About OHE
OHE Offices
Contact OHE
|
WHAT A DIFFERENCE A YEAR MAKES!
Alternative Teacher Preparation (ATP) in New York State
MEETING PROCEEDINGS
On Friday, March 5, 2004, the New York State Teacher Recruitment and
Transition to Teaching Projects sponsored the first statewide meeting of
alternative teacher preparation (ATP) programs. We were pleased to welcome 49
attendees, as well as many Department staff, to the meeting. The Office of
Higher Education's Deputy Commissioner, Johanna Duncan-Poitier, and Assistant
Commissioner of Quality Assurance, Joseph Frey, made opening comments.
Representatives of institutions of higher education who offer ATP programs and
the New York City Department of Education, who partners with a dozen New York
City institutions of higher education to offer the Teaching Fellows Program,
then made presentations about their experiences.
Below is a summary of the day's proceedings. If you have comments regarding
the meeting or the attached proceedings, please contact Ruth Pagerey at
Rpagerey@mail.nysed.gov .
Opening Comments Johanna Duncan-Poitier,
Deputy Commissioner, Office of Higher Education
The Deputy Commissioner commended the institutions for their good work in the
alternative teacher preparation programs, as they have prepared 6,000 new,
quality teachers for New York State. She was pleased to see the variety of
institutions represented at the meeting.
New York needs both traditional and alternate pathways for teacher preparation.
This is new for New York – these programs are setting the stage and the
standards for the future. We will learn more about both types of programs from a
study being conducted by Jim Wyckoff and his associates to follow teachers from
traditional and ATP programs and their effects on student achievement. The study
will also identify the elements of a successful teacher.
We have more work to do in public schools to get the message out about the
quality of New York teachers prepared under the new standards.
Challenges we know about:
- Mentoring – Needs to happen more and needs more support; we’re looking for
$52 million for mentors for first time teachers (e.g., Teachers of Tomorrow
program)
- ATP – Money to allow for flexibility in program planning
- Partnerships – It’s good to see people from CUNY, the Independents, and
the NYCDOE working together
Joseph Frey, Assistant Commissioner for Quality Assurance, Office of Higher
Education
The Assistant Commissioner noted that teacher preparation is about student
learning. We need to know whether teachers need more or less training and more
or less testing in order to effect student learning. We need courage to say we
have it okay, but it could be better. Are things working the way they are now?
We are looking at test results in different sectors of New York State – They
help us determine what’s working or not. Then we can mend what’s not working.
The Entry Phase – Selection and Placement
Gerard Sadoski
(Mount St. Mary College)
Mount St. Mary College’s ATP program was started with the encouragement of
area BOCES superintendents. The need for such a program reflects the loss of
jobs in the region and the Newburgh community. This is a small program with a
first-year cohort of seven students who were selected from 75 applicants. The
interview process is intensive, with a focus on evaluating the candidate’s
interest in being a teacher. The College attempts to match candidates with
NCATE’s recent standards, and requires a minimum 3.0 GPA. Candidates are in
regular classes with other teacher education students, rather than as a
separate cohort. Finding a job is the responsibility of each candidate,
although districts often request teachers for specific subject areas or send
potential candidates to the program from their pool of paraeducators or
substitute teachers.
Laura Dorow (Utica College)
There are 600 education students at the graduate and undergraduate levels at
Utica College. The ATP program is offered in cohorts of 20 students. The
College was approached by local districts/BOCES and asked to offer the
program, as they had trouble filling positions in certain subject areas.
Utica College calls their program the “Apprenticeship Program.” This is the
third year of the program. The College works with 34 small school districts
and Utica City Schools. They have added an interview process to their program
admission screening. A committee including superintendents, college faculty,
and human resource staff from school districts conduct the interviews. One
purpose of the interviews is to weed out “malcontents” from other careers so
that the program includes people who really want to be teachers and who the
superintendents would want to hire. Candidates for the program are recruited
in February. Candidates who are unable to secure teaching positions by August
are encouraged to matriculate into the traditional program. A candidate may
return to ATP program if a teaching job is found. Candidates are supported by
the schools and work very hard. Retention rates are in the high 90s.
Obstacles for the program include--
The geographic disbursement of cooperating districts: Binghamton, Syracuse,
Waterloo.
Small districts won’t commit to hiring specific teachers early in the
process.
No federal assistance.
Time consuming for staff; stressful for candidates
Helen Youngman (New York City Department of Education)
The New York City Teaching Fellows (NYCTF) program, an initiative that
began in the summer of 2000, is a collaborative undertaking to recruit
and prepare talented professionals and graduates to teach in NYC public
schools. NYCTF partners with 12 local institutions of higher education
to provide an intensive pre-service program and ongoing support for
Fellows through a subsidized Master's degree program. With the goal of
helping fill the need for teachers, NYCTF recruits large numbers of
applicants each year. Recruitment is done through various advertising
media, career fairs, word of mouth, and the web site. The application
process includes a practice lesson, a discussion group and a written
exercise involving school-based case scenarios, and a one-on-one
interview. Although program candidate selection is done at a central
level, hiring is done at the school level. Since the inception of the
program, NYCTF has placed over 5,000 teachers in 875 NYC public schools
in five boroughs.
Wayne Reed (CUNY Brooklyn College)
Brooklyn College was one of the three initial CUNY colleges to participate in
the Teaching Fellows Program. The College has Teaching Fellows and another
alternative program, CUNY’s TOP (Teacher Opportunity Program). There are 2,800
students in the School of Education—500 undergraduate and 2,300 graduate. Of
these 2,300, 670 are Teaching Fellows.
Teaching Fellow Program selections are over before students come to Brooklyn
College. New York City regional teaching placement is determined as the
candidates attend the College for the introductory component.
The TOP program is a little different from the Teaching Fellows Program.
Candidates apply directly to CUNY, where applications are reviewed by CUNY
Central (80th Street). Candidates seek employment on their own. TOP candidates
at Brooklyn College are seeking math certification, although the TOP program
also includes science and, beginning this summer, Spanish candidates.
Survival and Adjustment – Mentoring and Supervision
Forming Partnerships with Community Schools
Frank Melia presented for the Fordham University programs. Fordham has
two alternative teacher certification programs, the two year MST for NYC
Teaching Fellows and the 15 month MST for Fordham Fellows aspiring to be
teachers in grades k-8. Both programs are based on a reflective
practitioner model, utilize cognitive coaching, and focus on teachers as
adult learners. The programs provide formative assessment of candidates
and use project-based learning. The Teaching Fellows Program includes
about 300 MST students, each supported by university field specialists.
For example, 85 secondary MST candidates are visited by 8 field
specialists monthly. Challenges include the availability of school based
mentors, school site resources, school climate, and the nature of the
Fellows' assignments. The program supports the candidates by focusing on
the theory into practice of teaching and learning. Periodically Fellows
need to revisit the question, "Why do you want to be a teacher?"
Susan Fine presented for Pace University. Pace has three ATP programs
(Teach for America, Teaching Fellows, Rolling Fellows) with a total of 730
students providing Teaching Fellows primarily for Region 8. There is a
strong connection between the University and the schools, with a high
percentage of full-time faculty involved. Susan showed a visual model of
the Pace program that emphasized relationships and reflective seminars. The
model showed the involvement of the Director of the ATP programs as it
related to graduate course needs, the Teaching Fellows, admission needs, and
school needs. In addressing what has worked for Pace, Susan spoke of a
small ratio (5:1) of Teaching Fellows to University liaisons. They keep in
touch through personal visits, phone, and e-mail. Challenges include the
building of ongoing relationships with school leadership.
Connie Bond, Director of the Mercy College New Teacher Residency Program,
spoke about the college's residency-based teacher education program which
serves the New York City Teaching Fellows. Mercy College began their
partnership with the New York City Department of Education Teaching Fellows
program in 2002. Connie's presentation focused on their model for instruction
and supervision during the first year of the Fellows' candidacy. In this
model, a mentor from the school district provides classroom-based support and
development during the day, and once a week brings her group of Fellows
together for the college seminar. These Mentor Adjuncts work for both the
college and the district, which helps address a concern common to Fellows that
managing the many different voices and supports in their classrooms is often
overwhelming. The model also brings to life a central tenet of Mercy's program
- that practice should drive inquiry, not vice-versa.
Steve Rosenberg and Paul Pedota, Coordinators of the St. John’s University
alternative programs, spoke about their programs. This year St. John’s has
Teaching Fellows in childhood and special education programs, as well as the
Math Immersion program. Although the school mentor is a critical piece of this
program, it was identified as a challenge. The coordinators stated that it is
very difficult to insure that Fellows receive consistent mentoring by the same
person. It was stressed that the human factor is what makes the alternative
preparation programs a success.
Urban Teachers for Tomorrow Program
Richard Mace, Director of the Roberts Wesleyan College Urban Teachers for
Tomorrow Program (UTT), and Marie Costanza, Director of the Rochester City
School District Career in Teaching Program, presented about the Rochester
experience. The Rochester UTT program is in its third year, and has made
changes to the program based on each year's experiences, including revision of
the introductory component and the capstone project. The College has also
added more instruction in literacy and differentiated learning. As part of the
UTT intern's introductory component, under the guidance of their mentors, the
interns (candidates) teach in summer school. While the UTT program is fairly
new, the Rochester City School District has a mentoring program with an 18
year history. Mentor selection and training are priorities of the Career in
Teaching program. Mentors are provided with between two days and a full week
of training. The training centers on peer coaching. The majority of mentors in
the Rochester program are based in the same school as the intern, although
some mentors are not always available in the same school. As a result,
approximately 10 percent of the mentors receive some release time in order to
meet with their interns in other schools.
The Rochester program is unique in that mentor assessment of the intern is
part of the program. Interns receive daily feedback about their teaching, with
formal reports two times a year. If improvement is not seen from the first to
the second report, the mentor writes a confidential unsatisfactory report. The
goal of this assessment tool is to provide a plan of action for the intern so
that the mentor and intern can concentrate on specific areas of concern.
Ultimately this tool helps the new teacher to meet District standards by the
end of the year. Because the mentor works closely with his or her intern in
establishing a trusting relationship, the assessments usually are not viewed
in a negative manner.
Supporting Teaching Fellows and the People Who Support Them
Linda Vereline, Program Coordinator, and Candy Systra, Liaison Coordinator, at
Long Island University, Brooklyn, spoke about how they provide formal and
informal support to their Teaching Fellows and to the liaisons who work with
them. Linda explained the system of field support with college liaisons
overseeing groups of Teaching Fellows and then also teaching their year-long
seminar courses. This provides continuity between the candidates’ experiences
in their classrooms and the college coursework. Additionally, liaisons meet
monthly to plan seminar sessions and share ways to support the Fellows.
Candy then read from work by Pat Carini. As Candy was reading, participants
wrote words that described an effective teacher. We discussed this and then
broke into small groups to read some of the descriptive observations which
liaisons wrote about their visits to Teaching Fellows. As we read the
descriptions, we looked for evidence of what the liaisons focused on in the
observations and what was valued. These observations were shared in the large
group and were followed by a discussion of the content and form of
observations and how they can best be used to support the work of Fellows. We
ended with a quote from Carini’s work: “It is always easy to criticize and
find fault with children (and other adults), to point out what they can’t do
and how problematic they are. It takes more time and patience to paint a
fuller picture in which each person is understood to be not the sum of
unchanging traits, but in process, in the making.”
Candidate Growth/Retention
Following the presentations,
participants worked in groups to provide input and discussion around the
following questions:
- At what point in the ATP program do you see candidates move their focus
from daily survival to student learning? What are the outward signs of this?
What can the college and school do to hasten and deepen this new focus?
- Many candidates become discouraged during the difficult first months of
teaching. How can school and college partners work together to move
candidates through challenging times?
- Dual certification requirements for special education present the
challenge of adequately preparing candidates within the ATP framework. How
are programs dealing with this? What new approaches can you suggest?
- How can candidates’ job placements affect their retention in the
program? Should any unique job placement considerations be considered for
teachers prepared through alternative program programs? What placement
considerations are most critical to retention?
ATP Meeting Roundtable Notes March 5, 2004
Question 1: At what point in the ATP program do you see candidates
move their focus from daily survival to student learning? What are the
outward signs of this? What can the college and school do to hasten and
deepen this new focus?
- Pre-service overlapping with the end of academic school year (?)
- Acknowledge the new teacher development cycle that impacts all new
teachers
- Provide space and opportunity for reflection
- Timing and sequencing of courses and selecting course content tied
to new teacher development cycle
- More opportunity for university coordinators to share best practices
- New teachers see student reactions as personal
- Goes in phases: When teacher sees they’re engaged, they gain
confidence, and learning occurs
- You can tell from teachers’ questions
- Body language
- Teacher demonstrates leadership, is in charge
- They start to develop program, find new materials, work on school
committees
- They take risks (e.g. personal anecdote)
- Re-start to see potential of students to learn
- Learn students names, see them as individuals
- Realign curriculum to put the practical up front
- Offer enriching programs and outside resources
- Help students communicate as a community of learners
Question 2: Many candidates become discouraged during the difficult
first months of teaching. How can school and college partners work together to
move candidates through challenging times?
- Being candid about placement process
- Being realistic about the process
- Establishing trust
- Solicit feedback/survey from principals
- Sequence of coursework to better prepare for
challenges/difficulties
- Helping Fellows and principals draw on/use Fellows’ life
experiences
- Dialogue among college liaisons – how best to support candidates
- Place more than one candidate in a school
- Prevent discouragement by proper placement
- Problem school culture – navigate it (supportive environment or
not)
Possible solution:
- Develop cooperative professional development plan
- Work ahead of time with teachers at school to develop support
- Build ownership by school faculty as a whole to support
candidates and lessen resistance
- Problem: perception that ATP programs lack rigor
- Remember to involve teachers’ unions as critically important
partner
- Work with unions
- Encourage candidates to organize own professional development
- Bring cohort of candidates together once a week and involve
schools, colleges, and unions
- Bring in alumni/ae of ATP programs
- Invite all new teachers in school to activity/event on topic of
mutual concern
- Maybe work with principal so this counts towards professional
development e.g., technology, etc.
- Offer emotional support: have “secondary mentors” or “mentoring
teams” for this purpose
- Establish relationship with administration (liaisons)
- Careful screening of candidates – make them aware of time
management and classroom management
- Have in-school pre-service experience (should have active and
varied experiences, not just passive)
- Increase contact between teachers and mentors
- Establishing peer network/community structure for sharing ideas
and experiences
- School orientation the week before school starts
- Use schools with veteran mentors
- Limit number of preparations/after school activities/supervisory
- Schools provide best working environment
- Fair class assignment
- No multiple classrooms
- Rites of passage needn’t be so grueling
- Prepare for student needs; students need to understand the
background of their students
- Treat new teachers as professionals
- Provide more methods based coursework and preservice in their
schools
Question 3: Dual certification requirements for special education present the
challenge of adequately preparing candidates within the ATP framework. How are
programs dealing with this? What new approaches can you suggest?
- How do we address standards when approved graduate program
outcomes need to be the same, but the requirements of the programs,
such as the number of credits, are so different?
- How do we address dual certification for secondary level special
education teachers?
Delivery – program models
- Add classes, save time
- Redesign to embed special education in all classes
- Financial aid ramifications if less than six credits per semester
Issues:
- Multiple philosophies
- Range and appropriateness of placement
- Fellows in most difficult special education settings
- Co-teaching is not part of preparation
- Certificate title at secondary doesn’t match teaching assignments
and isn’t realistic for teachers
- Some schools should not have Fellows, not just specialized
- Don’t let Fellows be alone in special education
- Loss of special education supervisors is a problem
Question 4: How can candidates’ job placements affect their retention
in the program? Should any unique job placement considerations be considered for
teachers prepared through alternative program programs? What placement
considerations are most critical to retention?
- Placement has a very strong influence
- Fellows who are in school(s) [districts] that are not supportive
have a more difficult task
Important issues:
- Poor mentoring
- Program-scheduling (classroom assignments, traveling program,
tendency to assign lowest achieving classes to newest teachers)
- Administration
- Leadership abilities (or lack of)
- Disciplinary support (or lack of)
- Vision and expectations are sometimes unclear
- Size of school building and population
- UFT related issues – privacy…
Considerations:
- Mentor and teachers share assignments and allow time for meeting
- More structured environment (support)
- Match intern with student needs
- Administration should offer a needs assessment, timing of hiring
|
