they are indeed experts when it comes to school—old school .

Malcolm Gladwell refers to it as the 10,000-hour rule . We prefer to call it the 15,000 -hour problem. Regardless of how you identify it, there are some strong forces tugging

against innovation in our classrooms.

In his book Outliers, Gladwell posits that expertise in any field comes after 10,000 hours spent working at it. From Bill Gates writing code at his high school ’s computer to the

Beatles playing marathon gigs in Hamburg , Germany , before taking the world by storm, Gladwell presents an entertaining argument for those hours you spent practicingpiano.

Unfortunately, this equation works in both directions. As Seth Godin points out, there are plenty of bands playing 10,000 hours of subpar music . Long hours may help youbecome an expert, but they won’t ensure that you’ll make it to the top of the charts.

Such is the rub for educators.

The average high school graduate attends public school for 13 years, amounting to nearly 15,000 hours . Tacking on another five years for undergraduate education and

credentialing before becoming licensed leaves incoming teachers with nearly 20,000 hours spent in a classroom.

Each year ’s newest class of teachers is freshlyminted in the ways of yesterday’s schools. They are experts two times over in the way they view their instruction , classroom,

school, and most important, their position in the education hierarchy. While preservice programs endeavor mightily to equip teachers with the latest research-basedstrategies, it is difficult to fight what has been ingrained so deeply .

I visited another school renowned for its blended learning structure . There , students in the learning lab were completing digitalversions of multiple-choice tests. A worksheet with lipstick is still just a worksheet . Despite the wave of complex, educational gamingsoftware sweeping across our digital devices and making Oregon Trail look like the Model T, even some of themore “advanced”school models struggle to internalize that learning is as much about the process as it is about the content.

Fortunately, there is a growing number of educators breaking from themoorings of the past and logging smarter hours with students.As in any field, innovation comes from craftsmenwho experiment with their practices on a regular basis. The flipped classroomgained recognition for reconceiving our notion of instructional time, but I’m also thinking of teachers like Bill Ferriter and Marsha

Ratzelwho have explicitly built novel learning experiences into their instruction.

What elements of your 20,000 hours have you left in the past ?

Posted at 11:41 AM in Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Prep , Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

November 14, 2011

Ron Thorpe and the Future of NBPTS

Last week, CTQ blogger and teacher John Holland wrote an open letter to RonThorpe, who was recently named president and CEO of the National Board for ProfessionalTeaching Standards (NBPTS). In his letter, John expressed his hope for what the NBPTS could accomplish under its new leadership. “I hope you are a special kind ofleader,” John writes, “a ‘boundary spanner ’ who is future-oriented and ready to collaborate with a wide range of stakeholders , including NBCTs [National Board CertifiedTeachers].” In a comment on John’s blog post , Ron Thorpe responded with a letter of his own. Below is the full text of his response.

John,

Since you have sent your thoughts in an open letter to me, I hope you don’t mind if I respond similarly. First of all, THANK YOU for writing what you did. The mere fact thatyou value such communication and took the time to fashion such a thoughtful set of observations is exactly what I’m hoping to find many times over—maybe 91,000 timesover!—amongNational Board Certified Teachers.

Letme start by addressing the word “vision,” which gives me more than a little pause . I realize that successful leaders do possess vision and , just as importantly , the ability toget others to embrace that vision. From that perspective, I’m in no position right now to speculate whether I have those qualities, at least not within the context of theNational Board . Decisions about that will emerge over time.

I can reflect, however, on my last 8+ years leading the education department at the public television station, WNET. I arrived at that job on July 14, 2003—Bastille Day!—after16 years as a teacher and dean of faculty and another dozen working in foundations , almost always around grantmaking for teachers and education writ large. I brought lots

of experiences to the job shaped by somewonderful former bosses and mentors like Ted Sizer , but the truth was I had no vision for what I’d do in public television because Ididn’t yet know enough about public television. With the help of a really strong staff and some wonderful external partners, things have come together , and today I’d putWNET’s education department up against any in public television. Not only that, but WNET is very much at the education table locally in New York City and our area, in NewYork State, at the national level, and even internationally because of ourwork last March with Secretary Duncan, OECD, and Education International around the historicInternational Summit on the Teaching Profession, which was the pre-meeting to WNET’s Celebration of Teaching & Learning. I can only hope that I’ll be as fortunate with

coalitions of partners as I move to the National Board.

I completely agree with your other points especially around partnerships . In fact, you’ll be especially pleased to know that I’m meeting with Barnett Berry and his colleague

Ann Byrd on November 21st in Raleigh , two weeks before I even start my new job.

Letme end with what I think is yourmost compelling observation: the need for the National Board to fully exercise its commitment to that third goal of advancing “other

education reforms for the purpose of improving student learning in American schools .” That is the area that most interests me at the National Board . I am not anassessment” guy, nor am I very well versed in the technical side of what it requires to establish strong and meaningful standards. What I care about most is using thatfoundation—which is so well established by the NBPTS over the last 25 years—to forge the profession teaching truly deserves to be. Much of that knowledge—and almost allof themuscle—will come from those teachers who have pursued Board Certification and who continue to set the bar not only around what teachers should know and be ableto do, but around how teachers behave as professionals.

The culture of K-12 education is inextricably linked to the culture of the individuals who lead classrooms and who create the environment in which learning takes place.Among U.S . teachers today , fewer than 3% are National Board Certified. They have a powerful voice that needs to be heard, and they are making a profound difference in the

profession, but their numbers are still too small. 3 to 100 are pretty long odds, even when the 3 are the best of the best. We need to change that balance, and we need to findways to support teachers who want to take up the challenge .



I completely agree with your other points especially around partnerships . In fact, you’ll be especially pleased to know that I’m meeting with Barnett Berry and his colleague

Ann Byrd on November 21st in Raleigh , two weeks before I even start my new job.

Letme end with what I think is yourmost compelling observation: the need for the National Board to fully exercise its commitment to that third goal of advancing “other

education reforms for the purpose of improving student learning in American schools .” That is the area that most interests me at the National Board . I am not anassessment” guy, nor am I very well versed in the technical side of what it requires to establish strong and meaningful standards. What I care about most is using thatfoundation—which is so well established by the NBPTS over the last 25 years—to forge the profession teaching truly deserves to be. Much of that knowledge—and almost allof themuscle—will come from those teachers who have pursued Board Certification and who continue to set the bar not only around what teachers should know and be ableto do, but around how teachers behave as professionals.

The culture of K-12 education is inextricably linked to the culture of the individuals who lead classrooms and who create the environment in which learning takes place.Among U.S . teachers today , fewer than 3% are National Board Certified. They have a powerful voice that needs to be heard, and they are making a profound difference in the

profession, but their numbers are still too small. 3 to 100 are pretty long odds, even when the 3 are the best of the best. We need to change that balance, and we need to findways to support teachers who want to take up the challenge .

I realize that National Board Certified Teachers are not the only great teachers in the country. Board Certification is evidence—well tested over time and trial— that those whoattain it are true professionals who make a difference in the lives of young people. In a world that can be fairly subjective and vertiginously arbitrary—where everyone has anopinion—that objectivity means something.

I thank you, John , for your open letter and your dedication to teaching and learning. I also thank you for your disenchantment. As I lead the National Board into its secondquarter-century , I need to knowwhat wemust do better, where the new opportunities are, and who the people are who care enough to expectNBPTS to stand for more than acredential. In that regard, I realize that I have much in common with the teachers the National Board was created to serve. And I am honored to be share in the work.

RonThorpeNotyet, but soon to be the new President and CEO of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards

Posted at 03:46 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, NBPTS, Teaching 2030, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (5)

November 07, 2011

Modeling Teacher Leadership

By Ali Kliegman

Ali Kliegman, a policy associate at CTQ, has been working with teacher leaders on a newwebsite called Teacher Leader Model Standards. The site, which launched lastweek, is a collaborative resource for teacher leaders to share and learn about teacher leadership in the 21st century.

Infographic designed by sunnibrown .com for the Teacher Leader Model Standards site.Within every school there is a sleeping giant of teacher leadership, which can be a strong catalyst for making change .” (Katzenmeyer and Moller , 2001)

Teacher leadership is not a new concept. Yet until we begin to cultivate , support , and spread the knowledge and expertise of those who have mastered this craft, we willcontinue to miss the mark on achieving great gainswith students.

So while the newly released Teacher Leader Model Standards may surprise some as an innovative tool for improving the profession, teacher leaders themselves have beenliving them for years. These standards describe the skills, knowledge, and competencies that teachers need to performwell in leadership roles, including:

Domain I: Fostering a Collaborative Culture to Support Educator Development and Student Learning

Domain II: Accessing and Using Research to Improve Practice and Student Learning

Domain III: Promoting Professional Learning for Continuous Improvement

Domain IV: Facilitating Improvements in Instruction and Student Learning

Domain V: Promoting the Use of Assessments and Data for School and District Improvement

Domain VI: Improving Outreach and Collaborationwith Families and Community

Domain VII: Advocating for Student Learning and the Profession

Whatmight be themost useful aspect of these standards are actual exemplars of what teacher leaders have been doing for decades. These exemplars, alongwith additionalinformation about the development and research behind the standards themselves, will all be made available via their new virtual home: www. teacherleaderstandards.org.The first featured exemplar is the Math and Science Leadership Academy , a teacher -led school in Denver, Colorado, that embodies all seven of these domains.

Thanks to generous funding from the University of Phoenix, ETS, NEA, and ECS, CTQ has been working closely with an outstanding group of five teacher leaders who areresearching and posting best practices for each of the seven domains of teacher leadership.

Suggestions for more? Send them our way. In fact, we’ll be convening a virtual community of teacher leaders for this very purpose, and we hope you’ll join the conversation!

Posted at 03:48 PM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

November 01, 2011

Support, Mastery, Leadership

By Meredith Kohl

In this guest post, Meredith Kohl , a former teacher and current CTQ policy assistant , reflects on the new education documentary Mitchell 20, as well as her own teaching

experience.

Capturing a profession in transition and highlighting the untapped collective power of teachers committed to their craft, the

powerfulMitchell 20 documentary, and the leadership of Daniela Robles, reveals that teachers are a primary solution to the complexchallenges that our schools and students face.



Suggestions for more? Send them our way. In fact, we’ll be convening a virtual community of teacher leaders for this very purpose, and we hope you’ll join the conversation!

Posted at 03:48 PM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

November 01, 2011

Support, Mastery, Leadership

By Meredith Kohl

In this guest post, Meredith Kohl , a former teacher and current CTQ policy assistant , reflects on the new education documentary Mitchell 20, as well as her own teaching

experience.

Capturing a profession in transition and highlighting the untapped collective power of teachers committed to their craft, the

powerfulMitchell 20 documentary, and the leadership of Daniela Robles, reveals that teachers are a primary solution to the complexchallenges that our schools and students face.

In the film, National Board CertifiedTeacher Daniela Robles encourages 20 of her colleagues to undergo the National Board certification process together , sparking a spirit ofcollaboration and improvement. Mitchell 20 resonated deeply with me because in five years of teaching, I never felt like I was part of the solution. I was a Teach For Americarecruit, and I had high aspirations for teaching as a career once I entered the classroom and saw the possibilities. But in my short tenure in an urban district, I felt isolated,unsupported, and confined to the bottom of a bureaucratic power pyramid.

The top-down education system had something to do with it, sure. And a school climate characterized by frequent (but irrelevant and inadequate) professional developmentand the careless manipulation of teacher expertise definitely contributed to my feelings of helplessness.

But it was more than these factors. As a teacher new to the profession, I did not see myself as part of the solution because my attempt to master my craft went largelyunsupported. Once I was deemed “effective” by my administration, the resources and individualized support needed to further improve my practice were simply not there.

Over time, experience mademany aspects of teaching easier, but I came to realize that weaknesses in my practice—for example, working with second-language learners andusing effective techniques for teaching reading—were going unchecked and unaddressed by my school leadership. My concerns as a classroom instructor were unresolved,and time for meaningful inquiry and collaborationwith my colleagues was not provided.

Without mastery, how could I articulate the learning occurring in my classroom or the complexities of my craft? How could I leverage expertise I did not possess to transformmy school ? How could I change the conversation? How could I changemy teaching , and the teaching of my counterparts? How could I change outcomes for my students?

As TEACHING 2030 co-author Shannon C’de Baca recently pointed out, “Teacher voice should be secondary to craft. First , teachers must master their craft, then we needthem to reform policy.”

The best teachers are continually improving, but what happens when they want to but can’t find meaningful and long-term avenues to do so? I regret that in my high-needschool I never heard about the National Board process, that I was unaware of communities like the Teacher Leaders Network, that a colleague like Daniela never came and

knocked onmy classroom door to present a collaborative challenge for improvement.

There are thousands of unsupported , early -career teachers in our highest-need schools unsure of where to turn in order to take their practice to the next level. Until they are

able to do so, their voices will not beheard .

So how dowe reach them?

We must spread stories likeMitchell . Not only to change the conversation, but also to change the behavior of thousands of dormant teachers who have yet to realize theirleadership potential. Collectively, teachers must understand how they can take control of their practice when support is not available at their school . They must create cohorts

like the Mitchell 20, dedicated to professional growth and learning . Teachers, especially newer ones , must have time and support for self-examination, reflection, andcollaboration so that they can improve their practice. All of this is necessary for teachers to lead the transformation of learning communities across the country.

So license a screening, share the trailer, tell early-career teachers about the National Board process, and challenge them to be part of the solution by mastering their craft,finding their voice, spreading their expertise, and stepping forward to lead.

Posted at 08:28 PM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, NBPTS, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (0)

October 28, 2011

New York Times Schools for Tomorrow Conference: A Teacher's Take

By John Holland

JohnHolland , a preschool teacher and co-author of TEACHING 2030, represented CTQ at the New York Times Schools for Tomorrow Conference last month. Below is histake on the experience.

I walked into the New York Times Schools for Tomorrow conference with some trepidation. The conference had been organized to energizestakeholders about integrating technology in our schools . I knew that many of the attendeeswould be from the private sector, includingentrepreneurs, venture capitalists , and online learning providers. I was surprised to find approximately 75 educators in the crowd of morethan 300. Some , like Brian Crosby, were educational technology specialists . Brian is an elementary teacher in Reno who stepped onto the

larger educational stage after Skype learned he ’d used their services to teach a homebound student with leukemia.

Brian secured his invite to the conference by emailing the New York Times to explain how wack it was the panels included no teachers . I got

my invite easily enough , by filling out an online form.

But I was skeptical . I attended the conference so I could live by the advice I give my daughter about soccer. She often plays defense and has gotten quite good at the skill I call

being there.” To “be there” is to see the total field, the offensive positions , and your place in anticipating an attack. You can then get to where you need to be to stop the balland turn the tide of the drive on the goal.

I went to the Schools for Tomorrow conference to “be there” as a teacher leader and passionate advocate for a hopeful vision for education. I wanted to meet the players,

especially those who might consider technology a replacement for teachers.

The Spark

David Brooks, one of themost popular opinion columnists in America , opened with a surprising remark: “I want to start by expressing a note of skepticism about technologyin education.” He continued :

My skepticism about the role of technology in the classroom is based on three arguments. The first is that people learn from people they love, they don’t learn fromcomputers they love, and anything that gets in the way between the relationship between the teacher and the student is something I’m likely to be skeptical of. Thesecond thing is that electronic communication is far inferior to personal communication…. And finally information processing. The tendency of technology is to makeinformation processing easy. But the way you learn and remember is through processing information that is hard and challenging. You want to introduce trouble, not

introduce ease.



I went to the Schools for Tomorrow conference to “be there” as a teacher leader and passionate advocate for a hopeful vision for education. I wanted to meet the players,

especially those who might consider technology a replacement for teachers.

The Spark

David Brooks, one of themost popular opinion columnists in America , opened with a surprising remark: “I want to start by expressing a note of skepticism about technologyin education.” He continued :

My skepticism about the role of technology in the classroom is based on three arguments. The first is that people learn from people they love, they don’t learn fromcomputers they love, and anything that gets in the way between the relationship between the teacher and the student is something I’m likely to be skeptical of. Thesecond thing is that electronic communication is far inferior to personal communication…. And finally information processing. The tendency of technology is to makeinformation processing easy. But the way you learn and remember is through processing information that is hard and challenging. You want to introduce trouble, not

introduce ease.

Wow, I thought, David Brooks sounds like a teacher. Even though I consider myself a passionate advocate for the use of technology in schools , I still struggle with those same

points. But if we can balance our enthusiasm about technology with our recognition of Brooks’s points, we can be the adaptive professionals that students deserve.

From Defense to Offense

The first panel included a group of international experts on technology in schools . None of them were teachers. I decided to move from defense to offense—by asking aquestion: “What concrete action steps, from your various perspectives , can be taken to help teachers use technology to teach?”

Here’s how Harri Skog, the permanent secretary of Finland'sMinistry of Education, responded:

I think it helps a lot if a teacher has an autonomous way of having his own discretion at the level of the classroom.... I think it is very important for teachers to be able toplan how they want to teach, but that needs to have this kind of trust situation. If I would be asked one thing to have, it would be more autonomy in schools.

I was sitting next to Diana Laufenberg, a powerful and visionary teacher from the Philadelphia Science Leadership Academy—we both started clapping.

Meeting the Players

Between attending panels and informally networking, I met many passionate advocates for 21st-century learning.

Larry Berger, founder and president of Wireless Generation , spoke on a panel about technical tools for the classroom. He highlighted how technology could strengthen

teachers ’ formative assessment efforts.Jacqueline Botterill, director of social public good for Skype, shared news of Skype in the classroom, connecting teachers and learners across the globe.Scott Kinney, senior vice president atDiscovery Education, described how the Discovery Educator Network enables public school teachers to leverage streamingmediafor student learning and professional development.Joel Arquillos is executive director of 826LA, a nonprofit writing and tutoring center that provides free writing programs for Los Angeles students, including after-school

and in-school tutoring, field trips , workshops, and publishing resources.Erik Michielsen founded Capture Your Flag, a project that is conducting qualitative interviews with aspirational leaders, tracking them over time. Erik will apply taggingand coding techniques to these annual interviews , identifying themes that can drive an innovative approach to curriculum development for college and career readiness .

What “Being There” Meant to Me

This conference confirmed one of my deepest held beliefs about teaching: there is a spark between human beings that is essential to the learning process. This fundamentalspark in the engine of learning can never be replaced by technology. In fact, the best uses of technology in education will continue to involve person-to-personcommunication.

The human spark is also what will make a difference in important decisions about educational policy and practice. When teachers can “be there,” they can provide a much-needed window into how policies affect the learning of individual students. When teachers can “be there,” they can ask the questions that need to be answered. We will trulyknow this spark is alive when teachers (alongwith students and parents) are not just relegated to “being there,” but are sought-after panelists in important discussions aboutteaching and learning .

Thank you, David Brooks, for calling onmy raised hand. Let's hope that next time, my colleagues and I will be answering questions, not just asking them.

Posted at 01:20 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, Teaching 2030, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (4 )

October 24, 2011

USDOE Sends Mixed Messages on Teacher Education

Just recently, the U.S. Department of Education released its plan for teacher -education reform, pointing out that too many university -based programs “do not provide

teachers with a rigorous, clinical experience that prepares them for the schools in which they will work.”

In an ironic twist, however, the Department’s Race to the Top guidelines have promoted the proliferation of alternative certification programs that shortcut pre-service

training for new recruits. These programs give recruits limited or non-existent opportunities for “rigorous, clinical” preparation prior to teaching independently. Not onlymust university -based teacher education be improved, but we also need to think about what supports teachers are given while they're teaching . There is no reason to believethat school districts are sufficiently suited to prepare teachers for the schools of today — or tomorrow, for that matter.

A recent study has shown that few teachers receive the “intensive, sustained, and content -focused professional development” that matters for student achievement. Forexample, as reported in the same study , over the course of a year only 9 percent of elementary math teachers had more than 24 hours of content-specific professionaldevelopment in math. Many school -district officials just don’t value the kind of high-quality professional development that teachers (and their students ) deserve . Instead, asseen in this stark display below (from a local news report on how school districts view teacher learning ), archaic district-driven professional development prevails.



From the Jackson (MS) Clarion-Ledger, Oct. 17, 2011I wonder why USDOE officials , in pushing for much-needed changes in teacher education, don’t push school districts to transform their systems of professional development.The plan does indeed call for all teachers — including veteran teachers and recent graduates of preparation programs— to “receive professional development and careeradvancement opportunities that are aligned with their identified strengths and needs.”

However, USDOE does not call for scrutiny of school districts’ professional development programs. Maybe districts should be held accountable for the quality of support theyprovide to recently minted teacher -education graduates. Maybe if the USDOE called for such scrutiny, our nation would get a bit closer to creating the kind of comprehensiveteacher-development system needed for the schools of today and tomorrow.Posted at 12:49 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools , School Reform, Teacher Prep, Teacher Recruitment & Retention, Teacher Working Conditions , TeachingEffectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (1)

October 19, 2011

Building a Wall of Teacher Voices

By Mermuda Wilson

Mermuda Wilson, a policy assistant at CTQ, has been using her video-editing expertise to share teacher voices in an online video series . In this guest post, she describesher experience workingwith these teacher -submitted videos.

Relationships. AP scores. Graduation stoles. “Fast food” learners. Empowerment. Community partnerships.

These are a few of the topics broached by teacher leaders highlighted in our CTQTube series. The series, which runs until mid -November, features Teacher Wall submissions

from teachers in CTQ's Teacher Leaders Network (TLN).

The TeacherWall Project is a virtual teacher town square where educators can share video clips and comments. It was built by Scholastic , the Bill &Melinda Gates

Foundation, and DonorsChoose .org as a way to elevate teacher leaders' perspectives on their profession. The CTQTube series is a microcosm of the Teacher Wall, which hasreceived hundreds of video responses.

The breadth of responses has been amazing. One aspect of the CTQTube submissions that has really stood out to me is that not a single teacher has listed a formal award astheir “greatest succcess as a teacher ” (a question the teachers were asked to respond to in their videos). These are Teachers of the Year, National Board Certified Teachers,Presidential Award recipients, and National Education Association Teachers of Excellence finalists .

Shannon C'de Baca talks about the value of student-teacher relationships .

Instead, they all chose student-centered measures as their shining moments. This reinforces what teacher Shannon C’de Baca says in her video: the relationships teachershave with students are more important than any specific program.

Building relationships is a common theme that arises in some form or another for all the teachers featured in our CTQTube series. A very clear example is Karen Van Duyn’ssubmission. In a creative twist on the assignment, Karen’s students put together their perspectives onwhy she teaches. It’s a fun video that sheds some light on herphilosophy of student empowerment. The students seem to have really enjoyed the production process and looked critically at how their perspectives on their teachers shapehow they learn.

Putting this series together has reminded me that while every classroom and every educator is different, the top educators do share one commonality : the genuine desire tofoster relationships that allow students to tap into their unknown potential.



Karen Van Duyn and her students share reasons why she teaches.

Our nation has so many of these accomplished classroom practitioners who have so much untapped potential to lead school improvement efforts. Now is the time to makethese expert teachers more visible to policymakers and the public. They can and must lead the way. There are only 18 years, 2 months , and 12 days until 2030. We have a lotmore work to do to "blur the lines of distinction between those who teach in schools and those who lead them."

Posted at 09:33 AM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (2 )

October 13 , 2011

The Difference Between a Teacherpreneur and an Education Entrepreneur

By Kristoffer Kohl

Kristoffer Kohl is a former classroom teacher working currently as a policy associate at CTQ to further the vision of TEACHING 2030. He previously collaborated with a

team of accomplished teachers to produce the report “Transforming School Conditions : Building Bridges to the Education System that Students and Teachers Deserve.”

How do you create space for innovation when a system is already in motion? In education especially, it often feels like we're trying to build the plane as

we’re flying.

What would our schools look like if we solicited the expertise of teachers and recognized classroom problems as opportunities for innovation? How

might learning outcomes be transformed if teachers were equipped to investigate and design solutions ?

Given that most teachers aren’t afforded such opportunities, the education-reform world has been captivated in recent years by other another model of innovation: the

incredible efforts of education entrepreneurs. Their accomplishments engage and inspire the public with seemingly endless possibilities for our schools . New Tech Network,Harlem Children 's Zone, School of One, and Khan Academy have rocked the foundations of the education establishment by transforming the identities of school andclassroom.

Though these schools have been successful, their ideas have proven difficult to scale and sustain in a way that benefits all communities. Fortunately, there is an untappedreservoir of expertise that can generate even more profound change in our nation 's schools.

Enter the teacherpreneur.

As defined by the authors of TEACHING 2030, a teacherpreneur is a teacher leader of proven accomplishment possessing a deep knowledge of how to teach, a clearunderstanding of what strategies must be in play to keep schools highly successful, and the skills and commitment necessary to spread their expertise to others — all whilekeeping at least one foot firmly in the classroom.

Entrepreneurs may have brilliant ideas that often require venture capital and years of planning, but teacherpreneurs’ innovation is grounded in their daily experience inschools and classrooms. While education entrepreneurs experimentwith novel theories for student learning , teacherpreneurs serve as action researchers by hypothesizing ,implementing, troubleshooting, and learning from their daily interactions in the classroom.

Prioritizing their responsibilities to students, teacherpreneurs are making a name for themselves by creatively packaging and delivering instruction. Some are 'flipping' theirclassrooms by allowing students to watch lessons online and using class time to complete work traditionally reserved for home. Others are using social media tools to developa moremodern take on classroom discussion, effective writing, and community action.

The prevailing form of teacherpreneurship occurring regularly in schools across the nation is teacher leadership. Running everything from their departments and grade levelsto professional learning communities , teachers are cropping up as managers, directors, mentors, and guides. Outside their buildings, teacher leaders are transforming

unions, community organizations, after-school programs, and online professional-development communities .

CTQworks directly with three teacherpreneurs: Jessica Keigan and Dana Nardello in Denver, and Noah Zeichner in Seattle. In addition to their primary roles as teachers, all

three are involved with education policy work for the NewMillennium Initiative. Jessica and Dana also work alongside the Colorado Legacy Foundation, and Noahcollaborates with Seattle Public Schools and the Seattle Education Association to increase teacher leadership opportunities. These teacherpreneurs will ideally serve as modelsfor other organizations and districts that want to support similar hybrid positions.

Both teacherpreneurs and entrepreneurs play valuable roles in advancing the development of a 21st-century school system. While entrepreneurs inspire a vision of whatschools can become, teacherpreneurs demonstrate the caliber of individuals we need in schools to realize that vision . Teacherpreneurs elevate the entire profession byensuring that colleagues, policymakers, and the public knowwhat works best for students.

To participate in a discussion about teacher career paths and hybrid teaching positions , join our Twitter chat on Thursday, October 20, from 8:30-9 :30 p.m. ET , hashtag#teaching2030.

Posted at 05:37 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Recruitment & Retention, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching 2030, TeachingEffectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (2 )

October 10, 2011

Using Teacher Expertise to Improve Policy

By Bill Farmer

The Illinois New Millennium Initiative has been doing some terrific work in response to the state’s recent efforts to reform its teacher evaluation systems. I’ve asked Bill

Farmer, an Illinois NMI member and high school science teacher in Evanston, Illinois, to share his thoughts about the team’s recent report and interactions with statepolicymakers.–-Barnett Berry

Likemany other financially strained states, Illinois is engaged in significant educational policy reform propelled by the carrot of Race to the Top federal funds. One of theprimary products of this reform is Senate Bill 315, passed in January 2010. SB 315, more commonly known as the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA ), provides theframework for a major overhaul of teacher and principal evaluation systems, using student growth as a significant component of evaluations.

Illinois teachers have long recognized the flaws in current evaluation systems and have been advocating for an improved model that provides useful, timely feedback and



October 10, 2011

Using Teacher Expertise to Improve Policy

By Bill Farmer

The Illinois New Millennium Initiative has been doing some terrific work in response to the state’s recent efforts to reform its teacher evaluation systems. I’ve asked Bill

Farmer, an Illinois NMI member and high school science teacher in Evanston, Illinois, to share his thoughts about the team’s recent report and interactions with statepolicymakers.–-Barnett Berry

Likemany other financially strained states, Illinois is engaged in significant educational policy reform propelled by the carrot of Race to the Top federal funds. One of theprimary products of this reform is Senate Bill 315, passed in January 2010. SB 315, more commonly known as the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA ), provides theframework for a major overhaul of teacher and principal evaluation systems, using student growth as a significant component of evaluations.

Illinois teachers have long recognized the flaws in current evaluation systems and have been advocating for an improved model that provides useful, timely feedback andprofessional support that can enhance classroom practice. In fact, in 1984 Art Wise and Linda Darling-Hammond, both then at the RAND Corporation, identified many of thesame evaluation problems reformersand teachers are concerned about today .* Almost 30 years ago Wise and Darling-Hammond pointed out that we need clearly defined

standards of professional excellence, well-trained and pre-qualified evaluators, and more frequent feedback. And today PERA is calling for similar guidelines for a teacherevaluation system .

The Complex Task of Measuring Student Growth

In the political and public realms, linking evaluations to student growth seems like common sense. Research consistently indicates that teachers are the most important

school-based variable in a student ’s educational growth. But somehow the school-based segment of that conclusion is frequently omitted. In reality, innumerable factorsboth inside and outside schools affect student growth.

And although many of us educators are already frequently monitoring student growth in our individual classrooms, systematizing such a complex measurement is aninfinitely challenging task. This is particularly the case when trying to quantify an individual teacher ’s contribution to student learning . Teachers often teach multiple gradelevels and courses, spend varying amounts of time with students, and are aided by specialist teachers . Team teaching, which is much needed, can confound efforts to identifywhich teacher is responsible for student learning gains.

Involving Teachers in the Implementation Process

Implementing PERA is the responsibility of a joint committee called the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC). Of this group of roughly 30 educationstakeholders, only one is a current K-12 teacher.

Around the same time PEAC was organizing, the Illinois New Millennium Initiative was assembling a dynamic group of early-career and veteran teachers to do the exact samething. With such a huge transformation under way in Illinois, our goalwas – and is – to bring teacher voice to the forefront of the conversation around the implementation ofPERA.

Our NMI team’s virtual community provided a way for teachers to share research on teacher evaluation systems, helping us better understand the complicated matrix ofeducational policy in Illinois and around the country.

We then combined this knowledge with our own teaching experiences to write our report, “Measuring Learning, Supporting Teaching : Classroom Experts ’ Recommendationsfor an Effective Educator Evaluation System.”

Making Our Teacher Voices Heard

Since the report's release, key stakeholders and educators have taken notice.

The NMI team has hosted webinars with members of PEAC to share our recommendations and provide feedback on PEAC’swork. NMI teachers have also attendedmonthlyPEAC meetings to make connections and share perspectives from the classroom. These experiences have made us feel like our teacher voices are being heard and considered .

This month, we plan to attend regional teacher forums PEAC is sponsoring to present its progress and solicit teacher feedback. We’re eager to engage in (and maybe evenhelp initiate) the next layers of policy reform that will strengthen our professional practice and produce better student outcomes. Evaluation reforms of 30 years agoneverbore much fruit because teachers weren’t involved in implementing them. NMI teachers are ready to help lead the way.

Wise, A. E., Darling-Hammond, L. , McLaughlin, M. W. & Bernstein, H . T . (1984). Teacher Evaluation: A study of effective practices. Santa Monica, CA. RAND.

Posted at 05:00 PM in Improving Our Schools, NewMillennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession |

Permalink | Comments (0)

October 05, 2011

SixWays to Improve Teacher Prep Programs

Below is a blog post I wrote as part of an online discussion for Learning Matters, a nonprofit media production company that has produced many education-focusedreports and documentaries for PBS. Along with several experts in the education field, I was asked to write about teacher quality and teacher training . I encourage you toread the other participants' responses and leave comments on the full Learning Matters discussion — it's absolutely worth the read.

Recently, I collaborated with twelve expert teachers to write TEACHING 2030: What We Must Do For Our Students and Our Public Schools …Now and in the Future. Weargue that universities’ teacher education programs— and highly-touted alternative certification programs like Teach for America — perpetuate out-of -date models ofteaching and learning .

Teacher recruits need a very different kind of preparation to teach the diverse, tech-savvy learners of today and to ready those learners for the 21st-century global

marketplace. To make this happen, wemust move far beyond reform rhetoric — and wemust do so quickly. Here are six big strategies that can help teacher preparationprogramsbreak the mold:

1. Ensure that recruits are being prepared for the roles that are most needed in area schools: School districts should develop “labor market” reports,allowing universities to carefully consider how many recruits should be prepared and for what.

2. Jettison traditional three-hour course credits in favor of performance-based pedagogical modules and assessments: This nimble, practical approachwill help recruits to develop specific teaching skills and will better identify who is ready to teach, when, and under what conditions .

3. Split the time: Work with school districts to create hybrid roles for the most effective teachers to spend half their time teaching and half their time as lead teachereducators.

4. Understand the community: Require recruits to complete a substantial internship in a community-based organization, developing deep knowledge of how and wherestudents and their families live.



Teacher recruits need a very different kind of preparation to teach the diverse, tech-savvy learners of today and to ready those learners for the 21st-century global

marketplace. To make this happen, wemust move far beyond reform rhetoric — and wemust do so quickly. Here are six big strategies that can help teacher preparationprogramsbreak the mold:

1. Ensure that recruits are being prepared for the roles that are most needed in area schools: School districts should develop “labor market” reports,allowing universities to carefully consider how many recruits should be prepared and for what.

2. Jettison traditional three-hour course credits in favor of performance-based pedagogical modules and assessments: This nimble, practical approachwill help recruits to develop specific teaching skills and will better identify who is ready to teach, when, and under what conditions .

3. Split the time: Work with school districts to create hybrid roles for the most effective teachers to spend half their time teaching and half their time as lead teachereducators.

4. Understand the community: Require recruits to complete a substantial internship in a community-based organization, developing deep knowledge of how and wherestudents and their families live.

5. Embrace online: Engage recruits in a virtual network of teachers, preparing them to teach effectively online and to collaborate virtually with teaching colleagues.

6. Emergent Tech: Work with school districts to expose recruits to live and digitally recorded “lesson studies,” in which teams of candidates learn to critique teaching andassess student learning using emerging technologies.

Posted at 01:45 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools , School Reform, Teacher Prep, Teacher Recruitment & Retention, The Teaching Profession | Permalink |

Comments (1)

September 30, 2011

How Teacher Turnover Harms Students

Finally reaching the bottom of one my reading stacks, I found myself fascinated and frustrated by the findings of a new study on the relationship between teacher turnoverand student achievement.

The study, led by Matthew Ronfeldt and his education economist colleagues, used sophisticated methods to uncover empirical evidence on how teacher attrition , especiallyin high-need schools, seriously harms low-income and black students . They point out that previous researchers assumed that turnover rates negatively affected high-needstudents because high quality teachers were the ones leaving.

But this is not the case.

Teacher attrition has a detrimental effect on student achievement “even after controlling for different indicators of teacher quality” — including value-added ratings forteachers who leave and the ones who replace them. The researchers claim that teacher turnover “negatively affects collegiality or relational trust among faculty” or “results inloss of institutional knowledge among faculty that is critical for supporting all student learning .”

Other research has revealed complementary findings. Tony Bryk ’s path-breaking analyses, for example, link trust and collegiality among teachers with higher studentachievement.

It’s time for policymakers to seriously consider who is recruited into teaching , for how long, and how they are placed in schools. Thoughtfulness in these areas will ensurethat teachers contribute to , not undermine , faculty cohesiveness and long-term instructional strategies. It’s time to confront policymakers’ embrace of recruiting

underprepared teachers to high-need schools without adequate training, supervision, and support.

At the same time, we need to question their dismissiveness of the positive effectsworking conditions can have on teaching and learning. It's time to build 21st-century school

organizations that support teacher teams that have staying power and that are rewarded for working effectively with their students , families, and communities over time.

Posted at 04:07 PM in Improving Our Schools, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink

Comments (2 )

September 29, 2011

Reimagining School AsWeKnow It

Over the past several years, we atCTQ have been documenting how school conditions and designs affect the way teachers teach and students learn. Research hasdemonstrated that curriculum , instructional resources, preparedness and stability of faculty, and connections to after-school and summer-school programs have strongimpacts on student achievement. Teachers say the same.

Furman Brown’sGeneration Schools are promising models of re-envisioned school conditions. Nearly 90% of the full-time professional staff teach classes. Students get moreinstructional time (up to 200 days), and class sizes can be as low as 16. Teachers have many opportunities to plan together and learn from one another. Currently, several

districts in Colorado are piloting the Generation Schools model, which has found a “better way to organize and distribute work” for both students and teachers . (See thisterrific report from EdSector on improving teacher quality through school design .)

Another innovative approach is also taking root in Colorado: the teacher-led school without a principal.With support from the Ford Foundation (whichhasmade significant investments in extended learning opportunities for students and their teachers), we have been able to document the emergence of the Math and ScienceLeadership Academy (MSLA). There, strong teacher leaders, most National Board Certified, have forged deep connections to the communities they serve and are backed by areform-minded union.

Watch the video to learn more about MSLA, and take a look at our case study about the school ’s creation. MSLA is doing great things, and we need to make sure that theschool, its teachers , and its stories become better known to policymakers, practitioners , and the public. We need find ways to take these good ideas to scale.

O



Posted at 06:05 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, School Reform, TeacherWorking Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 28, 2011

Confronting the 15,000-Hour Problem

This commentary by Barnett Berry originally appeared as a guest post on Getting Smart's blog on September 1, 2011.

Imagine a new teaching profession— the one that students of today and tomorrow deserve. Here’s how “schools ” and “teaching ” could look:

In transformed learning environments, digital tools enable students to learn 24/7 and use skills demanded by local and global economies . Meanwhile , similar

technologies allow teachers to learn from each other anywhere, at any time.

Expert teachers create seamless connections in and out of cyberspace. They bridge students ’ virtual learning with what goes on in brick-and-mortar schools (including

afterschool programs to deepen and extend learning for our most vulnerable students ).

Students learn from collaborative teamsof teachers with varied strengths and roles.This is made possible by a career matrix (as opposed to the traditional career ladder)

that includes differentiated pathways. The system places a premium on the spreading of teacher expertise—and is structured to encourage our best teachers to remain inthe profession.

More than 600,000 “teacherpreneurs” are making a difference in our schools . These are effective teachers who continue to teach students regularly, but also work part-timeon results -oriented efforts to improve student learning. They might design new instructional programs, orchestrate community partnerships, develop digital learning tools,and advance new policies and practices. Teacherpreneurs will be the “highest-paid anybodies” in a school district—and their roles will finally blur the lines of distinctionbetween those who teach in schools and those who lead.

These four possibilities , described more fully in TEACHING 2030, a new book I penned with 12 expert teachers , can help us imagine what teaching could look like. Here ’s thecatch: we have to move past the tired 20th century struggles over how we recruit , train, and pay teachers. Yes, some serious politics are involved, as described vividly, if notalways accurately, in Steven Brill’s new book , Class Warfare.

But wemust also contend with the 15,000-hour problem. MostAmericans have attended schools for 13 years—and have watched teachers teach for more than 15,000 hours,usually in the company of 25 or 30 other students (40 or 50 in hard times). And while most Americans may want improved schools and better teaching, they do not want

teaching and learning to look all that different from when they were in school themselves. The public’s familiarity with teaching reifies expectations. It may even breedcontempt for the specialized skills that effective teachers and administrators need to develop—afterall, an expert teacher can make the job look easy.

But the 15,000-hour problem besets teachers and administrators as well . Almost four decades ago, DanLortie , the well-known education sociologist, described the 15,000problem as the “apprenticeship of observation” — when teachers and administrators come into the profession thinking they already know how to teach and lead. In fact, sincemany educators have had the experience of “liking school ” as K-12 students , they often resist major transformative changes. They may not want to think differently aboutteachers’ roles, teaching methods, and how and when students are expected to learn.

So what do we do? We shouldn’t simply seekmore recruits from alternative routes. Plenty of evidence suggests that even teachers and administrators from “alternative routes”reify the current system of teaching and learning .

Instead, we should consider how teachers ’ and administrators’ preparation can set the stage for a new expectations about what schools and learning look like.

And now is the time for public engagement campaign that informs and inspires, helping Americans shift their own beliefs about what schools and teachers can accomplish —and how they should go about it.

Selling a bold new vision of teaching and learning is far from impossible.

The American people have the capacity to let go of old patterns of thinking when the evidence is compelling and well-presented. Consider how our nation ’s adult populationchanged its collective mind about cigarette smoking . In the early 1960s, cigarette smoking was common. In ads, the Marlboro Man (portrayed as a rugged cowboy) gavecigarettes a free-spirited, back -to-basics, all-American image. Then studies began to identify empirical links between smoking and cancer. Early anti-smoking commercials,starring “Johnny Smoke, ” showed cowboys keeling over with poisonous fumes in their lungs, parodying the Marlboro Man. Public awareness grew and behavior began tochange, as TV ads for cigarettes were banned and the Surgeon General’s warnings on cigarette packages became more stark and visible. Within 40 years, the percentage of

American adults smoking cigarettes decreased from 45% to 20%.

An inefficient public education system mired in 20th-century debates may not be blackening our lungs. But the status quo is doing something just as serious: failing our

students, our communities , and our democracy. We must help the public understand what is possible. We must get past the 15,000 -hour conundrum. We must worktogether to create the transformed system of teaching and learning that 21st-century students deserve.

Posted at 03:24 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink |

Comments (0)

September 21, 2011

Implementing Common Core Standards

By Susan Graham

Susan Graham, a National Board Certified Teacher and Teacher Leaders Network member, retired in spring 2011 after 28 years in the classroom. However, she continues



An inefficient public education system mired in 20th-century debates may not be blackening our lungs. But the status quo is doing something just as serious: failing our

students, our communities , and our democracy. We must help the public understand what is possible. We must get past the 15,000 -hour conundrum. We must worktogether to create the transformed system of teaching and learning that 21st-century students deserve.

Posted at 03:24 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink |

Comments (0)

September 21, 2011

Implementing Common Core Standards

By Susan Graham

Susan Graham, a National Board Certified Teacher and Teacher Leaders Network member, retired in spring 2011 after 28 years in the classroom. However, she continuesto encourage innovative reforms in teaching and learning, and is currently serving as a Virtual Community Organizer for CTQ’s new Implementing Common CoreStandards project.

Overheard this weekend at the Center for Teaching Quality ’s headquarters in Carrboro, NC: “This is such incredibly complicated work…” (one-second pause) “…but I am soexhilarated by the process!”

That’s the sort of energy generated when exemplary teachers combine their expertise to tackle tough issues in teaching and learning—which happens all the time onCTQ’svirtual Teacher Leaders Network. But this energy is powerful face -to-face , too, as I witnessed this weekend when CTQ assembled 21 National Board Certified Teachers fromNC and KY to work on the Implementing Common Core Standards (ICCS) project.

Here’s how the Common Core State Standards website describes the standards:

The Common Core Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what theyneed to do to helpthem. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college andcareers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.

But what does that look like in the classroom? How will students demonstrate mastery of the standards of literacy and mathematical functionality? And how do these effortssquare with the pressures of standardized test performance (currently the centerpiece of many states’ assessment and evaluation systems)?

Over the next year, the accomplished teachers I met atCTQ will face down these tough questions . They will design—and test-drive in their own classrooms, with their ownstudents— lessons and assessments linked to the Common Core State Standards.

ICCS teachers will pilot formative assessment templates created by the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) and Mathematics Design Collaborative (MDC) with the support ofthe Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The teachers met with Eleanor Dougherty (LDC) and Ann Shannon (MDC) to get a better sense of how to implement these new tools.

The teachers aren’t just test-driving—they’re documenting every curve of the road. As they fine-tune, deliver, and evaluate LDC and MDC modules, they’ll be compiling videoclips of instruction and assembling evidence of student work, and reflecting on how the modules affect student learning and their own practice.

In spring 2012, the ICCS teachers will begin to share the toolkits they’re creating— influencing student achievement in classrooms across the country. And their field-testcritiques of the Design Collaborative concepts will inform the process of integrating Common Core Standards and state course standards.

How will the pieces fit together? What will the results be? Which questions will be answered—in full or in part—and which will remain? We don’t know yet—but it is excitingto know that 21 highly accomplished teachers are alreadyhard at work on a potentially transformative project for advancing student learning .

Posted at 12:43 PM in Future of Teaching , NBPTS, Teacher Recruitment & Retention, Teacher Working Conditions, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession |Permalink | Comments (1)

September 20, 2011

Expertise to Action inDenver

By Jessica Keigan and Dana Nardello

One of the most exciting parts about workingwith expert teacher leaders is seeing their hard work and expertise appreciated. The Denver NMI team’s positivecontribution to shaping and implementing teaching policies in Colorado attests to the importance of teacher voice in the policymaking process. I’ve asked two members ofthe Denver NMI team, Jessica Keigan and Dana Nardello, to share some of their recent involvement with the state legislation process . Jessica also spoke about her

involvement during a special Rocky Mountain PBS roundtable held last Friday, where she represented her team with solutions -focused comments and compelling stories.

-Barnett Berry



involvement during a special Rocky Mountain PBS roundtable held last Friday, where she represented her team with solutions -focused comments and compelling stories.

-Barnett Berry

Here in the Mile High City , there has been a lot of buzz about Senate Bill 191, a law that calls for the creation and implementation of a new evaluation system for principalsand teachers.

Among other things, the bill requires that half of a teacher ’s evaluation bedetermined by student growth measures and that the other half -- loosely labeled as “multiplemeasures” -- include classroom observations by peers or administrators , goal attainment processes, or other similar tools.

But the tools used to assess teachers ’ effectiveness on the basis of gains on a once-a-year standardized test are still pretty raw. As noted in a recent Congressional briefing, thegrade-level standardized tests do not capture “teacher effects” when students are way below or above where they are supposed to be. Some teachers teach a disproportionate

share of second language learners or special needs students. Some teachers are part of teaching teams and it is difficult to determine who ismost responsible. Some teachersworkwith students who get all kinds of help from afterschool and summer programs, but others do not.

Asmembers of the Denver New Millennium Initiative, we knew itwas important to be part of the conversation about the bill’s implementation. Since the release of our reportMaking Teacher Evaluation Work : Voices from the Classroom ,” various stakeholders have solicited our suggestions for specific and concrete suggestions. And last week, wehad the fantastic opportunity to share our expertise at a state board public hearing .

The Process

This past May, the State Council onEducator Effectiveness (SCEE) began working to define what makes an educator effective , and since then it has made severalrecommendations to the ColoradoDepartment of Education (CDE). The council has drafted and revised rules and has encouraged general feedback through public hearings –an opportunity we decided to take advantage of.

After releasing our report, our team spent the summer months researching teacher effectiveness and various topics introduced in the drafted rules (e .g. , comparability,assessment tools, state vs. local control). Deciding to focus on what we thought the state’s definition of “multiple measures” should be, we submitted a list ofrecommendations to the board. At the public hearing, NMI team members supplemented the list by sharing our classroom realities, e. g., how highly mobile students or alarge number of second language learners who just entered our classes, could influence the accuracy of the test score evidence. We described how teachers can assemble a

wide array of data on their students so we can figure out how to improve our teaching .

Why Do We Care?

As teachers , we want stronger teaching accountability systems. We want to reach beyond our classroom walls and influence the policies that drive the work we do each day.Conversations about education reformneed to include perspectives of people who knowwhat happens inside the classroom. We have solutions , we have ideas, and wewant

to share them.

Our day-to-day experience allows us to anticipate pitfalls and envision successes in a way that wouldn’t be possible for most lawmakers. Because we believe we have the

responsibility to be involved in education policy, we are continually searching for entry points, conversations, meetings, and committees that we can contribute our expertiseto.

What We Learned

Classroom teachers often think they don’t know enough about policy, politics, or the legislative process. But the truth is that teachers hold the critical piece of the puzzle. Our

stories from the classroom can corroborate expert suggestions or productively challenge them.

The great news is that we aren’t the only ones who think this .

Our team and two other teachers were the only teacher voices heard during the hearing, and we could tell that our input made an impact on the audience. After giving ourtestimony last week, a member of the SCEE cited our evidence specifically when discussing next steps with the board. We knew wewere being listened to , and it was an

exhilarating experience.

Each new encounter with policymaking is showing us that people want to hear what teachers have to say. They respect our contributions as experts in our field –especially

when they are solutions oriented.

Next Steps

Last week we received tangible indication that our teacher voices are having a positive effect on policy. Witnessing such respect for teacher expertise makes us excited tocontinue contributing to this process.

The Denver NMI team will continue to review the commentary and drafts that stakeholders are submitting. The next public hearing is scheduled for October 5, and on thatday we hope even more Denver NMI teachers will share personal evidence that will support our recommendations.

As always , we will continue to seek out opportunities to share our voices, in hopes that we can improve our profession and best serve our students, inside and outside theclassroom.

Posted at 01:44 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools , New Millennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, TeacherWorkingConditions, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 12, 2011

Reshaping the Teacher Preparation Debate

A few days ago, U.S . Secretary of Education Arne Duncan gave a shout-out to the University of Michigan for serving as a national model for “reinventing” education schools .Indeed, the UM education school, led by Dean Deborah Ball, has done much to recalibrate university -based preparation programs by focusing on the practical how-tos ofteaching specific curricular content and drawing on new research about how students learn. And though Secretary Duncan has often called for more student teaching , notless, his Race to the Top policies continue to embrace shortcut alternative-certification programs. Such routes, like Teach for America, can’t come close to offering new

recruits the kind of preparation provided by UM’s education school (or by the many other university preparation programs that have also overhauled their approaches).



Posted at 01:44 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools , New Millennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, TeacherWorkingConditions, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 12, 2011

Reshaping the Teacher Preparation Debate

A few days ago, U.S . Secretary of Education Arne Duncan gave a shout-out to the University of Michigan for serving as a national model for “reinventing” education schools .Indeed, the UM education school, led by Dean Deborah Ball, has done much to recalibrate university -based preparation programs by focusing on the practical how-tos ofteaching specific curricular content and drawing on new research about how students learn. And though Secretary Duncan has often called for more student teaching , notless, his Race to the Top policies continue to embrace shortcut alternative-certification programs. Such routes, like Teach for America, can’t come close to offering new

recruits the kind of preparation provided by UM’s education school (or by the many other university preparation programs that have also overhauled their approaches).

Secretary Duncan’s contradictory stances on teacher training are difficult to reconcile.

I keep thinking back to a terrific conversation captured by Education Next a fewyears ago. ArthurWise , a champion for professionalizing teaching, and Julie Mikuta, a TFAalum and partner in the NewSchools Venture Fund, discussed the merits of university-based and alternative-certification approaches to teacher preparation. The three-year-

old piece brings to light a number of issues surrounding TFA and whether it’s a “valuable strategy for recruiting the best and brightest into education and energizing schoolimprovement, or a distraction and a device for sending ill-prepared neophytes to serve some of the nation ’s neediest students.”

Federal policymakers have much to learn from the Education Next conversation – especially from Dr. Wise, who points to the false dichotomies often promoted in the currentpolicy debates over teacher education. Rather than demonizing TFA or claiming teacher education programshave it all figured out, he calls for a strategy that scaffoldslearning for all novices , whether they are TFA members or university-based recruits . He envisions a “teaching team strategy” in which experienced teachers are ultimatelyresponsible for students , “but in multiple classrooms and with the assistance of the novices. ”

Both TFA and traditional recruits have much to contribute to the process of improving teaching and learning. No teacher , however, should teach independently until he orshe has passed muster on performancemetrics , including teaching diverse learners (such as ELL students ) and using sophisticated assessment tools to determine studentprogress toward 21st-century academic standards. It’s time that our nation ’s education leaders learn that teacher education and licensing is not about dichotomous choices,

but inventive approaches that can support student learning today and tomorrow.

Posted at 04:02 PM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Prep , Teacher Recruitment & Retention, Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness ,The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 08, 2011

Ensuring Teachers are Real Participants and Partners in Reform

Recently, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan pointed out, "Teachers need and deserve more autonomy and respect --and they must become real participants and partners in reform if outcomes for children are to dramatically improve."

We couldn't agree more.

In a new CTQ report, "Teaching Effectiveness for the NewMillennium," 23 expert teachers describe how policymakers can more accurately definestudent learning and advance teaching effectiveness reforms. They emphasized that policymakers must capitalize on the untapped potential of

classroom leaders.

The teachers' insights--informed by research and their classroom experience--were inspired by online conversations with a group of key USDOE staff and with SecretaryDuncan. The teachers began by unpacking the Department’s ESEA “blueprint” — but soon honed in on the significance of hybrid teaching roles in implementing new reformswith veracity and fidelity.

All co-authors are members of CTQ's Teacher Leaders Network, and several participate in our NewMillennium Initiative. Drawing upon research and their teaching expertise,they highlight promising steps by the USDOE and also call for specific teaching effectiveness reforms, including:

Involve teacher leaders in creating and scoring assessments aligned with Common Core standards throughout the school year. These assessments could help teachersfine-tune instruction and could inform results -oriented teaching evaluations .Draw upon and spread the expertise of National Board Certified Teachers, who have met rigorous standards and demonstrated skill in analyzing student evidence to

improve instruction .Promote and support hybrid roles that allow teacher leaders to continue building upon their classroom skills while also serving as teacher educators, policy researchers ,community organizers, and trustees of their profession. Our nation needs more teacherpreneurs if we are to take innovative steps to improve our schools.Develop new forms of shared school leadership to support teaching effectiveness, like tapping expert teachers to serve as peer reviewers in implementing high-quality ,rigorous classroom evaluations .

Just yesterday, I was reading a newly released study that examines the effectiveness of high-quality peer review programs, such as California's Poway and San Juan districts.The researchers found that, when compared to principals, teachers are far more thorough and tough -minded in evaluating their colleagues . Expert teachers "get" the job of

teaching--and what it takes to do that job well .

Kudos to Secretary Duncan and his staff for engaging in an authentic conversation with some of the nation ’s best teachers. Now let’s find ways--including more robust peer

review programs--for teacher leaders to become the “real participants and partners” in reform.

Posted at 03:26 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, NBPTS, New Millennium Teachers, School Reform, Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching

Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

August 24, 2011

Teachers Call for Better Evaluation Systems

“We want an evaluation system that helps us define our strengths so we can share those strengths with other teachers . We want anevaluation that defines areas where we need to grow, so we can be the best we can be…”

That’s what Julianna Dauble, an accomplished fifth-grade teacher from Renton in Washington State, thinks a teacher evaluation systemshould do. Julianna was one of ten expert teachers in the Washington NewMillennium Initiative (NMI) who co-authored a new reportentitled “How Better Teacher & Student Assessment Can Power Up Learning.”

Unlike other professionals, teachers aren’t routinely consulted when changes in their profession’s policy are beingmade. Yet teachers have unique and important insightsbased on their expertise with students, content, and teaching methods. Key policy decisions—and the details of implementation—should be informed by teachers ’perspectives. With this in mind, NMI brings together groups of accomplished and effective teachers in targeted locations to discuss education policy, with the goal ofcultivating and elevating teachers’ voices in discussions about policy reform.



August 24, 2011

Teachers Call for Better Evaluation Systems

“We want an evaluation system that helps us define our strengths so we can share those strengths with other teachers . We want anevaluation that defines areas where we need to grow, so we can be the best we can be…”

That’s what Julianna Dauble, an accomplished fifth-grade teacher from Renton in Washington State, thinks a teacher evaluation systemshould do. Julianna was one of ten expert teachers in the Washington NewMillennium Initiative (NMI) who co-authored a new reportentitled “How Better Teacher & Student Assessment Can Power Up Learning.”

Unlike other professionals, teachers aren’t routinely consulted when changes in their profession’s policy are beingmade. Yet teachers have unique and important insightsbased on their expertise with students, content, and teaching methods. Key policy decisions—and the details of implementation—should be informed by teachers ’perspectives. With this in mind, NMI brings together groups of accomplished and effective teachers in targeted locations to discuss education policy, with the goal ofcultivating and elevating teachers’ voices in discussions about policy reform.

The Washington NMI team’s report comes in the wake of the passage of SB 6696, legislation that has the potential to move the state closer to establishing a set of fair andaccurate teaching evaluation standards. Moving the state from a system in which teachers were deemed simply “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory,” the bill requires ratings to

occur on a more nuanced four-level scale . It also calls for implementing additional methods for measuring teaching effectiveness that include but also go beyond value-addedscores.

The law is currently in a two-year pilot phase, with statewide implementation due in the 2013 -14 school year. That means districts have a unique opportunity to garnerperspectives of expert teachers— like those of theWashington NMI team—about whether the new changes meet the needs of their districts and schools and how they can beimplemented well at the school level.

The Washington NMI teachers have responded to the lawwith a set of guidelines based on a year-long study of best practices in evaluation policy, integrated with their ownexperience of what works to promote effective teaching and learning .

We are working with NMI teams in Colorado and Illinois—two states that passed similar laws. The Washington teacher evaluation law ismore like the one in Illinois: localeducators have some leeway in figuring out how to implement it.

The Washington NMI team makes the case that:

1. Teacher evaluation systems should be based on valid, accurate , and reliable measures of student learning. While standardized test scores providesome information, other measures should be used , too, such as teacher self-evaluations, self-chosen artifacts of lessons and student work, peer evaluations , and videotapedobservations. These other data points can give educators, parents, policymakers, and community leaders a better idea of what students have learned, and can provideadditional context for understanding standardized test scores.

2. An improved evaluation system should equip teachers to design and use a variety of assessment tools that capture information aboutstudents' progress. School-based , curriculum -embedded assessments throughout the school year can give teachers more information about student learning, andtechnology can support these methods). States should also invite teachers to take part in creating state standardized tests as well . Writes Katie Davis, one of the report’s

teacher-authors , “I’m envisioning state testing to not be an end-of -year big event, but a regular set of smaller assessments that relate to pacing guides set by districts andaligned to state standards.”

3. Teacher evaluation systems should also provide opportunities for classroom practitioners to spread their teaching expertise—and considersuch leadership in individuals’ evaluations. Smart school systemsmust identify the “best” teachers—and place a premium on the spread of effective practices fromone classroom to the next, as well as across schools, and districts. Technology—including online tools and smartphones—alreadyoffers many useful ways to spread teachers ’expertise.

4. Teacher evaluation systems should include results-oriented professional learning communities (PLCs) in every school . These PLCs can providespace for teachers to collaborate (in and out of cyberspace ) on formative assessments , share expertise, and be guided by master teachers , who could take on increased rolesin areas such as peer evaluations. Jessica Conte, a first-grade teacher from Monroe, writes about her own PLC, “We have become a team of experts available to support and

guide one another to bestmeet the needs of our entire group of students. ”

Teacher and report co-author Ryan Niman from Edmonds emphasized the most important thing for policymakers to keep in mind: “Regardless of how teacher evaluation

systems change, the most critical part of the entire process is that the system must be developed by those who really know teaching and learning .”

My hope is that other teachers around the country will hear this clarion call from their colleagues and advocate for changes theybelieve in . In Washington, the NMI team will

begin to go “deep” in one of the state’s school districts — helping both district administrators and union leaders get above the usual fray and implement the new law.Meanwhile, CTQ’s NewMillennium Initiative will continue to expand our virtual network of classroom experts who can identify TeacherSolutions to complex problems facingour public schools today — and tomorrow.

Posted at 08:30 PM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, NewMillennium Teachers, School Reform, Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness, The TeachingProfession | Permalink | Comments (0)

August 17, 2011

Steven Brill Does a 180: Teachers and Unions Can Save Our SchoolsThis guest post is by Kristoffer Kohl, a former classroom teacher who recently joined the Center for Teaching Quality as a policy associate working toward the vision of TEACHING2030. He previously worked with a team of accomplished teachers from across the country to produce “Transforming School Conditions: Building Bridges to the Education System thatStudents and Teachers Deserve .”

The clamor for education reformcontinues on the pages of the Wall Street Journal, but not in the manner youmight think. Rather than calling forvouchers, charter schools, and an end to collective bargaining, guest columnist Steven Brill suggests that the solution for saving our schools will befound in the skill and leadership of so-called ordinary teachers and the unions who represent them.

In an essay that appeared in Saturday’s print edition, Brill, author of Class Warfare: Inside the Fight to Fix America's Schools, dispels some of the

myths that have informed faulty proposals for fixing public education. With 50 million students in 95,000 public schools , we cannot charter-school ourway to meaningful reform, nor can we rely on the unsustainable model of super -teachers working endless hours at a tireless pace. In a professionnumbering over three million, it is the “rank and file” that must be mobilized for actual reform to take root. Brill nods to the profound role thatorganized labor will play in the process by adding, “The unions are the organizational link that will enable school improvement to expand beyond theability of extraordinary people to work extraordinary hours.”

I could not agree more. Teaching is the nation ’s largest college-educated occupation , and we need millions of teachers to work together over time intheir communities (and in and out of cyberspace ) to serve students and families well. As Gary Sykes and Dick Elmore suggested decades ago, it is time

to build a school system in which ordinary people can do the extraordinarywork of education.

As a Teach for America alum who taught in Las Vegas for almost five years, I can attest to the need to focus on the working conditions that allow teachers to teach effectively .

As the Center for Teaching Quality continues to evolve, we are working with teachers to rethink what it means to “organize” as a profession. We encourage unions to set



In an essay that appeared in Saturday’s print edition, Brill, author of Class Warfare: Inside the Fight to Fix America's Schools, dispels some of the

myths that have informed faulty proposals for fixing public education. With 50 million students in 95,000 public schools , we cannot charter-school ourway to meaningful reform, nor can we rely on the unsustainable model of super -teachers working endless hours at a tireless pace. In a professionnumbering over three million, it is the “rank and file” that must be mobilized for actual reform to take root. Brill nods to the profound role thatorganized labor will play in the process by adding, “The unions are the organizational link that will enable school improvement to expand beyond theability of extraordinary people to work extraordinary hours.”

I could not agree more. Teaching is the nation ’s largest college-educated occupation , and we need millions of teachers to work together over time intheir communities (and in and out of cyberspace ) to serve students and families well. As Gary Sykes and Dick Elmore suggested decades ago, it is time

to build a school system in which ordinary people can do the extraordinarywork of education.

As a Teach for America alum who taught in Las Vegas for almost five years, I can attest to the need to focus on the working conditions that allow teachers to teach effectively .

As the Center for Teaching Quality continues to evolve, we are working with teachers to rethink what it means to “organize” as a profession. We encourage unions to setaside their past rules and tools (which won themmuch-needed concessions from reluctant administrators) to become professional guilds. Transformed in this way, unions

could enforce teaching standards among the ranks and broker the kind of teacherpreneurial efforts needed for 21st-century schools .

In the post-industrial age, teachers need professional organizations that defend not only their rights but their profession’s commitment to high standards, the interests of

children, and a public education system that protects American democracy and spreads the expertise of its most effective practitioners.

Imagine if teachers were to earn differentiated membership into their unions based on the quality of their teaching . Imagine union leaders selected for their classroom

expertise as well as their leadership skills and organizational prowess. How might such a leadership structure dramatically alter the voice that unions have in the reformdebate?

As recent survey results from the Gallup /PDK Poll on public education demonstrate, the American public trusts teachers and believes they should have the flexibility to teachin the ways they think best without being tied to a prescribed curriculum. Likewise, we should trust the perspective of teachers and demand a meaningful role for them whenbig decisions are being made about education in this country. Too often , education policy is crafted by those who have never taught in a classroom. With the nation’s bestteachers informing policy decisions, legislative mandates would be driven by the realities and challenges of our schools.

Our NewMillennium Initiative teachers in Colorado (part of a larger network that includes communities in Washington, Illinois, Florida, and California) are promoting aseries of innovative solutions related to implementation of the state’s teacher evaluation legislation , SB 191, also known as the Ensuring Quality Instruction ThroughEducator Effectiveness Act . In his new book , Brill describes the Colorado law as landmark legislation . However, SB 191 and similar laws will fail unless we use new

technologies and organizational structures that equip expert teachers to implement high quality teaching evaluation systems.

It is reassuring to hear that Steven Brill has opened up the conversation a bit more for teachers to lead the way.

Posted at 11:03 AM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools , New Millennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Compensation, Teacher Prep, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (8)

August 15, 2011

NewWay to Share TEACHING 2030 Ideas

The word is getting out about TEACHING 2030 and our big ideas about the future of teaching and learning. Many of you have likely seen our 4-minute animated video.

Now there's a new resource to share: a free , printable visual summary of the book's ideas. We hope you will share 2030Illustrated with those in your life who care about the future of our children and public schools.

Our TEACHING 2030 team has been hitting the lecture halls and conference ballrooms this summer. Last week, I spoke to the National Council

of State Legislators, introducing the 2030 ideas to policymakers from across the nation . A couple days later, I spent time talking about theTEACHING 2030 vision with a group of teachers and professors atOakland University, which is working with local school districts to redesignits teacher education program on the basis of our book . Meanwhile , my coauthor Laurie Wasserman and colleague Melissa Rasberry led adiscussion of the book at a meeting of theMassachusetts Teachers Association.

Our audiences are responding eagerly to the bold, practical vision that twelve accomplished teachers helped me develop. People are attracted to TEACHING 2030 'sfarsightedness, optimism, and specificity about what's needed to create the teaching profession that our students deserve.We must keep spreading the word.We mustreachmore teachers, more administrators , more policymakers, more community leaders, more of the parents whose children 's future is at stake.

To accomplish that, we need your help as ambassadors.

We hope you'll……follow@teachingquality on Twitter & like CTQ on Facebook.

…retweet and share content and multimedia tools (like 2030 Illustrated and the four-minute video) with your networks.…let us know if you'd like to involve a member of the TEACHING 2030 team in an upcoming event.

Most of all , we hope you'll continue to find ways to get above the constant clutter of today 's reform talk and work with with your colleagues , friends, and neighbors to ensureevery child has qualified , caring, effective, and well-supported teachers who are well-prepared for 21st century teaching and learning .

TEACHING 2030 is available at Amazon, Barnes &Noble, and Teachers College Press.

Posted at 02:15 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools , School Reform, Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments

0)

August 01, 2011

A Public Education Success Story Silenced

Well, it’s happened again. Shortsighted policymakers have axed a research-based program that has proven effective in preparing high-quality teachers .

Parents and schools in North Carolina should mourn the loss of the North Carolina Teaching Fellows. The program, in place for almost 25 years, recruits top high school

students into teaching , pays for their high quality preparation (with extensive student teaching ), and supports them in their initial years so they remain in the classroom for acareer, not just for a couple of years.

According to yesterday's News &Observer , the NC Teaching Fellows program costs the state a modest $13.5 million a year. It produces more than 500 top-flight newteachers annually, well -prepared in both content and pedagogy , who commit to teaching in the state for at least four years. Some 17 campuses participate in the program.

Who are these Teaching Fellows? The typical recruit has a SAT score over 1100, a high school GPA of 4 .0 or higher on a weighted scale, and is in the top 10% of his or herhigh school graduating class. Each year approximately 20% of the program's recipients are minority, while 30% are male. As reported in the news article, Jason Sinquefield,a 26-year-old math teacher , noted that he “never thought of education as a career choice” until he discovered the NC Teaching Fellows. He credited the program with



August 01, 2011

A Public Education Success Story Silenced

Well, it’s happened again. Shortsighted policymakers have axed a research-based program that has proven effective in preparing high-quality teachers .

Parents and schools in North Carolina should mourn the loss of the North Carolina Teaching Fellows. The program, in place for almost 25 years, recruits top high school

students into teaching , pays for their high quality preparation (with extensive student teaching ), and supports them in their initial years so they remain in the classroom for acareer, not just for a couple of years.

According to yesterday's News &Observer , the NC Teaching Fellows program costs the state a modest $13.5 million a year. It produces more than 500 top-flight newteachers annually, well -prepared in both content and pedagogy , who commit to teaching in the state for at least four years. Some 17 campuses participate in the program.

Who are these Teaching Fellows? The typical recruit has a SAT score over 1100, a high school GPA of 4 .0 or higher on a weighted scale, and is in the top 10% of his or herhigh school graduating class. Each year approximately 20% of the program's recipients are minority, while 30% are male. As reported in the news article, Jason Sinquefield,a 26-year-old math teacher , noted that he “never thought of education as a career choice” until he discovered the NC Teaching Fellows. He credited the program withdefining “a way of becoming the best teacher you could be.”

The program’s results are impressive. A recent study by a researcher at the University of North Carolina found that Teaching Fellows are more likely to produce gains onstudent achievement tests, particularly in elementary and middle grades math, and in high school. The Teaching Fellows are farmore likely than other teachers (especiallythose from alternative certification programs) to remain in the classroom for five years.

And these positive results are longstanding. Over 15 years ago I had the opportunity to assess the impact of the NC Teaching Fellows Program. At the time, tools were notavailable to examine student achievement effects. However, I found that administrators highly valued thesewell -prepared, university -trained recruits , who quickly became

change agents for long-term school improvement. Today, almost 4,000 Teaching Fellows are teaching in 99 of the state’s 100 counties. Nearly one in four have earnedNational Board Certification.

They are effective teachers — and specialized recruitment and trainingmade a difference. So why’d this program get cut? Times are tight , of course . But some of the NorthCarolina state legislators who took the budget ax to the program seem to be influenced by rhetoric that devalues investments in teacher education and professionaldevelopment.

Ironically, the death of the NC Teaching Fellows program comes as many of our nation’s business and community leaders are calling for our nation to invest more inteachers. The North Carolina Teaching Fellows program employs many of the same strategies that help top-ranked nations to ensure the quality of their teaching workforces .As Linda Darling-Hammond described recently, nations like Singapore and Finland have built a high-performing teaching profession by enabling all of their teachers to enterhigh-quality preparation programs, generally at the masters’ degree level, where they receive a salary while they prepare. There they learn research -based teaching strategies

and train with experts in model schools attached to their universities. They enter a well-paid profession – in Singapore earning as much as beginning doctors -- where theyare supported by mentor teachers and have 15 or more hours a week to work and learn together , engaging in shared planning, action research, lesson study , and observationsin each other’s classrooms. And they work in schools that are equitably funded and well-resourced with the latest technology and materials.

Obviously, all of these elements are not yet in place in American schools . But in NorthCarolina , a small state program hasmanaged to take some significant steps to ensure atruly qualified cadre of public school teachers . Over the course of more than two decades, the North Carolina Teaching Fellows program has fine-tuned its strategies anddemonstrated its effectiveness. Shame on North Carolina policymakers for bringing this all-too-rare success story to an untimely end .

Posted at 03:27 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Prep , Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teaching 2030, The TeachingProfession | Permalink | Comments (1)

July 19, 2011

Accountability Gone Amok and Pay Policies Gone Awry

So it turns out that high-stakes tests—and the accountability systems based on them—aren’tworking out so well.

Earlier this week, The New York Times reported on a new study showing that the NYCdistrict’s $56 million merit pay system has had no payoff for student achievement. The

investigation, conducted by the RAND Corporation, concluded that “the bonus program had no effect on students ’ test scores, on grades on the city’s controversial A to Fschool report cards, or on the way teachers did their jobs.”

The RAND study lines up with the myth-busting report of the National Research Council which concluded earlier this year that test-based incentive programs “often useassessments too narrow to measure progress….(and) have not increased student achievement enough to bring the United States close to the levels of the highest achievingcountries.

Despite the evidence, district officials seem bent on finding a merit pay program that works . If NYC administrators are serious about finding a teacher compensation modelthat students deserve , then they should take a look at our inaugural TeacherSolutions report or a recent report by Florida teachers on pay-for -performance. A smart approachwould value the spread of teaching expertise, not just reward high-performing teachers.

Meanwhile, in other high-stakes testing news, the Atlanta story just keeps getting uglier.

According to The New York Times, district administrators “humiliated principals who didn’t reach their (test score) targets,” who in turn, “demean(ed) teachers with whomthey worked .”

One Atlanta principal “had teachers with low test scores crawl under a table.” He may have been following the example of his district’s superintendent, who “gathered theentire district staff at the GeorgiaDome,” seating “those from schools with top scores” on the Dome floor while staffers from schools with low scores were sent to the stands .

How do these shenanigans help children succeed? They don’t. Such actions only intensify the pressure that teachers feel. Should we be surprised that cheating occurred insuch a climate?

Decades ago, eminent social scientist Donald Campbell observed, “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision -making, the more subject it will be tocorruption pressures and themore apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”

As noted in a just released report by the U.S. Department of Education, top-performing nations do not draw on the same kinds of high-stakes standardized tests and top-

down accountability systems used here in the United States. Instead, these nations (e .g., Finland , Singapore , etc .) invest in teachers , who are deeply prepared to serve asexperts in assessing their students.

We have options. We can stick with high-stakes test scores (and the accountability systems that hang on them). Or we can create the results-oriented profession that studentsdeserve. We can invite teacher leaders to help create robust accountability systems that draw on varied assessments, many of which are designed and scored by classroomexperts themselves. We can compensate teachers in ways that encourage them to spread their expertise.

These options are within reach, as described in a paper I wrote with three master teachers. We argue that policymakers should look to expert teachers to developmeaningfulassessments and ensure the conditions necessary to implement high standards with fidelity and rigor.

And real -world evidence of teacher leaders’ contributions to better teaching and assessments is in the works. This fall , CTQ will launch, with support from the Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation, a virtual network of National Board Certified teachers who will be part of an effort to implement and assess new approaches to teaching andlearning. Their work will demonstrate the value of formative, authentic assessments as an integrated part of effective instruction. They will help refine just -in-time ways to



As noted in a just released report by the U.S. Department of Education, top-performing nations do not draw on the same kinds of high-stakes standardized tests and top-

down accountability systems used here in the United States. Instead, these nations (e .g., Finland , Singapore , etc .) invest in teachers , who are deeply prepared to serve asexperts in assessing their students.

We have options. We can stick with high-stakes test scores (and the accountability systems that hang on them). Or we can create the results-oriented profession that studentsdeserve. We can invite teacher leaders to help create robust accountability systems that draw on varied assessments, many of which are designed and scored by classroomexperts themselves. We can compensate teachers in ways that encourage them to spread their expertise.

These options are within reach, as described in a paper I wrote with three master teachers. We argue that policymakers should look to expert teachers to developmeaningfulassessments and ensure the conditions necessary to implement high standards with fidelity and rigor.

And real -world evidence of teacher leaders’ contributions to better teaching and assessments is in the works. This fall , CTQ will launch, with support from the Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation, a virtual network of National Board Certified teachers who will be part of an effort to implement and assess new approaches to teaching andlearning. Their work will demonstrate the value of formative, authentic assessments as an integrated part of effective instruction. They will help refine just -in-time ways todetermine whether students are meeting the high academic standards represented by the Common Core not just at the end of the year , but every single school day.

Our students deserve assessment and accountability systems that are sophisticated enough to prepare them to meet the demands of a global economy. Accomplished teacherscan help make it happen.

Posted at 08:09 PM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Compensation, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teacher Working Conditions ,Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (2)

July 11, 2011

Moving Past Excuses:What Excellence & Equity Require

As summer temperatures rise, tough talk about silver-bullet solutions is wilting:

In Atlanta,revelations of rampant cheating on high-stakes tests have rocked the reputation of the city’s schools and administrators . At the center of the scandal is asuperintendent previously championed by reformerswho emphasize high-stakes accountability and assessment. As reported in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, topadministrators “ignored, buried, destroyed or altered complaints about misconduct, claimed ignorance of wrongdoing and accused naysayers of failing to believe in poorchildren ’s ability to learn. ”

In Washington , D.C.—where concerns about possible widespread cheating during the Michelle Rhee era remain unresolved—standardized test scores for 2011 showedlittle movement.

Then there’s the mounting evidence that highly acclaimed charters are unlikely to serve themost disadvantaged students. In yesterday’s New York Times, MichaelWinerip explored ways in which some of the city’s charter schools pressure students to “thrive or transfer,” noting the relative scarcity of students with disabilities at suchschools .

At the Aspen Ideas Fest, a well-known reformer revealed his relish in attacking teacher unions . Upon being blasted by bloggers, the reformer apologized for the“arrogance in my tone.” However, video footage of his talk (which was not a brief sound bite ) presents disturbing evidence of the divisive rhetoric and tactics that get in

the way of meeting children’s needs.

Of course , accountability is an important tool for reform. Charter schools can help to incubate good ideas and practices outside the confines of district bureaucracies. Teacher

unions do need to change. But none of these silver bullet solutions—high-stakes tests, charter schools, dismantling unions— is enough to meet the challenge of providing21st-century students with the schools they deserve .

Given all the recent evidence of off-kilter priorities , Paul Tough ’s recent New York Times piece on the “no excuses” reform crowd is well-timed . Tough notes that the samereformerswho insisted high expectations (and high-stakes tests) would cure what ailed low-income urban schools are now pointing to excuses. They’re discovering that high-stakes tests and tenure reformcannot (by themselves) help students overcome the conditions of poverty.

Significantly, Tough notes that the situation isn’t hopeless—just more complicated than some have been willing to admit . He points out that dichotomous debate (chartersversus traditional public schools, teacher unions versus administrators , etc .) simply cannot address the quandary in which America finds itself. Instead, improving ourpublic schools requires nuanced conversation and comprehensive solutions .

Tough argues that if we are to educate all children to achieve high academic standards, wemust tackle the challenges of poverty head-on. He highlights tactics that haverepeatedly been proven effective on a small scale: “supplementing classroom strategieswith targeted, evidence -based interventions outside the classroom; working intensivelywith the most disadvantaged families to improve home environments for young children ; providing high-quality early -childhood education to children from the neediest

families; and , once school begins, providing low-income students with a robust system of emotional and psychological support, as well as academic support.”

Clearly, such a shift in strategy will require creativity, investment , and partnerships . But it will also require us to unleash the power of the abundance ofteaching talent we have in every school in this nation.

Who better to help ensure educational equity than our most accomplished teachers? Why not structure their work (and workdays) to strategically deploy their expertise? Our

best teachers could provide targeted intervention for the children and families who would most benefit from their experience and knowledge. They could help develop, staff,and assess high-quality early childhood programs. They could work with community partners to ensure all children have access to the academic, emotional, andpsychological support they need to succeed.

Too often, we shuffle our best teachers into full-time administrative roles, pulling them away from the children who need them most. Too often, we pile “reforms” on teacherswithout inviting them (and supporting them) to take onmeaningful roles in solutions . And too often, America ’s schools fail our least advantaged students and families.

Let’s drop the excuses. Let’s not kid ourselves about silver-bullet solutions . Let’s do the difficult work. And let’s welcome teacher leaders as partners in making it happen.

Posted at 02:07 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teaching 2030, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (4)

June 15, 2011

Tapping Teacher Expertise (What WeHaven’t Tried)

Below: Graphic facilitator Sunni Brown captured our TEACHING 2030 team's brainstorming session about the potential roles of teacherpreneurs . ..



Tapping Teacher Expertise (What WeHaven’t Tried)

Below: Graphic facilitator Sunni Brown captured our TEACHING 2030 team's brainstorming session about the potential roles of teacherpreneurs . ..

Sometimes it seems like America has tried everything. Various flavors of school reform have come and gone, often without securing real or lasting improvements forstudents. But there’s one thing we haven ’t tried (not on a widespread basis, anyway): fully tapping the expertise of our nation ’s accomplished teachers.

Our most effective teachers possess a wealth of knowledge and experience could be applied to the pressing problems faced by our schools . And students do not have to “lose”their best teachers (as is so often the case now when teachers are promoted into full-time administrative roles). Instead, we can design roles that allow teachers to advance

their careers by spending part of their time working with students—and part of their time on innovative efforts to improve teaching and learning .

Our public schools need more of these teacherpreneurs , expert teachers who keep one foot in the classroom while also pursuing results -oriented projects:

. Leading peer review processes for their schools to ensure that teaching evaluations are valid and drive improvement;

2. Developing tools and strategies for teaching the Googled learnerwho has grown up experiencing virtual reality;

3. Taking part in assessment reforms such as those linked to the new Common Core standards, and using technology to better capture, analyze, and publicize data aboutschools’ effectiveness;

4. Identifying effective strategies for teaching students who are increasingly diverse — by 2030, 40% or more will be second-language learners;

5. Organizing school -neighborhood partnerships that can support student learning through cradle-to-college solutions ; and

6. Transforming unions so that they become self-policing professional guilds that help ensure the quality of teaching that students deserve.

This list is not comprehensive. It’s just a sneak peek of the important work that “teacherpreneurs” could perform—while continuing to teach students for at least part of theirday, week, or year. (For more on the teacherpreneur concept, see chapter 6 of TEACHING 2030, a book I coauthored with twelve talented classroom teachers .)

Investing in Teacherpreneurs

Unfortunately, teachers ’ salaries remain too low to attract and retain enough talented, well-prepared professionals to fill our nation ’s high-needs classrooms — much less tocultivate the 600,000 teacherpreneurs we call for in TEACHING 2030. Unlike in other top performing nations , teachers in the U.S . are considerably underpaid , compared toother professionals with similar training and responsibility . American teachers are paid, on average, 60 percent less than other comparable college graduates.

But investing in expert teachers isn’t just about salaries—it’s about how the work and the school day are structured. Other top -performing nations invest in teachers byexpectingmore administrators to teach so teachers can lead. U.S. teachers teach students about 80% of their total working time—while their international counterparts spend

about 60% of their time teaching , with the remainder of the time spend planning lessons and fulfilling leadership responsibilities.

America’s top-down model of managing schools has led us to allocate resources less effectively than we otherwise could. Of the 70,000 employees of the Los Angeles Unified

School District, only 50% are practicing teachers . Embracing teacher leadership—creating roles that enable teachers to guide and add value to their schools—could help usput our education dollars to better use.

Finally, we must take a good long look at how our investment in expert teachers compares to what we spend on other efforts. Consider the war the United States is waging inAfghanistan, which is expected to cost $113 billion this next fiscal year, according to The Washington Post. As Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), the chairman of the ForeignRelations Committee , noted, “It is fundamentally unsustainable to continue spending $10 billion a month on a massive military operation with no end in sight.”

Could the costs of warbe applied to lowering the federal deficit? Could we apply a small fraction of the savings to funding our public schools in ways that meet children ’sneeds? Creating and funding roles for expert teachers is a wise investment—and one that is critical to safeguarding America ’s future.

Posted at 11:53 AM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, NewMillennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Compensation, Teacher Recruitment & Retention,TeacherWorking Conditions, Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)



America’s top-down model of managing schools has led us to allocate resources less effectively than we otherwise could. Of the 70,000 employees of the Los Angeles Unified

School District, only 50% are practicing teachers . Embracing teacher leadership—creating roles that enable teachers to guide and add value to their schools—could help usput our education dollars to better use.

Finally, we must take a good long look at how our investment in expert teachers compares to what we spend on other efforts. Consider the war the United States is waging inAfghanistan, which is expected to cost $113 billion this next fiscal year, according to The Washington Post. As Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), the chairman of the ForeignRelations Committee , noted, “It is fundamentally unsustainable to continue spending $10 billion a month on a massive military operation with no end in sight.”

Could the costs of warbe applied to lowering the federal deficit? Could we apply a small fraction of the savings to funding our public schools in ways that meet children ’sneeds? Creating and funding roles for expert teachers is a wise investment—and one that is critical to safeguarding America ’s future.

Posted at 11:53 AM in Future of Teaching, Improving Our Schools, NewMillennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Compensation, Teacher Recruitment & Retention,TeacherWorking Conditions, Teaching 2030, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 30, 2011

Tackling the Tough To-Dos

How can we improve teaching effectiveness in America? Policy pundits have given us a list of to-dos: Evaluate teachers on test scores. Jettison teacher tenure . Scrap last-in-

first-out policies.

Yes, we need results-oriented teacher evaluation systems that draw on evidence of student learning . Yes, it makes sense to streamline personnel procedures for teachers andadministrators. Sure, let’s abandon quality-blind placements.

But if what wewant is genuine, sustained improvement of our public schools , we can’t just remove these arcane policies and pretend the job is done. To paraphrase H. L.Mencken, “For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.”

Here's the real to-do list for those who want to improve our public schools:

Take part in nuanced , solutions-focused conversations with diverse stakeholders.Examine empirical evidence of what works for students.Tap into the wisdom of thousands of accomplished teachers in our nation’s classrooms .

These to-dos drive all of our work at the Center for Teaching Quality—including our NewMillennium Initiative (NMI), which assembles diverse groups of talented, early -

career educators who are committed to improving teaching and learning at the local and national level.

Currently at work in Denver, Washington state, Illinois, the Bay Area, and Hillsborough County (FL), ourNMI teachers are digging into some of education’s toughest issues.These committed teachers are studying evidence of what works for students , asking tough questions of researchers and policymakers, and examining the policies that governtheir profession. They’re identifying specific recommendations for improving teaching and learning. And they’re speaking out.

Each of our NMI sites will be releasing papers and multimedia products to spread their findings to others who care about teaching and learning.

This month, the Denver NMI teachers released a report pointing out how their state’s new teacher evaluation law can be effectively implemented. Their report is concise,practical, and well-informed. It offers powerful evidence for why we should encourage teacher leaders to take an increasingly active role in today ’s education policy debates .

On May 18, Denver NMI teachers presented their findings to a diverse audience including state board of education members, superintendents , union leaders, and other keystakeholders. (Thanks to the Colorado Legacy Foundation and Rose Community Foundation for co-sponsoring this gathering with CTQ. ) The crowd was impressed by—indeed, hungry for—bold, practical perspectives from classroom teachers .

Since then, teammembers have been invited to take part in a variety of meaningful activities to advance effective implementation of the new law. Their work, funded by RoseCommunity Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is only just beginning.

Stay tuned—teachers in our other NMI sites are also tackling the tough to-dos and will be releasing additional reports in the months to come. Rather than being caught up intired debates over arcane policies, they’re looking back atwhat has (and hasn’t) worked for students—and looking forward to what is possible.



Above) The Denver NMI team presented their findings to a group of education stakeholders at an event co-sponsored by Rose Community Foundation, Colorado Legacy

Foundation, & CTQ.

Above) NMI teacher Katie Micek introduces the NewMillennium Initiative's short- and long-term goals.

(Above) The Denver NMI team atwork...

Posted at 03:17 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools , New Millennium Teachers, Teaching Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (1)

May 04, 2011

The Only Fight Worth Having

According to Richard Perez-Pena of The New York Times, NJ governor Chris Christie’s take on school reform was met with a welcome reception at a recent Harvard GraduateSchool of Education event. Christie received his first ovation with this one-liner: “The only reason I’m engaging in this battle with the teachers ’ union is because it’s the onlyfight worth having .”

Christie’s statement is not surprising . What stings is that such simplified logic apparently went unquestioned—and was even encouraged—by this audience of Harvardfaculty and students .

Yes, teachers ' unions need to change dramatically, adopting a stronger focus on teaching and learning . And yes, longstanding issues of performance pay, quality -blindtransfers, and cumbersome processes for removing incompetent teachers must be resolved —now. Students and families deserve better.

But such issues (often linked in the public mind to unions) do not comprise “the only fight worth having” in public education. In fact, to focus on these problems is to ignoremany, many other roadblocks to transforming the teaching profession for the benefit of all students:

. Administrators who fail to cultivate the enormous leadership talent of hundreds of thousands of effective teachers. (Why not re-organize schoolschedules in ways that spread the expertise of ourmost effective teachers? This is truly one of the great lost opportunities in our schools .)

2. School board members who base critical decisions about curriculum on their own ideological interests, rather than on empirical evidenceabout what works for students .

3. State legislators who refuse to equitably finance high-need schools . (In so doing, they ensure that the most disadvantaged students have the least access toeffective teachers and optimal conditions for teaching and learning. )

4. Policymakers who insist on perpetuating either-or debates at the expense of real change . (A juicy sound bite does little to help a struggling student ora first-year teacher. Real change will demand that we transcend either-or politics and look instead at how to structure schools around what works for students.)

The “only fight worth having” is the fight for better schools for all our children . And that fight cannot be an A versus B match. (“In one corner , The Governor! In the other,

The Union!”) It must instead be an ongoing campaign challenging stakeholders at all levels to work together to create the schools (and teaching profession) our studentsdeserve.

Now, there’s a fight worth winning.



2. School board members who base critical decisions about curriculum on their own ideological interests, rather than on empirical evidenceabout what works for students .

3. State legislators who refuse to equitably finance high-need schools . (In so doing, they ensure that the most disadvantaged students have the least access toeffective teachers and optimal conditions for teaching and learning. )

4. Policymakers who insist on perpetuating either-or debates at the expense of real change . (A juicy sound bite does little to help a struggling student ora first-year teacher. Real change will demand that we transcend either-or politics and look instead at how to structure schools around what works for students.)

The “only fight worth having” is the fight for better schools for all our children . And that fight cannot be an A versus B match. (“In one corner , The Governor! In the other,

The Union!”) It must instead be an ongoing campaign challenging stakeholders at all levels to work together to create the schools (and teaching profession) our studentsdeserve.

Now, there’s a fight worth winning.

Posted at 05:54 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Recruitment & Retention, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching 2030, Teaching

Effectiveness, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (4 )

April 29, 2011

Preparing Teachers for Long-Term Success

In school time, two years is a blip on the screen ."

Anna L. Martin’s recent series of short essays on The Answer Sheet do highlight problems with the Teach ForAmerica (TFA) model. ButAnna’s pieces also offer an astute perspective on how the teaching profession can better fulfill the hopes of the students and families sheserves.

A TFA alum and bright young teacher working with our NewMillennium Initiative, Anna is now in her seventh year of teaching at the schoolwhere she was initially placed. While her essays touch on the need for better preparation for TFA recruits, Anna focuses instead on a centralpoint: any model that imagines a two-year life cycle for teachers is problematic.

Anna rightfully acknowledges that she might never have entered the classroom without TFA, while offering several observations about theweaknesses of the two-year cycle. What schools reallyneed, Anna argues, are teachers who have truly mastered their craft—and who aredeeply embedded in and committed to their school communities.

She points out , “Building relationships and creating a collaborative environment conducive to the kind of educational outcomes achieved byhigh-performing districts and countries outside the United States takes time… In a weird way, TFA seems almost to be supporting , rather than dismantling, the idea that

excellent teachers are widgets — easily replaceable, easily replicable.”

Rich lessons abound in Anna’s firsthand account of what it’s like to work in a school with high turnaround—about 30% of her school’s employee base is dedicated to TFA

placement. We learn about the promising young people—like Anna—who are attracted to teaching by TFA’s recruitment strategies. We learn about missed opportunities—forteachers to learn from their more experienced peers, for students and families to be served by teachers who know their communities well, and for bright, hard-working TFAalumni to develop as teacher leaders within their placement schools .

I am proud to have gotten to know Anna thanks to her involvement in our virtual Teacher Leaders Network as well as our NewMillennium Initiative — powerful groups ofyoung teachers in sites nationwide who are developing solutions for some of the most vexing problems of the teaching profession.

Here’s what is impressive to me about Anna’s essays. She provides an informed critique that emphasizes the factors that matter for students ’ success . She sees that neitherTFA or education schools (at least as they are designed today ) has adequately addressed the needs of all students .Moving past this false dichotomy (teachereducation schools vs. alternative routes) is essential to improving teaching effectiveness.

Anna and other Bay Area New Millennium Initiative teammembers will soon release a potent policy paper on the future of teaching. Their concrete suggestions (generatedafter extensive research and debate and grounded in classroom experience) address many of the key issues Anna highlights in her short essays: preparing teachers for long-term success, providing high-quality professional development on the job, and reshaping the career paths available to talented teachers .

Wise policymakers—those who recognize the importance of developing and keeping extraordinary teachers—should listen carefully to the ideas of teacher leaders like Anna.She is not alone.We are in touch with thousands of teachers across the United States who are deeply committed to their profession but recognize that bold changes will benecessary to meet the needs of 21st-century learners.

Posted at 10:29 AM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, NewMillennium Teachers, School Reform, Teacher Prep , Teacher Recruitment & Retention, TeacherWorking Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 22, 2011

Redefining Teacher Preparation

Is America finally ready to invest in teaching?

The question looms.

Last month , I sat in on the International Summit on the Teaching Profession in New York. Participan ts included education ministers and union leaders from high-performing nations as well as American education leaders (Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, NEA president Dennis Van Roekel, and AFT president Randi Weingarten).

Andreas Schliecher, a researcher at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), offered a compelling analysis of countries with high-performing

students (and narrowing achievement gaps). What do these countries have in common? They invest in teaching as a knowledge-based profession. Teacherpreparation is serious business: top-notch recruits are paid to prepare for a teaching career.

American teacher education policy is very different—and yields poorer results for students. Our policies promote short-cut, low-quality preparation for entry into theteaching profession. There is often little connection between pre-service preparation and on-the-job support . New recruits have few incentives to receive serious trainingbefore they teach, and they are not rewarded for remaining in the classroom.

TEACHING 2030, which I co-authored with twelve accomplished teachers, presses American policymakers to invest in better teachereducation for tomorrow’s students. (The image at left is taken from graphic facilitator Sunni Brown's depiction of a recent 2030 teamconversation.) Relying on classroom expertise as well as research on best practices, we developed a vision of a great teacher preparationsystem:

1. Universities , school districts, and non-profits will fuse their resources to prepare future teachers ;



Andreas Schliecher, a researcher at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), offered a compelling analysis of countries with high-performing

students (and narrowing achievement gaps). What do these countries have in common? They invest in teaching as a knowledge-based profession. Teacherpreparation is serious business: top-notch recruits are paid to prepare for a teaching career.

American teacher education policy is very different—and yields poorer results for students. Our policies promote short-cut, low-quality preparation for entry into theteaching profession. There is often little connection between pre-service preparation and on-the-job support . New recruits have few incentives to receive serious trainingbefore they teach, and they are not rewarded for remaining in the classroom.

TEACHING 2030, which I co-authored with twelve accomplished teachers, presses American policymakers to invest in better teachereducation for tomorrow’s students. (The image at left is taken from graphic facilitator Sunni Brown's depiction of a recent 2030 teamconversation.) Relying on classroom expertise as well as research on best practices, we developed a vision of a great teacher preparationsystem:

1. Universities , school districts, and non-profits will fuse their resources to prepare future teachers ;

2. Teacher preparation will be built on a sound liberal arts education — then candidates can choose from various tracks of professionalpreparation, each one focusing on different roles and responsibilities;

3. Teacher education will be cohort-based , preparing new recruits to teach as teams in high-need schools;

4. All new teachers will complete a substantial internship in a community-based organization in order to develop deep knowledge of thecontext of how and where students and their families live;

5. All new recruits for a teaching career will be expected to serve in an extensive internsh ip in a virtual teacher network, where they alsolearn specific skills in using multi-user virtual environments to educate students anytime, anywhere, as well as how to spread expertiseamong teaching colleagues ;

6. Pedagogical preparation will be built on a mixed use of live and digitally recorded “lesson studies” in which teamsof candidates learnto critique teaching and assess student learning using emerging technologies;

7. Each teacher education candidate will have a program of learning with common tasks to accomplish and performance assessments to measure when (and what) they areready to teach;

8. Passing performance assessments, not completing “seat time” in college courses, will determine when teachers are ready to teach independently – and in what schoolsand under what conditions;

9. Teaching responsibilities (and differential compensation) will be determined on the basis of what one knows and can do as an independently practicing teacher (identifiedthrough performance assessments ) and one’s proven knowledge and skills; and

10. Schools will be red esigned for teacher learning (as in other high-performing nations) so new recruits can develop under the supervision of expert vete ranswho havebeen specially prepared as mentors.

This is the future of teacher education we envision — one that will ensure equity and excellence for all students . American students and schools will onlybe able to catch up to (and surpass) other nations ’ educational systems through dramatic transformation of its teacher preparation policies. To learn more, order a copy ofTEACHING 2030.

Posted at 05:58 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Prep, Teacher Recruitment &Retention, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching2030, Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (1)

April 08, 2011

Gen Y Teachers and the Future of the Profession

Today the American Federation of Teachers and the American Institutes for Research released a very important report on the future of teaching — revealingwhat GenerationY teachers believe they need in order to teach effectively . The report, built on a plethora of surveys, focus groups , and case studies, should serve as a wake-up call for thosewho tend to simplify the problems facing the profession.

Here are key findings:

. Gen Y teachers seek “more frequent feedback on their teaching ” than their more veteran colleagues — but also want more assistance from their peers (not just fromadministrators);2. Gen Y teachers want more time and opportunities to improve their practice through meaningful collaboration;

3. Gen Y teachers embrace performance pay plans, but believe that their effectiveness cannot be accurately measured through standardized test scores alone;4. Gen Y teachers are enthusiastic about new networking technologies that can improve teaching and learning .

These findings mirror what we are learning from the young teachers involved in our NewMillennium Initiative. Generation Y teachers have no problem whatsoever with callsfor more accountability among the teaching ranks . However, having studied assessment and accountability issues in depth, they are deeply skeptical of the mechanical tools

being used in states like Florida, where the governor was recently called to task by Rick Hess for “setting one-size -fits-all prescriptions” for teacher evaluation.

’m inspired by what this report reveals about Generation Y teachers ’ attitudes toward their profession. Compared with young teachers in 1999-2000, Generation Y teachersin 2008 were more likely to say they hoped to “stay in teaching as long as I am able” and less likely to report being “undecided” about their career plans.

How can we help each talented young teacher to “stay in teaching as long as I am able”? This study offers concrete answers from the teachers themselves. And the veryconditions highlighted by Generation Y teachers (collaboration with peers, frequent feedback on their teaching, equitable and reliable assessment, and technology-imbedded

learning environments) are right in line with what research tells us works for students .

Through TEACHING 2030, we are developing a vision that considers the needs of 21st-century students and the new generation of teachers who will serve them. We mustinvest in working conditions and policies that will help students and teachers succeed in meeting 21st-century expectations. We must bewilling to rethink ways to structureteachers’ work so wemake the most of their talents while benefiting all students. (For example, teacherpreneurs could work with students while also serving as learningarchitects, web curators , teacher educators, researchers, policy mavens, and other innovative roles… opportunities that will appeal to the Generation Y teachers who are

destined to be among the profession’s leaders.)

As we imagine a brighter future for America ’s students and schools , it is time to listen to the hopeful voices of our Generation Y teachers — and to acknowledge the sincereefforts of teacher unions whose leaders are increasingly committed to making sure these voices are heard.



learning environments) are right in line with what research tells us works for students .

Through TEACHING 2030, we are developing a vision that considers the needs of 21st-century students and the new generation of teachers who will serve them. We mustinvest in working conditions and policies that will help students and teachers succeed in meeting 21st-century expectations. We must bewilling to rethink ways to structureteachers’ work so wemake the most of their talents while benefiting all students. (For example, teacherpreneurs could work with students while also serving as learningarchitects, web curators , teacher educators, researchers, policy mavens, and other innovative roles… opportunities that will appeal to the Generation Y teachers who are

destined to be among the profession’s leaders.)

As we imagine a brighter future for America ’s students and schools , it is time to listen to the hopeful voices of our Generation Y teachers — and to acknowledge the sincereefforts of teacher unions whose leaders are increasingly committed to making sure these voices are heard.

Posted at 04:34 PM in Future of Teaching , Improving Our Schools, NewMillennium Teachers, Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching 2030, The Teaching Profession |Permalink | Comments (0)

March 29, 2011

Questing for Better Teacher Evaluation

In a recent LA Times article, John Deasy, the incoming superintendent in Los Angeles, reframed the teacher evaluation debate with telling words: "We are not questing forperfect. We are questing for much better."

Instead of using new value-added tools in lock-step mechanical ways , the nation ’s second-largest school district (700,000+) is working to find a way to use the data in helpfulways to both identify effective teaching and improve it.

It’s a challenging task. Teachers’ unions appear to be adamantly opposed to the use of any unstable data in any high stakes decision . And district leaders often counter theunion’s stance by claiming that the VAM measures are more reliable than spotty classroom observations conducted by ill-trained administrators who do not have time toassess teachers (even if they are well prepared to do so).

In this LA Times piece reporting on LAUSD’s new evaluation initiative, journalist Teresa Watanabe offers a much more nuanced view of the inherent problems with VAM —but does not go so far as to suggest that the uses of the statistical tool have to be couched in either-or terms. Watanabe also notes that “Many teachers and union leaders saythey are not necessarily opposed to value-addedmethods but want to understand them and have a say in how they're used .”

In a recent paper penned with classroom experts, my CTQ colleague Alesha Daughtrey and I make the claim that VAM can be effectively used in performance evaluation ifteacher leaders are engageddeeply “in efforts to sharpen (the) models and their underlying assessments.”We suggest that “if more opportunities are made available for

teachers to understand as well as use the results , in light of both the assessments upon which they are built and the classroom context in which they are generated, manymore of them will be responsive to the evidence. ”

Nowa group of young teachers from our NewMillennium Initiative have taken the idea further, suggesting that teachers should be assessed with VAM data, not in absoluteterms, but as evidence that can be used to improve their teaching and student learning. They point out that a VAM data point is not static — and teachers should be assessedon how they interpret and use evidence to advance student learning . (Watch for their upcoming new report here).

Lee Shulman, president emeritus of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, has said: “One of the most dangerous ideas in assessment is themyth of amagic bullet, ’ some powerful test with psychometric properties so outstanding that we can base high-stakes decisions on the results of performance on that measure alone.”

Teaching effectivenessmust bedefined broadly and measured with a variety of tools. There are many, many teacher leaders, like the ones I am working with on pushing outour vision of the future of teaching (our TEACHING 2030 team, pictured here), who have some remarkable ideas about how to do so .

Dr. Deasy is correct. We must quest for better. If we listen to expert teachers, we'll get there.

Posted at 02:23 PM in Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (1)

March 25, 2011

5 Teacher Myths That Distract Policymakers

Reposted from the Washington Post Answer Sheet blog ---

By Valerie StraussThis was written by Barnett Berry, founder and president of the Center for Teaching Quality , Inc., based in Hillsborough, N.C., which seeks to improve studentachievement by advancing teaching as a 21st-century, results-oriented profession.

___________________________



Dr. Deasy is correct. We must quest for better. If we listen to expert teachers, we'll get there.

Posted at 02:23 PM in Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (1)

March 25, 2011

5 Teacher Myths That Distract Policymakers

Reposted from the Washington Post Answer Sheet blog ---

By Valerie StraussThis was written by Barnett Berry, founder and president of the Center for Teaching Quality , Inc., based in Hillsborough, N.C., which seeks to improve studentachievement by advancing teaching as a 21st-century, results-oriented profession.

___________________________

By Barnett Berry

There’s a lot of talk today about making our schools better and our teachers more effective. Researchers confirm that the right teachers can make a big difference in howmuch students learn , even in the most challenging schools . But scholars , educators, union leaders and policy wonks still disagree , sometimes vehemently, overwhat good

teaching looks like. And it’s a high-stakes question. Political leaders at every level are demanding we evaluate and pay teachers based on student test scores and value-addedstatistical formulas. If that turns out to be a bad strategy, the long-term ramifications for the nation could be staggering.

Incredible as it seems, 11 years into the new millennium decision makers are still opting for a patchwork teaching policy that often lowers entry standards to keep salaries andpreparation costs down.

We spend too much time debating 20th century arguments — e.g. , whether or not Teach for America or university-based certification programs are the best ways to recruitand train teachers. What we need instead are millions of well -prepared, highly savvy teachers who know how to teach the iGeneration and work successfully in teams in orderto serve diverse public school populations that include large numbers of English language learners and students from poverty.

Teaching in the 21st century is complex, challenging work, and the fiction that “anyone can be a teacher” threatens our future. We have entered an era of rapid andinexorable change, where the real “high stakes” must be measured at a global level. We don’t have time for myths. Here are five that often distract policymakers from creatingthe results -oriented teaching profession students deserve .

Myth #1: Teacher preparation matters little for student achievement .

Research Realities: Some research suggests that new recruits from Teach for America and other fast-entry programs perform about as well as those from traditional,university-based teacher training – leading many to assume that in-depth teacher preparationmatters little for student achievement. But what if neither approach is giving usthe teachers we need? The National Bureau of Economic Research found that beginning teachers with more extensive clinical training (including a full-year internship – likedoctors get) actually produce higher student achievement gains than those from either traditional university programsor alternative pathways. Recent research also tells us

that teacher who enter with too little preparation are likely to leave the profession much sooner than those who have a thorough grasp of the fundamentals – and they’re lesslikely to be effective over time.

Myth #2: Teaching experience matters little for student achievement.

We keep hearing that teaching experience beyond the initial three years or so does not necessarily produce higher student test scores. But recent studies say that more

experience doesmatter (up to 20 years) for student achievement when the conditions are ripe – that is, when teachers teach the same subjects and grade levels consistently,especially during their first five years of teaching. Other researchers have shown that experienced, expert teachers know more than novices and organize their knowledge ofcontent, teaching strategies, and students more effectively, retrieve it more readily, and can apply it in novel and creative ways. More seasoned experts are also betterprepared to overcome some of the stressful working conditions found in many high-needs schools. Experience does not guarantee effective teaching , but when schools areorganize to draw on its best teachers , it matters a lot.

Myth #3: Removing incompetent teachers will fix our schools.

Research Realities: In any professional workplace, dismissing ineffective employees makes common sense. But the best evidence indicates that the percentage of ineffectiveteachers in American public schools is far lower thanmedia reports might suggest . For example, the Teacher Advancement Program, which includes many thousands ofteachers across the United States , uses both student test results and observational methods to assess teaching effectiveness. Only a very small fraction of TAP teachers are

rated ineffective . Over 85 percent have been deemed proficient (with a score of 3 or above) and almost one-third earn a score of 4 or above on a 5-point scale . There ’s ampleevidence that we are obsessing on a small problem while we give short shrift to professional development strategies that could move large numbers of teachers fromsatisfactory to excellent.

Myth #4: Teacher tenure rules make it impossible to get rid of poor teachers.

Research Realities: A recent study by The New Teacher Project clearly shows that the difficulty in removing ineffective teachers hasmuch more to do with ill -trained andsupported administrators than tenure rules. Another report from the Center for American Progress concluded that poor evaluation procedures – not tenure –are most likelyto account for a school district’s inability to fire poor performers. Teacher tenure is prevalent in “high achievement” nations like Finland. In America, poor teacher evaluationis common (epidemic, in fact) in school districts with or without unions and tenure . Tenure reform is necessary , but the bigger issue is eliminating the widespreadeducational malpractice associated with broken evaluation systems, which not only stymie teacher development but student achievement.

Myth #5: Merit pay will motivate teachers to teach more effectively .

Research Realities: In the most rigorous study to date, scholars from Vanderbilt University and the RAND Corporation plainly conclude that “rewarding teachers with bonuspay, in the absence of any other support programs, does not raise student test scores.” Performance pay plans can make a difference for student achievement when they aredesigned to improve the school climate and encourage teacher collaboration. Studies of effective performance pay systems tell us that: (1) teachers must be involved in the

design and implementation; (2 ) costs need to be known and madepublic prior to program launch; (3) the system cannot be a one-size-fits-all approach – districts and

schools need to be able to adapt based on local contexts; and (4) one or two direct measures of student learning (like standardized test scores) cannot be the only basis for

rewards.

These myths drive today ’s teaching policies and continue to ground solutions in yesterday’s challenges. They distract us from the demands that teachers already face today

and that will only intensify tomorrow. We need to identify our most effective teachers , using fair, rigorous and valid measures, and let them lead the way in removingineffective colleagues . Most important , we need to invest far more in teacher education and school redesign policies reflective of 21st century demands on our public schools .More than anything else today ’s policy focus must spread the expertise our best teachers, in and out of cyberspace .

In TEACHING 2030, a new book I’ve authored with 12 outstanding teachers , we build a compelling case that for teachers to be effective now and in the future, they mustknow how to:

1) teach the Googled learner , who has grown up on smartphones and virtual reality games and can find information (if not understanding ) with a few taps of the finger;

2)work with a student body that’s increasingly diverse (by 2030, 40 percent or more will be second-language learners);



schools need to be able to adapt based on local contexts; and (4) one or two direct measures of student learning (like standardized test scores) cannot be the only basis for

rewards.

These myths drive today ’s teaching policies and continue to ground solutions in yesterday’s challenges. They distract us from the demands that teachers already face today

and that will only intensify tomorrow. We need to identify our most effective teachers , using fair, rigorous and valid measures, and let them lead the way in removingineffective colleagues . Most important , we need to invest far more in teacher education and school redesign policies reflective of 21st century demands on our public schools .More than anything else today ’s policy focus must spread the expertise our best teachers, in and out of cyberspace .

In TEACHING 2030, a new book I’ve authored with 12 outstanding teachers , we build a compelling case that for teachers to be effective now and in the future, they mustknow how to:

1) teach the Googled learner , who has grown up on smartphones and virtual reality games and can find information (if not understanding ) with a few taps of the finger;

2)work with a student body that’s increasingly diverse (by 2030, 40 percent or more will be second-language learners);

3) prepare students to compete for jobs in a global marketplace where communication , collaboration, critical thinking and creative problem solving are the “new basics ”;

4) help students monitor their own learning – using sophisticated tools to assess whether students meet high academic standards and fine-tuning instruction when theydon’t; and

5) connect teaching to the needs of communities as economic churn creates family and societal instability , pushing schools to integrate health and social services withacademic learning .

As described in TEACHING 2030, far too preparation programs, including both alternative and traditional ones , cultivate teachers with these skills . Even fewer schools areorganized to create opportunities for our best teachers — or teacherpreneurs— to teach students regularly as well as lead pedagogical and policy reforms outside their

classrooms. Now’s the time to transcend the usual debates over how to make our schools better and our teachers more effective – and break free of the myths that keep usfighting 20th century battles. Instead we need to look hard at the realities, framed by research evidence as well as the challenges teachers face everyday, in pointing the waytoward a 21st century teaching profession demanded by our nation ’s public schools .

0-

Posted at 03:46 PM in Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (2)

March 21, 2011

Lessons the U.S. Needs to Learn about the Teaching Profession

Last week I was privileged to attend the International Summit on the Teaching Profession in New York City , co-sponsored by (among others) the Asia Society, WNET NewYork and USDOE. The Summit, which immediately preceded WNET's wonderful annual Celebration of Teaching & Learning, gathered education ministers , national unionleaders and accomplished teachers from the United States and from nations with high performing and rapidly improving educational systems.

The International Summit is described here by guest blogger Liana Heitin atEducation Week’s Teacher Beat blog. Heitin does a nice job in laying out the basic facts of whowas there and for what purpose — but bypasses some of the most important messages about whyU.S. teaching policy is way off the mark in comparison to other (top-ranked) nations represented at the Summit. As Heitin notes, in high performing nations, unions and government work together . But there is a lot more to be learned. Hereare the key lessons:

1. High performing nations have not changed their teachers . They have changed their teaching development systems.

2 . Ministers of Education in top-ranked nations have no problem talking about the importance of teacher working conditions — most notably time for them to learnfrom each other.

3 . Other nations recruit top talent to teaching but recognize that high flying academics are not always the best teachers .

4 . In Shanghai high performing schools have time and resources to help low performing schools . There is no competition between “traditional” schools and “charters.”

5. Top-performing nations pay for rigorous, formal, and extensive pre-service preparation of all new recruits to teaching. There is no need for a Teach for Finland orTeach for Singapore.

For insight take a good look at the OECD report presented at the conference— Lessons from PISA: What the U.S. Can Learn from the World’sMost Successful Reform Efforts— and ask questions about why U.S. policymakers can’t get it right.

Here’s another blog commentary — by Maureen Downey at the Atlanta Journal Constitution — that includes more highlights from the OECD report. And you can watcha webcast of the Summit's closing session here.]

Posted at 12:47 PM in Future of Teaching , Teacher Recruitment &Retention, TeacherWorking Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (2)

March 16, 2011

America supports teachers . Now let's move forward.

In a recent back-and-forth conversation, education policy experts Diane Ravitch and Rick Hess offer persuasive explanations for the heavy criticism being heaped on teachersand their unions). Diane speaks about the many reformerswho have made teachers accountable for unreasonable (NCLB-esque) goals — advocates who, without sufficientevidence, make the claim that high needs schools are overrun with teaching incompetence. Rick argues that today's unflattering attitudes toward teachers are nothing newand that the current attacks on the profession are more about failing policies than inept classroom teachers.

They both have a piece of the truth, but there are some other larger issues in play — and additional evidence that needs to be considered .

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the attack on teachers in Wisconsin and Florida ismuch more about union busting than about advancing teaching as a results-



Posted at 12:47 PM in Future of Teaching , Teacher Recruitment &Retention, TeacherWorking Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (2)

March 16, 2011

America supports teachers . Now let's move forward.

In a recent back-and-forth conversation, education policy experts Diane Ravitch and Rick Hess offer persuasive explanations for the heavy criticism being heaped on teachersand their unions). Diane speaks about the many reformerswho have made teachers accountable for unreasonable (NCLB-esque) goals — advocates who, without sufficientevidence, make the claim that high needs schools are overrun with teaching incompetence. Rick argues that today's unflattering attitudes toward teachers are nothing newand that the current attacks on the profession are more about failing policies than inept classroom teachers.

They both have a piece of the truth, but there are some other larger issues in play — and additional evidence that needs to be considered .

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the attack on teachers in Wisconsin and Florida ismuch more about union busting than about advancing teaching as a results-oriented profession.

In Wisconsin , the public is now learning of themany financial concessions the union hasmade to help resolve the budget crisis, while Governor Walker keeps demanding tostrip teachers of their collective bargaining rights while giving a bye to the rights of other unionized public employees (e. g., police and fire) who have tended to support hispolitical outlook.

In Florida, Governor Scott has re-introduced a teaching effectiveness bill that will definitely misuse value-added student achievement data for assessing teacher performance.The Florida union has put forth proposals from some of the state's best teachers (link to FL report) who call for the thoughtful use of this data in both teaching evaluationsand strategic compensation . Governor Scott has clearly ignored the suggestion to build out Florida's results-oriented system of evaluation and pay, leveraging the GatesFoundation-funded reforms in Hillsborough County (Tampa) where union president Jean Clements and superintendent Mary Ellen Elia are jointly leading the way.

Unions and districts both needto advance the agenda

Unions need to pursue an agenda that will lead to enforcing high standards among their ranks — no question. But school district administrators , who jointly sign off on thecollective bargaining agreements that are hotly criticized by some reformers and many ambitious politicians, must change a lot also .

Unions must focus more on professional performance and the interests of learners — supporting the removal of the incompetent teachers who don’t meet reasonablestandards of practice (as ToledoOH has been doing for decades). At the same time, school districts must ensure that valued added achievement data are used properly, in anon-mechanical way, as part of a context sensitive, multiple-measures evaluation system. District leaders much also assure that administrators are well trained (andcompetent) to conduct and lead fair evaluations. This is what we see happening in Hillsborough (and several other communities as well).

Finally — for those who think the public does not, in the end, support public school teachers , examine this Rasmussen poll , just released. It reveals that almost 60% of likelyWisconsin voters now disapprove (with 48% strongly disapproving) of Governor Walker. The same poll shows that 77% of Wisconsin voters have a positive opinion ofteachers.

More teachers need to lead the way in bringing about the transcendent teaching effectiveness reforms demanded by our failed education policy system. We cannot continue totolerate an approach to teaching policy that undercuts efforts to recruit , prepare, support and pay the neighbors, friends and fellow citizens whom we depend upon to teachour students . Wisconsin is sending a message. America supports teachers. Let'smove forward to preserve and improve the teaching profession.

Posted at 08:51 AM in School Reform, Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 14, 2011

Bold indicators - for the 20th century

The Center for American Progress and the Education Trust have published a policy brief focusing on the "essential elements" of teacher policy they believe must be present in

the reauthorization of ESEA .

Problem is — they left out some of the essentials .

Their policy prescriptions earnestly address the 20th century problems that so many policy wonks seem determined to fix, whether or not they still have much relevance.

Here in the second decade of the 21st century, the CAP/EdTrust proposed ESEA indicators often miss the mark. They ignore important research on the conditions that willallow teachers to teach effectively in the new millennium and thus assure that all students have access to expert teachers every day.

Here are a five examples of inadequate indicators.

CAP and Ed Trust call for mandates requiring states to collect and report on:

. The percentage of teachers beyond their first year of teaching . But they disregard the fact that high-needs schools require teachers with at least 4 -5 years under their belt

- the point at which classroom teachers develop a more finely tuned practice.

2. The percentage of course sections taught by in-field secondary teachers. But they ignore that many administrators mindlessly shift elementary teachers from grade tograde without any consideration of their training and experience.

3. The percentage of teachers prepared by a high-performing teacher preparation program . But they overlook the fact that ineffective teachers can graduate from "effective

pathways" without ever having to demonstrate that they are competent.

4. The percentage of teachers with fewer than ten absences. But they fail to account for poor working conditions (e .g., like inept administrators ) that may beunderminingteachers' capacity to teach effectively.

5. The percentage of teachers in the top quartile of teacher impact on student growth. But without recognizing the instability of the current statistical models, the narrow

range of testing data available, and the need to use all data in more measured and non-mechanical ways.

Most important , none of their proposals call for states to collect evidence on the spread of effective teaching by expert practitioners, in and out of cyberspace . This is howschools improve. If we are going to create the kind of teaching development system students deserve , we must have indicator systems that align with today 's school realities— indicators that will actually drive the changes we must have to create a high performing, results -oriented teaching profession across the board .

Posted at 07:49 PM in School Reform, Teacher Prep , Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (0)



pathways" without ever having to demonstrate that they are competent.

4. The percentage of teachers with fewer than ten absences. But they fail to account for poor working conditions (e .g., like inept administrators ) that may beunderminingteachers' capacity to teach effectively.

5. The percentage of teachers in the top quartile of teacher impact on student growth. But without recognizing the instability of the current statistical models, the narrow

range of testing data available, and the need to use all data in more measured and non-mechanical ways.

Most important , none of their proposals call for states to collect evidence on the spread of effective teaching by expert practitioners, in and out of cyberspace . This is howschools improve. If we are going to create the kind of teaching development system students deserve , we must have indicator systems that align with today 's school realities— indicators that will actually drive the changes we must have to create a high performing, results -oriented teaching profession across the board .

Posted at 07:49 PM in School Reform, Teacher Prep , Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (0)

February 22, 2011

Are Teacher Unions Anachronistic?

Today’s New York Times raises important questions about the fracas over unions and the teaching profession in Wisconsin. A news analysis exploresthe possibility that unions, including those representing teachers , may have become anachronistic — ending with a quote from a private sectoremployee: “I know there was a point for unions back in the day because people were being abused,” she said. “But now there’s workers’ rights ; there’slaws that protect us.”

Perhaps she is right when it comes to basic employee law, and the rights of workers to fair wages and basic working conditions (e .g. ,hours worked perweek and job safety ). But as Diane Ravitch recently wrote in the Washington Post's Answer Sheet blog, the unions still have a role to play in advancingteaching as a profession — in terms of advocating for basic conditions that all teachers must have to teach effectively :

I recently visited Arizona, a right-to-work state, and parents there complained to me about classes of 30 for children in first and second grades, and even larger for olderstudents ; they complained that the starting salary for teachers was only $26,000, and that it is hard to find strong college graduates to enter teaching when wages are solow.

Too many policymakers, unfortunately , would prefer to opt for cheap and compliant teachers , and not those who are more well -prepared and willing to aggressively advocatefor the kinds of conditions and teaching practices they knowwill help students learn more. Much as it has been during 150+ year history of the American common school , toomany policymakers want teachers to be seen, but not heard.

But isn't it time to invite classroom experts — whose deep knowledge of teaching, students, and families is a precious public resource — to inform and shape educationpolicy? Isn’t it time for teacher leaders to enforce standards among their ranks and work with policymakers and the public in creating a 21st century results -orientedteaching profession?

And isn’t it time for teacher leaders to press forward the discussion about transforming unions into professional guilds that seek not only to maintain but to advance publiceducation as the cornerstone of our democracy? This is the vision for the teacher unions of tomorrow set forth in our new CTQ/TLN book TEACHING 2030. We need acollective voice of teachers now more than ever — functioning not as maligned defenders, but as respected leaders who are about the business of creating the world's finest

public school system.

Posted at 11:35 AM in Future of Teaching | Permalink | Comments (8)

February 14, 2011

More Evidence that Newspapers Shouldn’t Be in the Teacher Evaluation Business

The controversy over using value-added ratings to judge teachers in Los Angeles — which has been the subject of many blog posts, including my own August comments —continues unabated with the release of a new report from the National Education Policy Center, challenging the methodology used by an L.A. Times consultant and reportersto create a massive ratings database and publicly identify what the newspaper claims are ineffective teachers.

Last week, L.A. Timeswriter Jason Felch, the lead reporter on the project, attempted to trump the release of the NEPC report by breaking the embargo date requested by theCenter. (Embargodates are routine business for newspapers and newsmakers—a necessary partnership that assures fair and wide distribution of newsworthy developments.)

It is transparently clear that Mr. Felch, who was given an advance copy of Due Diligence and the Evaluation of Teachers by its authors, jumped the gun in an effort to reducethe report’s splash and to muffle growing concerns both about the methodologies used to make the analysis and the ways in which the L.A. Times has used the data. Felch

and the Times have not onlymined the data to produce dozens of news stories but provided public access to the database through an online search engine that ratesindividual teachers by name and ranks the top 100 elementary teachers and schools in the vast LAUSD system.

The NEPC researchers found many flaws in the analysis conducted by Richard Buddin , a senior economist at the RAND Corporation (working as an independent contractor).Both Felch’s series of stories and the database developed by Felch and his editors relied entirely on Buddin’swork to identify “effective and ineffective teachers.” Yet when the

NEPC researchers did their own analysis and compared it with Buddin ’s results , they found that, for reading, “only 46.4% of teachers would retain the same effectivenessratingunder bothmodels, ” and for math, only 60.8%.

The NEPC determined that the Buddin /Times statistical approach was “producing biased estimates of teacher effects because it omits variables that are associated bothwithstudent test performance and how students and teachers are assigned to one another.”

You can read the NEPC authors’ meticulous description of their own methods and analysis for yourself. What’s particularly notable is their contention that the nature of the

data called for a more conservative approach to determining teacher effects:

Because the L.A. Times did not use this more conservative approach to distinguish teachers when rating them as “effective” or “ineffective”, it is likely that there are a

significant number of false positives (teachers rated as effective who are really average), and false negatives (teachers rated as ineffective who are really average) in theL.A. Times’ rating system .

While the NEPC researchers concentrated on what they perceived as flaws in Buddin ’s methodology and conclusions , that doesn’t let Jason Felch and the L.A. Times off thehook. After claiming that teachers ’ personal rights to privacy (and , indeed, fair treatment) were trumped by “the public’s right to know, ” Felch and his editors had anobligation to vet and re-vet their methodology before playing that First Amendment trump card. We can now see they did not go nearly far enough.

Remarkably, whenMr. Felch broke the NEPC report embargo and reported on its findings, the L.A. Times headline proclaimed: "Separate study confirms many Los Angeles

Times findings on teacher effectiveness." Perhaps Felch and his editors were banking on the public’s aversion to reading reports about statistical methodology. But anyonewho reads the NEPC executive summary will see that the newspaper’s choice of headline was self-serving and disingenuous — and that’s putting



You can read the NEPC authors’ meticulous description of their own methods and analysis for yourself. What’s particularly notable is their contention that the nature of the

data called for a more conservative approach to determining teacher effects:

Because the L.A. Times did not use this more conservative approach to distinguish teachers when rating them as “effective” or “ineffective”, it is likely that there are a

significant number of false positives (teachers rated as effective who are really average), and false negatives (teachers rated as ineffective who are really average) in theL.A. Times’ rating system .

While the NEPC researchers concentrated on what they perceived as flaws in Buddin ’s methodology and conclusions , that doesn’t let Jason Felch and the L.A. Times off thehook. After claiming that teachers ’ personal rights to privacy (and , indeed, fair treatment) were trumped by “the public’s right to know, ” Felch and his editors had anobligation to vet and re-vet their methodology before playing that First Amendment trump card. We can now see they did not go nearly far enough.

Remarkably, whenMr. Felch broke the NEPC report embargo and reported on its findings, the L.A. Times headline proclaimed: "Separate study confirms many Los Angeles

Times findings on teacher effectiveness." Perhaps Felch and his editors were banking on the public’s aversion to reading reports about statistical methodology. But anyonewho reads the NEPC executive summary will see that the newspaper’s choice of headline was self-serving and disingenuous — and that’s puttingitmildly.

In response, the NEPC researchers were quick to release a fact sheet about the Times story, challenging its interpretation of their work andbluntly stating that the August publication by the Times of teacher effectiveness ratings was “based on unreliable and invalid research .”

WHAT IS most troubling about all this brouhaha — beyond the very real damage that the Times’ reckless actions has done to teacherswho did not deserve the treatment they got — is this : Results-oriented teacher evaluations are very much needed. I could not agree more withRick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute that VAM can be used to evaluate teachers , but only “carefully.”

Back in August I noted that :

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, under the auspices of its Measuring Effective Teaching project, is taking a very thoughtful approach to teacher assessment bylooking at multiple measures of student achievement and linking other metrics (e .g. , classroom observations, teachers’ analyses of student work and their own teaching,and levels of student engagement) to capture a more robust and accurate view of who is effective and why.

Very few accomplished teachers are likely to argue against better methods of determining who is effective and why. In a soon-to-be JUST-RELEASED paper from theCenter for Teaching Quality, three teachers well -versed in the issues surrounding evaluation policy call for the strategic use of value-added data, with the VAM models’limitations in mind. They strongly recommend that classroom experts be engaged to help sharpen these tools and their underlying student assessments, and by doing so ,produce accountability systems that better support effective teaching and learning .

In a sensible society, concerned about the future of the children in its public schools, wewould not — and I hope wewill not — leave the evaluation of effective teaching toreputation-seeking journalists and their attention-seeking news organizations.

Posted at 11:35 AM in Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (3)

February 01, 2011

Using VAM the right way. With teacher leaders LEADING the way.

Harvard professor HeatherHill and several research colleagues have published one of the more thoughtful pieces of research on value-added models and their validity forevaluating teachers on the basis of student test score gains.

The article, “A Validity Argument Approach to Evaluating Teacher Value-Added Scores,” appears in the American Educational Research Journal.

Using sophisticated quantitative measures, the researchers tested how well the value ratings of middle school math teachers correlated with their mathematical knowledgeand quality of instruction . The results are compelling , revealing the utility of VAM in some circumstances, but also pointing to a serious flaw in the models because of themis-identification of teachers .

The researchers found high correlations of VAM estimates among three different types of statisticalmodels used to rate teachers. And, to quote from the abstract, they “found

teachers’ value-added scores correlated not only with their mathematical knowledge and quality of instruction but also with the population of students they teach.”

Perhaps most importantly the researchers found that a large percentage of math teachers studied had very low ‘quality of teaching’ ratings, but very high VAM estimates. Inthis case, low quality meant operationally that examination of the teachers’ instruction revealed “very high rates of mathematical errors and/or disorganized presentations ofmathematical content.”

Case studies of these teachers explained a lot of these “false positive” VAM results — results that could make such teachers eligible for significant performance bonuses inmost merit pay plans (and, not insignificantly , send the message that their teaching practice was exemplary).

Case 1: This teacher has been trained as an elementary generalist, with 8 years of teaching experience. The case study recounts that she reads a problem out of the text as3/8 + 2/7” but then writes it on the board and solves it as “3 .8 +2 .7.” She calls the commutative property the community property. She says proportion when shemeansratio. She talks about denominators being equivalent when shemeans the fractions are equivalent. In many instances , the teacher ’s teaching “clouded rather than clarified themathematics of the lesson. ”

But she does exhibit the “tough -love style of behavior management” popular today in many high-need schools . She knows how to organize discussions of math among her

students. If you entered a classroom as an evaluator she would be rated as a teacher who has high expectations — another reform mantra. The researchers were puzzled as to

how she earn such a high VAM rating, suggesting that itmay have been the consistent computational exercises she assigned (in other words, teaching to the test).

Case 2: This teacher has been teaching for four years, entering the profession as mid -career switcher . While he does not hold a degree in mathematics , he has completedmany math courses in his academic training, and his previous work outside of education gave him practical experience in using math. Knowledge of math was not hisproblem. He understands math conceptually, but he has little skill in detecting problems in his students ’mathematical reasoning. And while he made frequent mathematicalerrors (some serious), often “his students quickly correct(ed ) them.”

Overall the researchers concluded that there was “very little mathematics occurring” in his classroom as the teacher offers only the “briefest of mathematical presentations,typically referring students to the text and assigning a series of problems.” He only provided routine supervision of and feedback on student work. The researchers concludedthat his high VAM ratings were best explained by the high ability of the students he taught, who had many other in-and out-of-school opportunities to learn math.

Conclusion: Based on the data analysis and case studies, the researchers offered a clear warning to policymakers about the proper use of value-addedmethods : “Although



how she earn such a high VAM rating, suggesting that itmay have been the consistent computational exercises she assigned (in other words, teaching to the test).

Case 2: This teacher has been teaching for four years, entering the profession as mid -career switcher . While he does not hold a degree in mathematics , he has completedmany math courses in his academic training, and his previous work outside of education gave him practical experience in using math. Knowledge of math was not hisproblem. He understands math conceptually, but he has little skill in detecting problems in his students ’mathematical reasoning. And while he made frequent mathematicalerrors (some serious), often “his students quickly correct(ed ) them.”

Overall the researchers concluded that there was “very little mathematics occurring” in his classroom as the teacher offers only the “briefest of mathematical presentations,typically referring students to the text and assigning a series of problems.” He only provided routine supervision of and feedback on student work. The researchers concludedthat his high VAM ratings were best explained by the high ability of the students he taught, who had many other in-and out-of-school opportunities to learn math.

Conclusion: Based on the data analysis and case studies, the researchers offered a clear warning to policymakers about the proper use of value-addedmethods : “Althoughwe do recommend the use of value-added scores in combination with discriminating observation systems, evidence presented here suggests that value-added scores alone arenot sufficient to identify teachers for reward, remediation, or removal.”

Our own work with teacher leaders in a variety of CTQ programs suggests that many classroom practitioners are ready to accept and use VAM as part of a comprehensive

teacher development and evaluation system — but not in any automated way. In a soon-to-be releasedpolicy paper, which includes expert insights from teachers ReneeMoore, Marsha Ratzel, and David Orphal, wemake the case that if teachers are able to unpack and use VAM data as part a comprehensive evaluation process, thenmorepractitioners will embrace the tool.

Under our proposal, instead of a far-off statistician make a summative judgment of an individual teacher on the basis of a VAM rating, trained onsite evaluators (including

expert teachers) will use VAM data in a non-automated way to make sense of who is effective or not, and why that’s the case, in the context of their teaching and workingconditions.

Now is the time to cultivate the many accomplished teachers in our schools who can lead the way in ensuring that VAM’s potential as a useful evaluation tool is notultimately lost because policymakers ignored the warnings of HeatherHill and other VAM researchers to do it right.

Reference: Hill, H., Kapitula, L. and Umland, K. (2010) A Validity Argument Approach to Evaluating Teacher Value-Added Scores . American Educational ResearchJournal.

Posted at 07:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (2 )

January 28, 2011

The Top 10 Teaching Policy Issues NCTQ Somehow Forgot

The National Council for Teacher Quality (no organizational relationship to us here at the Center for Teaching Quality ) has once again published its annual report on teachingpolicies across the nation. Unfortunately, the NCTQ report card builds on a very narrow view of what it takes to develop the nation ’s teaching profession — and apparently islocked into 20th century thinking and actions.

The report card points to four problem areas: performancemanagement policies that are disconnected from teacher effectiveness; vague and/or weak guidelines for teacher

preparation; licensure requirements that do not ensure that teachers have appropriate content knowledge; and obstacles that prevent expansion of the teacher pipeline.

But NCTQ bypasses many other critical areas that state teaching policies must address. In fact, the list of overlooked issues is so long I could fill a lot of virtual space tickingoff the inadequacies of the NCTQ report. Don’t worry, I won’t. I’ll just give youmy top 10.

10 Policy Issues States Must Address but NCTQ Ignores

. Performance management policies that do not hold administrators accountable for creating conditions necessary for teachers to teach effectively (like time for elementaryteachers to teach science);

2. The lack of capacity in state agencies to assemble linked teacher -student databases that educators can use to improving teaching and learning ;

3. The development of common tools and strategies so that educators can use value-added ratings in valid and reliable ways (check out the new research of HeatherHill ,TomKane, and Jesse Rothstein);

4. The lack of attention to joint funding for higher education and school districts (as well as non-profits and social service agencies ) required to fuel the teacher educationreforms (e .g., urban and rural teacher residencies) that are so important for the schools of tomorrow;

5. Weak guidelines for holding traditional and alternative certification programsaccountable for performance and teacher retention (the NCTQ report focuses only onuniversity-based teacher education programs for some strange reason, despite the growing alternative pipeline);

6. The lack of attention to “grow your own” teacher development programs that build capacity for local communities to cultivate new recruits who are more likely to knowstudents and families and remain in teaching for the long haul;

7. The lack of focus on developing teachers with content -specific teaching knowledge (and not just subject matter knowledge);

8. The guarantee that no teacher teaches special education without extensive training in serving the increasing numbers of different students with serious and diverselearning challenges;

9. The lack of attention to creating more hybrid teaching roles so that effective teachers can leadpolicy and pedagogical reforms without totally leaving the classroom; and

10. Obstacles that prevent all preparation programs from ensuring that new recruits know how to: (a) teach the “Googled learner” (who can find any piece of content at the tapof a finger); (b) work with growing numbers of second language learners, and (c ) develop and use tools in the classroom to measure student progress towardmeeting theCommon Core standards.



7. The lack of focus on developing teachers with content -specific teaching knowledge (and not just subject matter knowledge);

8. The guarantee that no teacher teaches special education without extensive training in serving the increasing numbers of different students with serious and diverselearning challenges;

9. The lack of attention to creating more hybrid teaching roles so that effective teachers can leadpolicy and pedagogical reforms without totally leaving the classroom; and

10. Obstacles that prevent all preparation programs from ensuring that new recruits know how to: (a) teach the “Googled learner” (who can find any piece of content at the tapof a finger); (b) work with growing numbers of second language learners, and (c ) develop and use tools in the classroom to measure student progress towardmeeting theCommon Core standards.

Sorry, NCTQ, but your agenda is far too narrow. There is so much more to be done to ensure public policy will advance the results -oriented teaching profession studentsdeserve.

Posted at 02:39 PM in Future of Teaching , Teacher Recruitment & Retention, Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (2 )

January 19, 2011

A new vision of teacher tenure

Stephen Sawchuck atEducation Week is always spot-on in identifying the hot teaching policy issues in his lively Teacher Beat blog. Take this recent post onteacher tenure. Imagine if instead of focusing on tying tenure to student 'achievement' (determined using 20th century tools built on 19th century principles of

teaching and learning ), we instead focused on tying tenure to student learning and the spread of teaching expertise, in and out of cyberspace . This ideacaptures much of the vision for a 21st century teaching profession we seek to advance at the Center for Teaching Quality.

Our ground-breaker book Teaching 2030 — which reimagines tenure , teaching roles, leadership for school reform, and much more — is officially releasedthis week.

Posted at 05:09 PM in Future of Teaching , Teaching Effectiveness , The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (1)

January 18, 2011

Teachers and Nanny Cams: Compliance vs. Trust

Guest blogger Jon Eckert is an assistant professor of education at Wheaton College in Wheaton IL. Before joining the Wheaton faculty in 2009, Jon served for a year as aTeaching Ambassador Fellow at the U.S . Department of Education and in the Office of the Secretary. He taught and coached for 12 years in the middle grades in Illinoisand Tennesee , where he completed his doctorate at Vanderbilt in 2008.

by Jon Eckert

For some, Mike Petrilli’s recent commentary in Education Next might conjure up some fairly humorous images of a tiny “nanny cam” embedded in astuffed bear to catch teachers behaving badly, or a principal sitting at his or her office with a bank of monitors similar to a prison cell block to ensure

that all is well in the school . But is he taking a potentially valuable tool for educators over “a bridge too far” and instead, continuing to de-professionalize the teaching profession?

In this piece , he begins by advocating for the use of electronic recording of classrooms with benefits similar to those achieved by having cameras in police patrol cars. I am ateacher of nearly 15 years, including four in Tennessee where my middle school science students achieved excellent value-added ratings. As a Teaching Ambassador Fellow at

the U.S. Department of Education, I worked in both the Bush and Obama administrations on teacher quality issues and matters related to assessment and accountability. Isee the tremendous benefit of digitally recording and analyzing the work of teachers and students . One of the most painful, vulnerable, and productive ways to grow as ateacher or prospective teacher is to analyze and reflect on your teaching or the teaching of others on video.

Currently, I am a professor in the oft-maligned world of teacher education, where this month I am also teaching a physics unit to 44 fifth graders and digitally recording each

day’s lesson for analysis by me and my teacher education students. Later this spring, my students will be required to record one lesson a day for a week, view each lesson eachnight, and analyze what they have seen and how they can grow.

As Petrilli points out in his commentary, the Gates Foundation MET Project is using 360-degree cameras in the classrooms of 3,000 teachers to evaluate and providefeedback to teachers . Again , there is tremendous potential value in this type of practice.

However, midway through the commentary, Petrilli asks, “But why not go further?” This marks the point where we part ways.

He goes on to make the case that video cameras should be used for “monitoring” teachers . In his view, constant video monitoring will reduce child abuse, school violence,ineffective teaching practice both behaviorally and compositionally, and increase access for parents. There are at least three problematic assumptions that undergird Petrilli’s

argument:

Assumption #1: We can define teaching effectiveness , or ineffectiveness , via constant electronic vigilance.Gross incompetence , such as teachers readingthe newspaper, texting, or losing complete control of the class might be readily evident in Petrilli ’s world of electronic vigilance. However, a decent principal can alreadyidentify this with the tools at his or her disposal. Effective teaching is not always seen easily, as scholars have found, when it comes to teacher evaluation, there are “limits to

looking.” Effective teaching often rests on how teachers think about their students ’ academic and socio -emotional progress and what they do about it before and after class.

Assumption #2: Effective teachers “have little to fear” because their effectiveness will be self-evident. There is no guarantee that those who are watchingknowwhat they are looking for and how they will determine what good teaching looks like on a video. A plethora of studies, including one by the New Teacher Project,suggests that teacher evaluation is undermined because administrators are not trained to assess teaching adequately. While Jacob and Lefgren found that someprincipals arequite good at identifying the top and bottom 10-20% of teachers , giving administrators a video monitor will not make them any better at this task. Not all principals areuniformly effective at evaluating teaching . It takes time and training and principals who were effective teachers themselves.

Assumption #3: Teachers cannot be trusted. Tony Bryk eloquently argues for and illustrates the power of trust in schools and its connection to improving schools . Ifwe do not trust teachers to have good intentions toward students, why would we believe that having a camera in a classroom would keep them from simply perpetrating theoffense elsewhere out of the view of the camera? What does this say about our respect for teachers and the complicated and challenging work they have to perform?

Ultimately, if we feel we need a “nanny cam” in every classroom in America to ensure compliance and competence , then we have lost our sense of teachers as trusted molders



Assumption #2: Effective teachers “have little to fear” because their effectiveness will be self-evident. There is no guarantee that those who are watchingknowwhat they are looking for and how they will determine what good teaching looks like on a video. A plethora of studies, including one by the New Teacher Project,suggests that teacher evaluation is undermined because administrators are not trained to assess teaching adequately. While Jacob and Lefgren found that someprincipals arequite good at identifying the top and bottom 10-20% of teachers , giving administrators a video monitor will not make them any better at this task. Not all principals areuniformly effective at evaluating teaching . It takes time and training and principals who were effective teachers themselves.

Assumption #3: Teachers cannot be trusted. Tony Bryk eloquently argues for and illustrates the power of trust in schools and its connection to improving schools . Ifwe do not trust teachers to have good intentions toward students, why would we believe that having a camera in a classroom would keep them from simply perpetrating theoffense elsewhere out of the view of the camera? What does this say about our respect for teachers and the complicated and challenging work they have to perform?

Ultimately, if we feel we need a “nanny cam” in every classroom in America to ensure compliance and competence , then we have lost our sense of teachers as trusted moldersof minds and citizens. We are reduced to thinking of them as technicians transferring information in a prescriptive manner. If this is the role we expect teachers to assume,no amount of monitoring will repair the damage such marginalization will do to our democracy.

Learnmore about Jon Eckert here.

Posted at 12:59 PM in Improving Our Schools , Teacher Working Conditions , Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (1)

January 12, 2011

Straight Talk at the "Straight Up" Blog

Rick Hess is definitely “straight up.” Gotta really appreciate his blog, including his latest guest posts by RoxannaElden (expert teacher and TLNmember) and ed researcherDanGoldhaber .

In her guesting debut, Roxanna unpacks the language of self-proclaimed school reformerswho use terms like “status quo” to denigrate the efforts of teachers and bash theunions who seek to support them. Roxanna cautions us that teachers — beset by years of policy mandates that do not work — often see value in a number of seeminglystatus quo" strategies. She writes:“Most teachers are open to growth and change,but wehave also experiencedchanges so poorly planned, last minute,and disruptive that

thestatus quo doesn' tseem like such a bad alternative.”

And then there is the very thoughtful essay from Professor Goldhaber, making the case for the careful use of value-added models in assessing teaching effectiveness. As heand I have discussed in the past over a beer (me) or bourbon (Dan), the various statistical wrinkles and the messiness of student attribution require us to take a cautious andcomprehensive approach to using VAM. One way for VAM to be thoughtfully put to work is to have teachers co-develop the metrics and then drive its application indetermining effective and ineffective teaching. (We'll soon post a paper at the CTQ website that I co-wrote with several teacher leaders for the Gates Foundation. It makes thecase for this approach .)

But let's remember that, in terms of tools, VAM is a creation of late 20th century statistics and measures academic growth prettymuch in 20th century terms. Indeed, wemight even say that the standardized tests currently in use (from which VAM results are derived) are actually built on 19th century principles of teaching and learning .

We are now entering the second decade of the 21st century . We have the smart teachers (e .g., Roxanna) and the smart tools (including smartphones in the hands of most

educators) to reframe accountability and school reform. We have students who deserve cutting edge assessments respectful of the real work done by the professionals whoserve them.

If we want to rid ourselves of the "status quo," let's start there.

Posted at 11:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

January 10, 2011

As we stretch the school dollar, let's not rip out the seams of our public system

I just came across Bruce Baker’s scathing critique of the new “15 ways to stretch the school dollar” policy brief , penned by Mike Petrilli and Marguerite Roza for the Fordham

Institute.

Baker’s analysis turns the brief on its side (if not on its head), using pages of hard evidence to poke holes in the claim that the proposed reforms would actually reduce statespending on schools or help districts make better budget -trimming choices by eliminating "onerous" policies. Both the brief and Baker's response are must-reads for anyonetrying to peel the onion of school funding mandates.

The policy issues raised by Petrilli and Roza need to be addressed . But it's important to do so carefully and thoughtfully , and despite Baker's aggressive style, he does lay outresearch-based counter arguments that deserve a full response, also framed by credible research .

As I looked through the list of 15 policy recommendations to "stretch" school dollars, I had some questions of my own. For instance, Petrilli and Roza propose that statesand school systems:

End ‘last hired, first fired’ practices . I would ask what happens when administrators, who know little about teaching and learning , undervalue the pool of experienced

teachers who have grown up in a community and know students and families well .

Remove class -size mandates. I would ask what happens when teachers cannot differentiate instruction and don't have time to carefully assess progress on the CommonCore Standards because they have too many students to teach.

Eliminate mandatory salary schedules. I would ask what happens when an impoverished school district does not have finances in place to ensure that teacher pay does not

fall below the level necessary to attract talent.

Redesign teacher compensation. I would ask what happens (this would be a good thing) to the savings when many teachers performwell within the incentives-drivenredesign, and the district needs moremoney for salaries, not less.

Redesign sick leave and stop spending on substitutes. I would ask what would happen if ALL administrators were expected to do some teaching (an issue that P&R do not



teachers who have grown up in a community and know students and families well .

Remove class -size mandates. I would ask what happens when teachers cannot differentiate instruction and don't have time to carefully assess progress on the CommonCore Standards because they have too many students to teach.

Eliminate mandatory salary schedules. I would ask what happens when an impoverished school district does not have finances in place to ensure that teacher pay does not

fall below the level necessary to attract talent.

Redesign teacher compensation. I would ask what happens (this would be a good thing) to the savings when many teachers performwell within the incentives-drivenredesign, and the district needs moremoney for salaries, not less.

Redesign sick leave and stop spending on substitutes. I would ask what would happen if ALL administrators were expected to do some teaching (an issue that P&R do notaddress), both to reduce the need for subs and to keep all school professionals current about what it takes to teach today's students .

Limit the length of time that students can be identified as English Language Learners. I would ask what happens when students are automatically or arbitrarily removedfrom a program, even when their teachers make the professional judgment that they still need those services.

School reformers often call for education policy solutions that are far too detached from the realities of the classroom and what it takes to educate students in the 21stcentury. It's hard to imagine that some of these proposals could survive a thorough vetting by expert teachers and principals who understand what it takes to be successful inevery kind of school these days. I'd encourage policymakers to carry out such a vetting before leaping into new policy pants .

There are certainly other actions school districts can take to cut costs. As I mention above, onemight be to create the expectation that all administrators teach and work withstudents some of the time. If they're not qualified to do that , perhaps they should be the first to be let go. As a decision maker responsible for educating students to highlevels, I would definitely pursue this idea well before I let go all of my experienced and proven teachers (because they cost too much) -- or before I eliminated substituteteachers, who make it possible for teachers to spend time sharpening their teaching practice on behalf of the students they serve.

Let's be very careful how we stretch the school dollar . We don't want to rip out the seams of America 's public school system, which I and many others still believe is vital inholding our democracy together .

Posted at 06:23 PM in Improving Our Schools, School Reform, Teacher Compensation | Permalink | Comments (3)

December 31, 2010

Teacherpreneurism, not incrementalism, will give us 'peak performance' schools

I share the optimism of TLN blogger Ariel Sacks (see this recent post) and her hopes for creating a large force of teacherpreneurs to lead excellence in the schools of

tomorrow. It’s a major concept we decribe in TEACHING 2030, the new book co-authored by myself , Ariel and 11other accomplished teachers . I’m so hopeful about this BigIdea, in fact, that I fully expect to be promoting Ariel and many others as teacherpreneurs in the decades to come.

As Ariel notes in her post, over 20 members of the Teacher Leaders Network had an often-riveting conversation with Education Secretary Duncan in mid -December, during alive virtual conference. The online event was one of a series of webinars co-hosted by CTQ and the Education Department to inject more expert teacher voice into the national

ed policy debate. (Watch for a policy paper and podcast on “TLN Talks with ED” in late January).

Ariel’s excellent elevator speech on teacherpreneurism did indeed catch the ear of Mr. Secretary. But somehow I do not think he fully understood our

call for 600,000 teacherpreneurs by 2030 — and the goal to finally blur the now-sharp lines of distinction between those who teach in schools andthose who lead them.

In response to Ariel’s description , Secretary Duncan pointed to the federal Teacher Incentive Fund program as an example of his Department’s supportfor more substantive teacher leadership, suggesting TIF will support the kinds of roles she identified as “teacherpreneurial.”

With all due respect to the Secretary, I question that interpretation. The Teacher Incentive Fund grants, at least in their current incarnation, do notencourage a “rethinking of the teaching profession” as an instrument to drive continuous improvement in teaching and learning . Neither the specs ofthe grant guidelines — nor the uninspiring “career ladders ” being built from TIF funds — suggest that anyone in Washington imagines TIF as a catalystfor transforming teaching into a full-realized profession capable of leading America’s public schools to peak performance in the 21st century.

Through our extensive work in Jefferson County, Colorado, those of us at the Center for Teaching Quality know the TIF process and criteria well . I certainly agree that the TIFgrants are promoting some positive, incremental change in the direction of more teacher leadership and responsibility -sharing. But the reforms are still “so 20th century.” Forthemost part, they still reinforce the keen distinctions between teachers and administrators, with the former clearly at the bottom of the organizational pyramid.

Here is what I am sure of : TIF does not advance the spread of teaching expertise in and out of cyberspace . It does not promote teachers as bridge builders between schools,communities and other vital student and family service providers. It does not open doors for teachers to become education game developers and masters of mobile

technologies in the cause of learning. It does not promote teachers like Ariel and my other Teaching 2030 co-authors as change agents empowered to revamp universitypreparation programs (which the Secretary justly calls for). Those who shape the Teacher Incentive Fund’s policies would never imagine that its investments could producesituations where the highest paid person in a school system is a practicing teacher .

TIF could help drive these and many other reforms that would nurture and promote the teacherpreneurial spirit. Absent that policy vision, be assured that the Center forTeaching Quality and the 1000-plus members of the Teacher Leaders Network will forge ahead in 2011, in full pursuit of a true, results-oriented teaching profession.

Teaching 2030, the new book describing our vision of the teaching profession we need in the 21st century, will be available in bookstores and online no later thanJanuary 9 .

Posted at 01:31 PM in Future of Teaching, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

December 14, 2010

Edging toward Professionalism

Last week The Bill &Malinda Gates Foundation released initial findings from its Measures of Effective Teaching investigation — a much needed $45million effort todetermine which teachers are good or not, and why.

As other research has found, the Gates investigators concluded that the value- added calculations of a teacher 's performance can fluctuate significantly but not enough to

preclude the data from being used as part of a more comprehensive system of evaluation. (A position I've argued here since this blog 's inception .) As Education Week



Posted at 01:31 PM in Future of Teaching, The Teaching Profession | Permalink | Comments (0)

December 14, 2010

Edging toward Professionalism

Last week The Bill &Malinda Gates Foundation released initial findings from its Measures of Effective Teaching investigation — a much needed $45million effort todetermine which teachers are good or not, and why.

As other research has found, the Gates investigators concluded that the value- added calculations of a teacher 's performance can fluctuate significantly but not enough to

preclude the data from being used as part of a more comprehensive system of evaluation. (A position I've argued here since this blog 's inception .) As Education Weeksummed it up: "So far, the study.. .appears to support the notion, advocated by teachers’ unions and others, that evaluations should be based on multiple measures."

Perhaps, most importantly , the initial findings revealed much stronger correlations between classroom conditions, teaching practices and student achievement. Most notablewere similarities in the predictive effect of teachers ' value-added histories and students’ perceptions of a teacher ’s ability to challenge students with rigorous work.

As the MET findings suggest , success in accurately identifying effective teachers will require erudite interpretation from those who know teaching and learning and thecontext in which practitioners teach. The researchers concluded that “reinventing the way we evaluate and develop teachers will eventually require new infrastructure” —using digital video as well as peer observations.

In determining who is an effective teacher, it's time for classroom practitioners (and their unions) to take the lead in establishing and enforcing standards among their ranksand beginning to function more like professional guilds.

Dina Strasser, a TLN member from our virtual community, engaged in a lengthy conversation earlier this fall with a doctor -turned-teacher over what it might take forteaching to fully evolve as a profession. It makes for interesting reading.

Perhaps Vinnie Basile of Westminster 50 (Colorado) — a participant in the CTQ/TLNNew Millennium Initiative — put it most clearly and simply:

Transforming the union into the professional guild is the central, unifying solution to many of the otherwise divided issues in education reform. It empowers teachersto take control of their own career paths, enforcing a set of standards that in many cases would far exceed the expectations of policymakers and the general public.

The MET research edges teaching toward professionalism by helping establish empirical links between what teachers do and how students learn — and why. But only teacherleaders can truly make sense of all of this data. And they are in the best position to ensure that the data are used to drive changes in everyday classroom realities and theimprovements in the lives of students and their families and communities.

Posted at 04:31 PM in Future of Teaching , Teacher Working Conditions, Teaching Effectiveness | Permalink | Comments (2)

Advancing the Teaching Profession

Documents