Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas and What to Do About Them

8/3/2019 Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas and What to Do About Them

1/32

Straight Talk onTeaching Quality:

Six Game-ChangingIdeas and Whatto Do About Them

Prepared by the Annenberg Institutefor School Reform at Brown University


2/32

About the Annenberg Institute or School Re orm atBrown University

The Annenberg Institute or School Re orm is a national policy-researchand re orm-support organization, a liated with Brown University, that

ocuses on improving conditions and outcomes or all students in urbanpublic schools, especially those attended by traditionally underservedchildren. The Institutes vision is the trans ormation o traditional school

systems into smart education systems that develop and integrate high-quality learning opportunities in all areas o students lives at school, athome, and in the community.

The Institute conducts research; works with a variety o partners commit-ted to educational improvement to build capacity in school districts andcommunities; and shares its work through print and Web publications.Rather than providing a speci c re orm design or model to be implement-ed, the Institutes approach is to o er an array o tools and strategies tohelp districts and communities strengthen their local capacity to provideand sustain high-quality education or all students.

Annenberg Institute or School Re orm at Brown UniversityBox 1985Providence, RI 02912233 Broadway, Suite 720New York, NY 10279www.annenberginstitute.orgTwitter:@AnnenbergInst


3/32

Straight Talk on TeachingQuality: Six Game-ChangingIdeas and What to Do

About Them

Prepared by theAnnenberg Institute or School Re orm at Brown University

or the Schott Foundation or Public Education

December 2011


4/32

Acknowledgments

The Annenberg Institute wishes to acknowledge the generous nancialsupport o the Schott Foundation or Public Education, which madepossible the production o Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas and What to Do About Them. We are especially grate ulto members o the Schott Foundation sta who provided guidance and

eedback on early dra ts o the guide: John H. Jackson, President and

CEO, Ann Beaudry, Vice President or Strategy and Program Develop-ment, and Cassie Schwerner, Senior Vice President o Programs. Likewise,Maureen Kay Sigler, our colleague in the Education Department at BrownUniversity, o ered discerning comments on earlier versions o the report.

We also wish to acknowledge the generosity o the Ford Foundation orallowing the Institute to use dissemination unds rom a related grant tosupport the design, printing, and distribution costs o the publication. TheFoundations support will enable us to reach a wider and more diverseaudience than otherwise would be possible.

We also wish to thank the Parents Leadership Council o the Coalitionor Educational Justice or o ering eedback on Straight Talk on Teaching

Quality. The Council met as a ocus group to review the use ulness o thedocument rom their perspective as parents and community leaders. Theirspeci c suggestions will render Straight Talk more immediately use ul tothis vital constituency.

Finally, we wish to acknowledge the leadership o our ormer colleague,Marla Ucelli-Kashyap, who was the principal author o the document.Toward the completion o the project Marla accepted a position as Assis-tant to the President or Educational Issues at the American Federation o Teachers. Her contribution to Straight Talk, both intellectual and strategic,serves as a capstone achievement to the decade-long body o work sheleaves the Institute.

Suggested citation: Annenberg Institute or School Re orm. 2011. Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas and What to DoAbout Them. Providence, RI: Brown University.

This publication is available online at http://www.annenberginstitute.org/ publication/StraightTalk

2011, Brown University, Annenberg Institute for School Reform

Design by Brown Graphic Services


5/32

Contents

Introduction 1

Follow Your Bliss: Career Pathways for Teachers 3

Evaluation Nation: Multiple Ways of Measuring Performance 6

Supports for Teachers, Not Just Rewards and Sanctions:Why Firing Teachers Wont Lead to Large-Scale Improvement 10

Environmentally Friendly: Why School Culture and Working

Conditions Matter 14

No Teacher Is an Island: The Importance of In-School

Partnerships and Teacher Collaboration 18

No School Is an Island: Partnerships with Parents and Community 21

Keeping the Conversation on Track 24


6/32


7/32

Annenberg Institute for School Reform / 1

I asked about the hottest topic or mosttalked-about players in American publiceducation today, pretty much everyones an-swer rom parents to policymakers to pundits would include the words teachers or teach-ing. From both intuition and experience, weknow that good teaching matters. This has beentrue or a very long time. Yet it is reasonableto wonder why the drumbeat about teachingquality seems especially loud these days. Maybeits because the evidence base about the linkbetween the quality o teaching and the achieve-ment o students has gotten a lot stronger overthe last teen years. It could also be because

ederal education policy under our previous andcurrent presidents has tied both regulations anddollars to de nitions o highly quali ed teach-ers and, most recently, to measuring teacherscontributions to their students learning. And a

growing ocus on college and career readiness,emphasized in the Common Core State Stan-dards and by re ormers as a measure o educa-tional excellence, has underscored how criticalteachers are in ensuring that all students havethe skills to succeed in their postsecondary lives.

This guide is about game-changing strategies orimproving teacher e ectiveness, but it starts witha couple o important caveats. First, teaching isthe single most important in-school in uence onstudent learning (Johnson et al. 2005). Its what

matters most inside schools. But when any oneplayer in a very important game gets that kindo attention, its easy to orget about other ac-tors, like the rest o the team (other teachers andstudent support pro essionals), the conditiono the playing eld (the schools physical envi-ronment and instructional resources), and thestrength o the coaches (principals and schoolleaders), to name a ew.

Beyond school walls, the supports and oppor-tunities available to students and amilies intheir communities ranging rom a terschoolhomework programs, to agencies that help new-comers and people who are non-native Englishspeakers get settled in a new place, to clean andsa e parks or all kids strongly impact learn-ing opportunities. And, just like students and

amilies are part o communities, teachers andschools are usually part o a larger system ordistrict. How that system makes rules and poli-cies, spends resources, and provides support toteachers and principals also impacts the learn-ing environment or students (Rothstein 2010,2004).

The second caveat: I you work in public educa-tion you o ten hear that there is not a single,agreed-upon defnition o what e ective teaching

looks like and how to measure it. Yet people areacting every day on explicit and implicit de ni-tions, whether ound in state standards, pub-lished rameworks, ormal evaluation systems,or just their own thinking about what works

or their own children. Even though there isnot one common de nition o what e ectiveteaching looks like and how to measure it, webelieve theres enough common ground andcommon knowledge right now to make betterpolicies and implement more e ective prac-tices in schools, school systems, communities,

and states. We reviewed de nitions o qualityteachers and teaching rom more than a dozenorganizations spanning a range o perspectivesand ideologies and ound more overlap thandissonance. Each had something to say aboutthe combination o teacher qualifcations (creden-tials, knowledge, and experience); characteristics(attitudes and belie s); and practices (what teach-ing strategies they use and how they relate tostudents) that lead to e ectiveness.

Straight Talk on Teaching Quality:Six Game-Changing Ideas

and What to Do About ThemIntroduction


8/32

2 / Straight Talk on Teaching Quality

As our starting point, we used two airlystraight orward de nitions o good teaching.The rst is a back to basics approach romThe Center or Teaching Quality: An e ective

teacher helps students learn more and spreadstheir expertise to their colleagues. (Berry et al.2006). The second is rom Laura Goe, whowrote that e ective teaching encompasses in-structional quality, student learning, and pro es-sional responsibility. (Goe & Sullivan 2011).With those de nitions in mind, weve identi edseveral important areas where the right stepscan change the game or teachers and, mostimportantly, their students. Equally important,going in the wrong direction or ignoring theseareas could set back the cause o better teaching

and learning.The Annenberg Institute or School Re ormhas worked or nearly two decades with schooldistricts, researchers, parents, and communitymembers and comes to the teaching qualityagenda with these di erent perspectives in mind.Our goal is to make the in ormation that weveculled rom a rich array o resources (so many,in act, that theyre too numerous to cite in aguide o this size) more accessible to everyone rom parents to policymakers to citizens whoare advocating or better schools. We know thisisnt everything. And we know that by tryingto t complex in ormation about one o ourmost important pro essions into a relativelyshort document, we risk leaving out a lot! Butwe think that this guide can o er anyone whois interested in the topic o teaching qualitysome use ul ideas, examples, questions, andresources that allow you to go deeper i youchoose and that can help you be a more e ectivecontributor to this very important cause.

In the ollowing pages, we describe six strategies

that both our own experience and our surveyo the eld have shown to be power ul supports

or the quality o instruction. For each strat-egy, we outline the problem to be addressed;what needs to happen to address the problem;examples o organizations and sites that areimplementing the strategy e ectively; what

readers can ask about and advocate or in theirown school communities; and a short list o resources where readers can learn more.

REFERENCES

Berry, Barnett, Linda Darling-Hammond, EricHirsch, Sharon Robinson, and Arthur Wise.2006. No Child Le t Behind and the HighlyQualifed Teacher: The Promise and thePossibilities. Hillsborough, NC: Center orTeaching Quality.

Goe, Laura, and Ellen Sullivan. 2011.Measuring Teacher E ectiveness Using MultipleMeasures. Presentation, AFT-TEACH con er-

ence, Washington, DC (July 12).

Johnson, Susan Moore, Jill H. Berg, andMorgaen L. Donaldson. 2005. Who Stays InTeaching and Why: A Review o the Literatureon Teacher Retention. Cambridge, MA:Harvard Graduate School o Education.

Rothstein, Richard. 2004. Class and Schools:Using Social, Economic, and Educational Re orm to Close the BlackWhite Achievement Gap. Washington, DC: Economic PolicyInstitute.

Rothstein, Richard. 2010. How to Fix OurSchools. Washington, DC: Economic PolicyInstitute.


9/32

1Annenberg Institute for School Reform / 3

THE PROBLEM

Public school teaching has been seen asa long-term career with relatively staticroles and responsibilities, regardless o ateachers experience, expertise, interests, or am-bitions. Historically, teaching has been viewed

as womens work, and career advancement onlyhappened i you were willing to leave the class-room behind. But that simple image has gonethe way o the record album. The teaching pro-

ession today is more diverse than ever in termso the experience, preparation, and long-termgoals o those entering the pro ession. Somesee teaching as a short-term, service-orientedpro essional experience and move on to careersin other elds. Others enter teaching as the

rst step on the road to a career in educationalleadership and administration. Others enter the

pro ession expecting to pursue a li e-long careerteaching students but become interested in mul-tiple and hybrid roles and opportunities such ascoaching or mentoring colleagues, developingand implementing curriculum, designing newschools, or working systematically with parentsand community members opportunities thatallow or advancement while also keeping e ec-tive and experienced teachers in, or close to, theclassroom.

In most cases, district human resources systems,current school environments, and compensationsystems are simply not set up to provide di -

erentiated opportunities and rewards to peoplewho have di erent reasons or joining the teach-ing pro ession, di erent skill sets, or di eringpro essional goals. And without those opportu-

nities, schools and districts have a more di culttime retaining excellent teachers or keepingthem in positions where they can have the mostdirect impact on student learning.

WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN

To retain excellent and experienced teachers inroles that are still connected to the classroom,state and local policymakers, school districts,and union leaders must embrace both thechanges in teaching that mirror those in manyother pro essions in the twenty- rst centuryand the di erent career perspectives that are inmany ways (but not exclusively) generational.

To address the di erent interests, talents, levelso experience, and career aspirations o teach-ers today, many districts are looking or waysto provide additional career opportunities thatvary rom the traditional path o advancingto a position in school or district administra-tion. Some are implementing alternative ormso compensation that are not seniority based,including merit pay, salary ranges, and bonuses.However, research has shown that pay alone isnot su cient motivation or an excellent teacherto remain in the classroom. Thus, some districtsare implementing career ladders in which excel-lent teachers who want to stay in the classroomcan progress rom apprentice to master teacheras they increase their experience and skills.These districts seek to systematically identi yhighly e ective and ambitious teachers and givethem increased responsibility and importantleadership roles as they move through the lad-ders rungs, or de ned pro essional levels. Ateach rung, they take on tasks such as mentoringnew teachers or helping with curriculum devel-

Follow Your Bliss:Career Pathways or Teachers


10/32


opment, are held accountable or their per or-mance, and receive compensation in accordancewith their increased responsibility.

A career ladder assumes that there will begrowth in a teachers competence, responsi-bilities, and skills over time, which should berecognized, rewarded, and utilized to the schooldistricts advantage. Career ladders have been

ound to help motivate and retain teachers byproviding varied pro essional opportunities anda rationale or achieving new levels o expertise.And recent research suggests that teachers inadvanced leadership positions bring more to aschool than simply their teaching ability; theycan share their expertise with less experiencedteachers, bring teacher voice to decision making,strengthen connections with parents and com-munity, and help to build higher overall teach-ing quality in the school.

WHO IS DOING SOMETHING GOOD?

Cincinnati Career Ladder: Cincinnatis careerladder is called the Career in Teaching (CIT)Program. Developed jointly by the CincinnatiPublic Schools (CPS) and the Cincinnati Fed-eration o Teachers, teachers in CIT progressthrough apprentice, novice, career, accom-plished, and lead teacher levels, with increased

nancial rewards at each step, based on acombination o assessment, advanced education,and experience.

Teachers in Cincinnati begin at the apprenticelevel, where they remain or no more than twoyears. Following two years o success ul peerand principal evaluations, teachers then advanceto the novice level, where they can remain orup to ve years. In both o these levels, teach-ers receive ongoing support rom experiencedmentors. The next level is career teacher, whereteachers can remain or the duration o their ca-reer at CPS, or they can move to accomplishedby earning National Board Certi cation. Teach-ers with at least six years in teaching the last

WHAT CAN I DO?Questions to Ask: What opportunities do the school, school

board, and administration provide ordi erentiated roles and compensation orteachers?

What opportunities or incentives doexcellent teachers have to share theirexpertise beyond their classrooms?

What master, mentor, coaching, or plan -

ning roles are available or teachers?

What are the criteria and reward systems?

What tools or processes does the school,or school district, have in place to learnabout the career goals o teachers, espe-cially new ones?

What kind of support does the school, orschool district, provide or new teachersin their rst ve years, a time that hasbeen shown critical to the developmentand retention/attrition o teachers?

Advocate For: Advocate or multiple opportunities or

teachers to advance their careers in andbeyond their own classrooms, share theirskills, teach other teachers, or documentand share practices that improve studentlearning.

Advocate against systems that are ex-clusively pay or per ormance, whichhave not been proven e ective and arenot characteristic o school and districtimprovement success stories.


11/32


three in the district can apply or lead teacherstatus. An extensive application is reviewed bythe Career in Teaching panel, made up o threeadministrators and three teachers. I the applica-

tion meets all criteria, the teacher is observed bya skilled veteran teacher called a trained teacherobserver (TTO), who also interviews the appli-cants principal and several teaching colleagues.Highly pro cient teachers with demonstratedleadership ability are then recommended by theTTOs or lead teacher status.

More in ormation: http://www.renniecenter.org/ CareerLadders/Example o Career Ladder.htm

LEARN MORE:

Alliance or Quality Education. January, 2011.Agenda or School Improvement: QualityTeaching or Every Student. New York: Alliance

or Quality Education.

Barrett, Kate, Katherine Hovde, Zehua Li Hahn,and Katerina Rosqueta. 2011. High Impact Phi-lanthropy to Improve Teaching Quality: Focuson High-Need Secondary Schools. Philadelphia,PA: The School o Social Policy and Practice atthe University o Pennsylvania.

Berry, Barnett. 2008. Sta ng High-NeedsSchools: Insights rom the Nations Best Teach-ers, Phi Delta Kappan 90, no. 4 (June).

Berry, Barnett and the TeacherSolutions 2030Team. 2011. Teaching 2030: What We Must Do or Our Students and Our Public SchoolsNow and in the Future. New York, NY: Teach-ers College Press.

Darling-Hammond, Linda. 2011. E ec-tive Teaching As a Civil Right: How BuildingInstructional Capacity Can close the Achieve-ment Gap, Voices in Urban Education, no. 31(Fall):4458.

Darling-Hammond, Linda, and Robert Roth-man, eds. Teacher and Leader E ectiveness inHigh-Per orming Education Systems. 2011.Washington, DC: Alliance or Excellent Educa-tion and Stan ord Center or Opportunity Policyin Education.

Goodman, Sarena, and Lesley Turner. 2011.Does Whole-School Per ormance Pay ImproveStudent Learning? Education Next (Spring).

McCrummen, Stephanie. 2011. Evaluation o DC Teachers Is a Delicate Conversation, TheWashington Post (March 17).

Assessing a Teachers Value. 2010. Opinionpages. New York Times (September 6), online at.

Odden, Allan. 2011. Strategic Management o Human Capital in Education: Improving Instructional Practice and Student Learning InSchools. New York, NY: Routledge.

Odden, Allan, and Eilene Kellor. 2000. HowCincinnati Developed a Knowledge- and Skills-Based Salary Schedule. Madison, WI: Universityo WisconsinMadison, Consortium or PolicyResearch in Education.

Odden, Allan, and James Kelly. 2008. What isSMHC? Madison, WI: University o WisconsinMadison, Consortium or Policy Researchin Education.

Schleicher, Andreas. 2011. Building a High-

Quality Teaching Pro ession: Lessons romAround the World. Background Report or theInternational Summit on the Teaching Pro es-sion. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.

Weisberg, Daniel, Susan Sexton, Jenni er Mul-hern, and David Keeling. 2009. The Widget E ect: Our National Failure to Acknowledgeand Act on Di erences in Teacher E ectiveness. Brooklyn, NY: The New Teacher Project.
http://www.renniecenter.org/CareerLadders/Example%20of%20Career%20Ladder.htmhttp://www.renniecenter.org/CareerLadders/Example%20of%20Career%20Ladder.htmhttp://www.renniecenter.org/CareerLadders/Example%20of%20Career%20Ladder.htm


12/32


THE PROBLEM

T eacher evaluation is an issue that has re-ceived a considerable amount o atten-tion recently, with teachers unions andpolicymakers in many locales clashing over howto appropriately and reliably assess instruction.

Most current evaluation systems su er romseveral design faws. Evaluations occur in re-quently and are not usually ocused on teachersmost important responsibility: helping studentslearn. In most districts, teachers can receiveonly two ratings satis actory or unsatis ac-tory which makes it impossible to distinguishreally good teaching rom air or even poorteaching. And, nearly every teacher (99 percentin some districts) receives a satis actory rating,making identi ying good teaching or, moreimportantly, identi ying poor teaching even

harder. Current evaluations also do not typicallyprovide eedback that is use ul or the teacher,and schools rarely consider such evaluationsin decisions about pro essional development,compensation, tenure, or promotion.

Recently, much o the debate has ocused onmeasures o e ectiveness that are tied to statetests and value-added measures, which arebased on the idea that teacher quality can bemeasured by the test score gains o a teachersstudents. Value added has a lot o di erentmeanings, is measured in many di erent ways,and, at least currently, is available or only asmall percentage o teachers. While it is im-portant to keep moving orward with evalu-ation technology, replacing current systemswith equally ine ective ones that rank teachersbased on narrow standardized test scores will

not trans orm teaching and learning. Instead,evaluation systems should be designed to iden-ti y excellence and help teachers improve theirpractice by considering multiple measures o e ectiveness.


The ultimate goal o all teacher evaluationshould be to improve teaching and learning.Good evaluation systems do not simply identi ygood or poor practice; they are tied to supports,targeted to a teachers identi ed areas o weak-ness, that help to build excellent practice. Incases where there is no improvement, evaluationcan provide evidence that support and develop-ment e orts over time are not making a di er-ence. In other words, good evaluation systemshelp good teachers become better and identi ypoor teachers who should be counseled out o the pro ession.

School districts need to decide what their evalu-ation system should measure. Many schoolsand districts are trying to develop evaluationsystems that provide both teachers and schoolswith in ormation that can be used to improveclassroom learning. More and more districts are

nding that this is best accomplished by usinga variety o strategies to evaluate growth instudent learning, instructional quality, and pro-

essional responsibility. Some districts are cur-

rently trying newer, more elaborate approacheswith more nancial awards that could provideinteresting lessons as they develop. These ap-proaches share many o the same characteristics:student port olios, teacher-designed assessments,student learning objectives, standardized tests,and student engagement measures, amongothers, to measure growth in student learn-ing; multiple observations with more than one

Evaluation Nation:Multiple Ways o Measuring Per ormance


13/32


observer, transparent eedback to the teacher,and examination o teacher arti acts to measureinstructional quality; and administrator andsupervisor reports and logs and documentation

o pro essional activities to measure pro essionalresponsibility. Parents can also be engagedin helping to shape teacher evaluation, bothby providing eedback on components o theevaluation system itsel , such as the elements o e ective teaching that are being measured, andby providing eedback in areas such as teachercommunication and responsiveness.

By gathering data in all o these ways, we canmore completely evaluate instruction and stu-dent learning growth. By linking the results withpro essional growth opportunities and supports

or teachers, teaching and learning can be notonly more accurately assessed, but improved.


Montgomery County, Maryland: In MontgomeryCounty, Maryland, the Montgomery CountyEducation Association and Montgomery CountyPublic Schools (MCPS) worked together to cre-ate an evaluation system or the districts teach-ers. MCPS uses two evaluation systems: PeerAssistance and Review (PAR) or all rst-yearand underper orming experienced teachers anda standards-based, principal-driven system orall other teachers. Evaluation in MCPS is part o the districts Pro essional Growth System, whichincludes new teacher induction, intensive pro es-sional development, evaluation, and a compen-sation system.

The PAR program provides intensive assistanceto the teacher and is responsible or an inde-pendent assessment and recommendation orcontinued employment, continued assistance,nonrenewal, or dismissal. The assistance, aswell as the per ormance review, comes not roma specialist or administrator, but a ellowteacher. This peer educator, called a Consulting

WHAT CAN I DO?Questions to Ask: Do teachers know how effectiveness is

being measured?

Are principals trained in high-qualityobservation and eedback?

Is there a performance plan including in -structional supports when a teacher needsimprovement?

Are professional development opportuni -ties aligned to what individual teachersneed to help them improve their practiceand their students learning?

Are data collected and shared with teach -ers in a time and ashion that improvestheir practice?

Advocate For: Evaluation models that allow teachers

rom all subjects and grades to be evalu-ated with multiple measures o evidenceo student learning, such as student port-

olios, teacher-designed assessments, andstudent learning objectives.

Professional growth opportunities thatare aligned with results rom evaluation.

Adequate time and support for teachersto review and analyze data and developresponses that improve practice and stu-dent per ormance.

The engagement of parents in shapingevaluation systems, and parent surveys onelements such as teacher communicationand responsiveness.


14/32


Teacher, is a teacher on leave rom the class-room or three years. Upon completing theirthree-year service to the PAR program, theyreturn to the classroom. Following the year o

assistance, the PAR Panel makes a recommenda-tion or continued employment, another year o PAR support, nonrenewal, or dismissal. Unliketraditional evaluation systems, that recommen-dation is not made solely by administrators norbased solely on a principals evaluation. Theconsulting teacher provides an independentper ormance assessment a second opinionso to speak and the employment recommen-dation is made by the joint PAR Panel, a groupthat includes an equal number o teachers andprincipals.

Once teachers earn tenure in MCPS (two years),they are placed in an evaluation system based oncycles o pro essional growth and evaluation. Asa teacher gains experience and expertise, moretime is spent in pro essional development activi-ties and less time in ormal evaluation. Uponreceiving tenure, s/he then enters a three-yearpro essional growth cycle. In the third year o the cycle, which is year ve o service in MCPS,the principal ormally evaluates the teacher.Teachers who success ully complete the three-year pro essional growth cycle enter a our-yeargrowth cycle. In the ourth year o this cycle,which is year nine o service in MCPS, they are

ormally evaluated. A ter success ully complet-ing the our-year cycle, teachers enter a ve-yearpro essional growth cycle. In the th year o this cycle, which is year ourteen o service inMCPS, and every ve years therea ter, the prin-cipal conducts a ormal evaluation o the teach-er. During the years that teachers are not being

ormally evaluated, they prepare pro essionalport olios detailing the pro essional develop-ment work they have undertaken. The program

requires principals, who are extensively trained,to appraise teachers work using Montgomery

Countys standards o teacher e ectiveness.Principals are required to prepare a descriptivenarrative, documenting where teachers are suc-ceeding and where they need improvement.

More in ormation: http://mcea.nea.org/pd / TeacherPGS_handbook.pd

LEARN MORE:

Barrett, Kate, Katherine Hovde, Zehua Li Hahn,and Katerina Rosqueta. 2011. High Impact Phi-lanthropy to Improve Teaching Quality: Focuson High-Need Secondary Schools. PhiladelphiaPA: School o Social Policy and Practice, Uni-versity o Pennsylvania: The Center or High

Impact Philanthropy.Berry, Barnett, and Alesha Daughtrey. NewStudent Assessments and Advancing Teaching asa Results-Oriented Pro ession. Carrboro, NorthCarolina: Center or Teaching Quality.

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. 2010. Work-ing with Teachers to Develop Fair and ReliableMeasures o E ective Teaching. Seattle, WA: Billand Melinda Gates Foundation.

Burris, Carol, and Kevin Welner. 2011. Letter

to Secretary o Education Arne Duncan Con-cerning Evaluation o Teachers and Principals. Boulder, Colorado: National Education PolicyCenter. http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/ letter-to-Arne-Duncan

Byrd, Ann, and Melissa Rasberry. 2011. Teacherand Teaching E ectiveness: A Bold View romthe National Board Certifed Teachers in NorthCarolina. Carrboro, North Carolina: Center orTeaching Quality.

Cantrell, Steve, and Joe Scantlebury. 2011.

E ective Teaching: What Is It and How Is ItMeasured? Voices in Urban Education, no. 31(Fall):2835.

Center or Teaching Quality. 2011. ResourcesOverview. Carrboro, North Carolina: Center

or Teaching Quality.


15/32


Childress, Stacey, Denis Doyle, and DavidThomas. 2009. Leading or Equity: The Pursuit o Excellence in Montgomery County PublicSchools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

Education Press.Darling-Hammond, Linda. 2011. QualityTeaching: What Is It and How Can It Be Mea-sured? Presentation at Teaching Quality Partner-ships: An Education Exchange Exploring HowTeachers and Communities Work Together toImprove Teaching and Learning (March 24),Stan ord Policy Meeting, Stan ord, CA, Stan ordCenter or Opportunity Policy in Education.

Donaldson, Morgaen. 2010. Supporting E ec-tive Teaching Through Teacher Evaluation: AStudy o Teacher Evaluation in Five CharterSchools. Washington, DC: Center or AmericanProgress.

Goe, Laura, and Ellen Sullivan. 2011. Measur-ing Teacher E ectiveness Using MultipleMeasures. Presentation, AFT-TEACH Con er-ence, Washington, DC (July 12).

Headden, Susan. 2011. Inside IMPACT: D.C.sModel Teacher Evaluation System. Washington,DC: Education Sector.

Little, Olivia, Laura Goe, and Courtney Bell.2009. A Practical Guide to Evaluating TeacherE ectiveness.Washington, DC: Learning PointAssociates.

Odden, Allan. 2011. Strategic Management o Human Capital in Education: Improving Instructional Practice and Student Learning inSchools. New York, NY: Routledge.

Odden, Allan, and James Kelly. 2008. What isSMHC? Madison, WI: University o WisconsinConsortium or Policy in Education.

Schleicher, Andreas. Building a High-QualityTeaching Pro ession: Lessons rom Around theWorld. 2011. Background Report or the Inter-national Summit on the Teaching Pro ession.Paris, France: OECD Publishing.

The American Federation o Teachers. 2011. AGuide or Developing Multiple Measures orTeacher Development and Evaluation. Washing-ton, DC: American Federation o Teachers.

Toch, Thomas, and Robert Rothman. 2008.Avoiding a Rush to Judgment: Teacher Evalu-ation and Teacher Quality, Voices in UrbanEducation, no. 20 (Summer):3240.

Tucker, Marc. 2011. Standing on the Shoulderso Giants: An American Agenda or EducationRe orm. Washington, DC: National Center onEducation and the Economy.

Weisberg, Daniel, Susan Sexton, Jenni er Mul-hern, and David Keeling, 2009. The Widget

E ect: Our National Failure to Acknowledgeand Act on Di erences in Teacher E ectiveness.Brooklyn, NY: The New Teacher Project.


16/32


THE PROBLEM

T here is considerable anxiety aboutteacher quality in American schoolstoday. Not enough highly skilled peopleare going into teaching, and too many promis-ing teachers leave the pro ession a ter a ew

years. Many teachers lack the knowledge, skills,and training they need to teach all students e -ectively. And the students who need the stron-

gest instruction o ten are taught by teacherswith the least experience and expertise.

One reason these problems persist is that therules and procedures that a ect teacher qualityare o ten haphazard. Teacher education institu-tions and ast-track, non-university programsprepare teachers; district human resourcedepartments recruit them; principals evaluatethem; collective bargaining agreements deter-mine where they can work; and universities andprivate organizations provide pro essional devel-opment. Yet these groups seldom work togethersystematically to ensure that all teachers arecapable and e ective in the classroom.

One o the reasons teacher evaluation is sucha hot topic is that many people believe thatremoving teachers who arent per orming wellis the highest re orm priority. Teachers them-selves believe that this is an aspect o re orm but

nd it less critical than strengthening programs

and resources that improve their ability to helpdiverse students with the highest needs meetcollege- and career-ready standards. The realityis that both are important. However, the attri-tion o e ective or promising teachers who arenot getting the support that they need to ullysucceed, particularly in the neediest and hardestto sta schools, is more problematic than theissue o simply getting rid o bad teachers. As

mentioned earlier, there are teachers who areinadequate or, in the worst cases, harm ul andshould be counseled out o the pro ession or dis-missed outright. But in terms o sheer numbers,a ocus on ring is a much lower-yield improve-ment strategy than supporting e ective teachers,assisting struggling ones, and creating a pro es-sional development system that helps the major-

ity o teachers to continuously improve.


Teachers are an important part o a childs edu-cation. While one teacher may be particularlysigni cant to a students academic success, it isthe collection o teachers that a student encoun-ters throughout his or her educational careerthat provides the oundation or academicsuccess, along with parents, other school sta ,administrators, and community members. Theeducation community as a whole and all o itsactors are responsible or providing every stu-dent with the opportunity to learn and to thriveacademically, socially, and emotionally.

Many schools and districts are increasinglyocusing on human capital management. They

recognize that the individuals who work orthem are their most important resources andwant to do whatever they can to grow and de-velop them. They are increasingly implementingpolicies to address issues o induction, deploy-

ment, and pro essional development in order toprovide ongoing support to new and continuingteachers. Many places are trying to develop aresponsive human capital system that aligns andstrengthens these areas. For example, many dis-tricts are utilizing a variety o supports or newteachers, ranging rom mentoring and coaching,to o -site training programs targeted at newteachers, to teacher residency programs.

Supports or Teachers, Not Just Rewardsand Sanctions: Why Firing Teachers Wont Leadto Large-Scale Improvement


17/32


Meaning ul learning opportunities or teach-ers require e ective methods o identi ying thestrengths and weaknesses o individual teachers,and reliable teacher evaluation can provide the

basis or targeted pro essional development.Ensuring that teachers have continuous oppor-tunity to develop skills to meet the diverse needso learners contributes to a positive and sup-portive working environment. Moreover, manyschools and districts have begun analyzing dataand collaborating to identi y and implementpractices that the data suggest could improvestudent achievement. In more and more places,teachers increasingly are expected and expectto collaborate more with their peers on issuesranging rom curriculum development to school

improvement through structured commonplanning time, inquiry teams that look closelyat data, and intervisitation, among others.

Educators increasingly recognize that they canonly achieve the goal o improving learning orall students through partnerships. Signi cantly,the resources needed to provide this supporto ten include support rom institutions outsidethe ormal structure o school unions, univer-sities, and private organizations. For example,school districts and teachers union locals mustbe partners in assuring a air, clear, and time-limited plan or counseling out teachers whoseper ormance is poor and has not improvedwith support, and there are good examples todraw on. Further, it makes a lot more sense todeal with standards on the ront end, makingit harder and taking longer to get tenure in the

rst place.


Boston Teacher Residency Program: A joint e ort

o the Boston Public Schools and Boston Planor Excellence, the Boston Teacher Residency(BTR) program recruits college graduates, mid-career pro essionals, and community memberswho are committed to becoming urban teachers.Modeled on medical residency programs, BTRcombines masters level coursework (alignedwith the Boston Public Schools instructionalagenda) with a year-long classroom apprentice-

ship, thus giving residents content and pedagogi-cal knowledge, the latest educational theoryand research, and hands-on experience in anurban setting. During their residency year, BTR

residents work in a classroom with a mentorteacher our days a week, with the th day andone evening devoted to rigorous coursework.Full-time coursework also occurs during sum-mers and in a two-week intensive winter session.Residents are supported through collaborationswith their mentor teachers, peers, and otherpractitioners and engage in various methods o observing and analyzing their own cra t, as wellas that o master teachers.

In exchange or orgiveness o the cost o theprogram, residents are asked to commit toteaching in the Boston Public Schools or threeyears. They emerge rom their residency pre-pared or the reality o teaching in an urbandistrict and continue to receive comprehensivesupports designed to build on the knowledgeattained during their residency throughouttheir three-year commitment and beyond. Ongo-ing supports include content- ocused coachinggroups that help teachers to build their practicein their subject area; school-based coachingtargeted to areas in need o improvement; andpro essional learning communities in whichgraduates orm collegial relationships withother BTR alumni and collaborate to continu-ously improve their practice. Induction coachesalso work with BTR graduates to help in theirtransition rom novice to skilled teachers. BTRgraduates also work with colleagues and schoolleaders to help build and sustain a collaborative,data-driven culture in their schools. The BTRmodel has led to impressive retention rates 80percent o BTR graduates are teaching in theBoston Public Schools beyond their initial three-year commitment, as opposed to an average 50percent retention rate or urban public schoolsnationally. To support the replication o theresidency model in other cities, BTR co- oundedthe Urban Teacher Residency United.

More in ormation:http://www.bostonteacherresidency.org/

http://www.utrunited.org
http://www.utrunited.org/http://www.utrunited.org/


18/32


LEARN MORE:

Annenberg Institute or School Re orm. 2008.Human Capital, Voices In Urban Education, no. 20 (Summer). Available or download at:http://annenberginstitute.org/VUE/archives

Alliance or Quality Education. 2011. Agendaor School Improvement: Quality Teaching or

Every Student. New York: Alliance or QualityEducation.

Berry, Barnett, Alesha Daughtrey, and AlanWieder. 2009. Teaching E ectiveness and theConditions that Matter Most in High-NeedsSchools: A Policy Brie . Carrboro, NorthCarolina: Center or Teaching Quality.

Berry, Barnett, and the TeacherSolutions 2030Team. 2011. Teaching 2030: What We Must Do or Our Students and Our Public Schools. . . Now and in the Future. New York: TeachersCollege Press.

Darling-Hammond, Linda. 2010. Recruitingand Retaining Teachers: Turning Around the

Race to the Bottom in High Need Schools, Journal o Curriculum and Instruction 4, no.1:1632.

Darling-Hammond, Linda. 2011. QualityTeaching: What Is It and How Can It BeMeasured? PowerPoint presentation at Teach-ing Quality Partnerships: An Education Ex-change Exploring How Teachers and Communi-ties Work Together to Improve Teaching andLearning (March 24), Stan ord Policy Meeting,Stan ord, CA, Stan ord Center or OpportunityPolicy in Education.

Darling-Hammond, Linda, and Bob Rothman,eds. 2011. Teacher and Leader E ectiveness inHigh Per orming Education Systems. Washing-

ton, DC: Alliance or Excellent Education andStan ord, CA: Stan ord Center or OpportunityPolicy in Education.

Hannaway, Jane. 2011. A ComprehensiveHuman Capital Management Strategy orTeacher E ectiveness, Voices in Urban Educa-tion, no. 31 (Fall):1719.

WHAT CAN I DO?

Questions to Ask: What is the process for getting tenure in

the district? Who decides?

How many teachers were rated ineffectivelast year? By what standard? What isbeing done to help them get better?

What supports do teachers have to get

better?

Where do most of the school anddistricts new teachers come rom andby what standards are they selected?Who decides?

Do local universities work with publicschools to train teachers?

How are new teachers trained andsupported?

Advocate For: Transparent criteria for hiring new

teachers.

Ongoing professional development

embedded in the school day/year thatconnects to core curriculum standards,di erentiated students needs, andwhats actually happening in classrooms.


19/32


Johnson, Susan Moore. 2007. Finders and Keep-ers: Helping New Teachers Survive and Thrivein Our Schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.


The American Federation o Teachers. 2010. AContinuous Improvement Model or TeacherDevelopment and Evaluation. Washington, DC:American Federation o Teachers.

Thompson, Joanne, Tracie Potochnik, and EllenFoley. Summer 2010. Beyond Human Resourc-es: Human Capital Development or Scale andSustainability, Voices in Urban Education 28

(Summer):1422.Weisberg, Daniel, Susan Sexton, Jenni er Mul-hern, and David Keeling. 2009. The Widget E ect: Our National Failure to Acknowledgeand Act on Di erences in Teacher E ectiveness. Brooklyn, NY: The New Teacher Project.


20/32


THE PROBLEM

D iscussions o bad teachers o ten at-tribute ine ectiveness to an individu-als quali cations, skills, or dispositionand omit the kinds o organizational supportsand systemic actors such as poor working

conditions that can have a major impact ona teachers per ormance in the classroom. Asnoted earlier, sometimes a teachers inability tosucceed is due to his or her own shortcomings.But no matter how skilled, experienced, or moti-vated an individual is, it is di cult to thrive in apro essional culture o distrust and closed doors,in a climate where school leaders leave you tosink or swim, in classrooms where textbooks areoutdated, or in a building with crumbling plas-ter, antique acilities, and no Internet access. In

act, teacher surveys conducted by organizations

such as the Center or Teaching Quality andthe National Center or Education Statistics, aswell as several studies on teacher retention, have

ound clear connections between poor cultureand working conditions and a teachers motiva-tion to leave his or her school. These issues arecited as o ten as, i not more than, issues such aslarge class sizes and low salaries.

Inequitable allocation o human and materialresources and an unsupportive policy environ-ment can have a direct and devastating impacton the culture and climate o a school. Dys unc-tional schools and systems o ten have problemswith understa ng and overcrowded classrooms,assign teachers to out-o - eld subjects, orconcentrate new or inexperienced teachers inhard-to-sta schools where kids need the mostsupport. Administrators may be ine ective orunsupportive, and teachers dont get targetedpro essional development in the areas where

they need it. There may also be structural barri-ers, such as lack o dedicated time and space tomeet as a team and talk about instruction, thatprevent teachers rom developing the kinds o productive and collaborative relationships withtheir colleagues that have been shown to bolstertheir own e ectiveness.

Schools and systems with poor working condi-tions or a counterproductive culture also mayprioritize compliance with district, state, or

ederal mandates and lack a ocus on continu-ing adult learning, leaving teachers to eel likeinterchangeable cogs in a wheel rather than in-tellectuals doing rigorous and demanding work.Teachers may not have access to the resourcesor technology that they need, or the schoolsphysical environment may be unsa e. In such acontext, teachers wind up in survival mode,and it can be di cult to get beyond basic day-

to-day responsibilities and crisis management.This can lead to burnout, prompting teachers toleave the school or leave the pro ession alto-gether. In a context o continuous turnover, poorschool climate becomes a sel - ul lling proph-ecy a revolving door o teachers ensures that acritical mass doesnt stick around long enoughto develop the kinds o collegial relationships orpro essional culture that can help to trans orma school.


Schools and systems that work to build apositive and productive school culture attendto both the physical and intellectual needs o teachers and students. Basic needs includingsa ety and adequate resources are systematicallyaddressed; up-to-date and appropriate materi-als or teaching and learning are provided; andlearning environments promote trust, respect,

Environmentally Friendly:Why School Culture and Working

Conditions Matter


21/32


empowerment, and a ocus on continuouslearning or students and adults. There are clearnorms and standards, and everyone in the build-ing has a common vision o what great teaching

looks like and a common language that theyuse to talk about it. Teachers are held account-able or their work but also receive the kindso supports that allow them to improve theirpractice. They are also able to hold administra-tors accountable or providing the resources,supports, and developments that enable them tobe success ul.

Pro essional development is ongoing, happensinside the school, and is closely tied to the needso students and teachers. This includes not onlydevelopment in the areas o content and peda-gogy, but strategies to address students social,emotional, and behavioral needs and an empha-sis on cultural competence or all school sta .The building is sta ed so that collectively thereis adequate experience and expertise, such as theskills to work with students with disabilities orEnglish language learners, and there is a healthybalance o new and experienced teachers. Op-portunities or collaboration with colleagues arebuilt into the school day, and teachers have avalued voice in decision making, policy creation,and re orm e orts. A positive culture or adultsin a school o ten translates to a good learningclimate or students, with high expectations,ambitious instruction, and the academic andpersonal supports to help students succeed.

Good working conditions arent accidental, andthey dont usually happen organically. Creatingthe kinds o environments that are most con-ducive or good teaching and learning requiresnot only a thought ul leader at the school level,but a supportive district that pays deliberate at-tention to issues o culture, climate, and equi-

table conditions at a policy level, and supportsschools in their e orts to create an environmentin which teaching and learning can thrive.


Hamilton County Schools Benwood Initiative: The Benwood Initiative, which began in 2001as a partnership between Hamilton County[Tennessee] Schools, the Chattanooga-basedBenwood Foundation, and Chattanoogas PublicEducation Foundation, ocused on re ormingeight low-per orming elementary schools andresulted in impressive gains in student per or-mance and teacher e ectiveness. Recognizingthe districtwide inequities in the distributionand retention o highly e ective teachers, thecreation o a cadre o strong leaders and strongteachers in the schools that needed them mostbecame the Initiatives ocus. Though the Initia-tive implemented nancial incentives and theextreme and controversial measure o calling orteachers to reapply or their jobs, the success o the Initiative rests largely on its e orts to helpexisting teachers improve the quality o theirinstruction. In act, more than two-thirds o theteachers who had to reapply or their jobs wererehired at Benwood schools.

The types o supports put in place or Benwoodteachers included a signi cant investment inmentoring programs or teachers, moving in-structional support sta rom the central o ce

to schools to provide embedded pro essionaldevelopment, the unding o new consultingteacher positions, and working to make schoolleadership stronger and more collaborative.The district created a new division o data andaccountability and trained teachers how to e -

ectively analyze and use student per ormancedata and other assessment tools. A ter askingteachers what they needed to be more e ective,the district also provided opportunities or morecollaboration, peer support, lesson preparation,and constructive eedback rom leaders. As a

result o these e orts to build a pro essional andsupportive culture, Benwood schools created en-vironments that were more conducive to teacherand student success. Teacher e ectiveness im-proved, turnover declined, and teachers rankedthe pro essionally supportive environment asone o their top reasons or choosing to work ina Benwood school. Additionally, in climate sur-


22/32


veys, Benwood teachers ranked their schools ashighly as some o the countrys top-per ormingschools on measures o working conditions.

More in ormation: http://www.pe chattanooga.org/initiatives/benwood-initiative

http://www.educationsector.org/publications/ benwood-plan-lesson-comprehensive-teacher-re orm.

LEARN MORE:

Annenberg Institute or School Re orm, BrownUniversity. 2010. Collective Practice, QualityTeaching. Voices in Urban Education no. 27(Spring). Available or download at: http://an -nenberginstitute.org/VUE/archives/vue-27

Barrett, Kate, Katherine Hovde, Zehua Li Hahn,and Katerina Rosqueta. 2011. High Impact Phi-lanthropy to Improve Teaching Quality: Focuson High-Need Secondary Schools. Philadelphia,PA: The Center or High Impact Philanthropy,School o Social Policy and Practice, Universityo Pennsylvania.

Berry, Barnett, Alesha Daughtrey, and AlanWieder. 2009. Teaching E ectiveness and theConditions that Matter Most in High-NeedsSchools: A Policy Brie . Carrboro, NC: Center

or Teaching Quality.Berry, Barnett, and the TeacherSolutions 2030Team. 2011. Teaching 2030: What We Must Do or Our Students and Our Public SchoolsNow and in the Future. New York: TeachersCollege Press.

Berry, Barnett, Carolann Wade, and Paula Tran-tham. December 2008/January 2009. UsingData, Changing Teaching, Educational Leader-ship 66, no. 4:8084.

Center or Teaching Quality. 2004. TeacherWorking Conditions Toolkit. Carrboro, NC:Center or Teaching Quality.

WHAT CAN I DO?

Questions to Ask: Are school climate surveys for staff con -

ducted? Who sees the results, and whois responsible or acting on the in orma-tion?

How are principals evaluated? Are theactors most important to teacher, parent,

and student satis action assessed?

Do teachers have the classroom resourcesthey need (i.e., books, technology, etc.)?

Are the most expert teachers assigned tothe highest-needs student populations?

What percentage of teachers are new tothe pro ession and to the school?

What percentage of teachers are teachingwithin their license area?

Advocate For: School district and teacher union col -

laboration on teacher assignment, sothat talent deployed to schools matchesstudent needs.

The availability of data on teacher turn -over and absenteeism by school.

A resource assessment to determine whatresources are needed and what needs arebeing met.

The school district to prioritize the high -est-needs/lowest-per orming schools and totarget resources, support, and expertise toimproving those schools.
http://annenberginstitute.org/VUE/archives/vue-27http://annenberginstitute.org/VUE/archives/vue-27


23/32


Futernick, Ken. 2010. Incompetent Teachers orDys unctional Systems? Re raming the Debateon Teacher Quality and Accountability. SanFrancisco, CA: WestEd, Teachers Network.

Marvel, John, Deanna Lyter, Pia Peltola, Greg-ory Strizek, and Beth Morton. 2007. TeacherAttrition and Mobility: Results rom the 2004-05 Teacher Follow-Up Survey. Washington, DC:U.S. Department o Education, National Center

or Education Statistics.

Provasnik, Stephen, and Scott Dor man. 2005.Mobility in the Teacher Work orce: Findings

rom the Condition o Education 2005. Wash-ington, DC: U.S. Department o Education,National Center or Education Statistics.


Schleicher, Andreas. 2011. Building a High-Quality Teaching Pro ession: Lessons romAround the World. Background Report or theInternational Summit on the Teaching Pro es-sion. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.

Sebring, Penny, Elaine Allensworth, AnthonyBryk, John Easton, and Stuart Luppescu. 2006.The Essential Supports or School Improvement. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago SchoolResearch at the University o Chicago.

Talbert, Joan, Lambrina Mileva, Pai-rou Chen,Ken Cor, and Milbrey McLaughlin. 2010.Developing School Capacity or Inquiry-based Improvement: Progress, Challenges, and Re-sources. Palo Alto, CA: Center or Research onthe Context o Teaching, Stan ord University.


24/32


THE PROBLEM

W hile it was once commonplace ora teacher to enter her classroom,shut her door, and e ectivelyremain isolated rom her colleagues and com-munity, today we know the importance o

building strong relationships both inside andoutside o a school building. A ocus on socialcapital the productive interactions and connec-tions between adults in a school community can signi cantly impact school climate, teacherretention, and student and teacher per ormance.While social capital is a key part o promotinga positive school culture and working condi-tions, as touched on in the previous section, it isa critical and unique enough component that itmerits a deeper, targeted exploration.

Current discussions o developing teachers o tenocus on human capital, which entails building

teachers skills, knowledge, and intellect. But aconcentration solely on human capital ignoresthe importance o the human connections thatcan lead not only to improved teacher practice,but greater job satis action and increased invest-ment in the success o a school and its students.In the private sector, collaborative work is in-creasingly the norm among skilled pro essionals.Teachers also need kindred spirits peers withwhom they can collaborate and rom whomthey can learn. They dont want to operate inisolation, nor are they most e ective when theydo so. Collegial situations where educators caninteract, share knowledge and expertise, andprovide eedback on each others work not only

bolster teacher practice, but also contribute toa collaborative environment in which everyonehas a stake in ensuring high-quality teachingand learning.


A ocus on teaching as a collective practicerecognizes that although individual capacityand accountability is still important, systematicand supported collaboration as a way o doingbusiness has the potential to trans orm an entireschool. In act, research has shown connectionsbetween access to collaborative learning envi-ronments and both student gains and teacherretention.

For a ocus on collective capacity to becomethe norm, teachers o di erent skill and experi-ence levels must be expected and enabled towork together consistently to improve studentlearning. Pro essional learning communities(PLCs) allow teams o teachers grouped bygrade level, subject area, or common interests dedicated in-school time to work together tobolster their practice. PLC members may, orexample, observe each other in the classroomand provide eedback or refection, look at andanalyze student work and student data, partici-pate in a joint book study, or engage in peer-ledpro essional development on topics identi edby teachers themselves. A related structure,

common planning time, is built into the schoolday to complement individual teacher planningand preparation time. Common planning timeis usually acilitated and structured by a leadteacher or specialist and brings together teacherson subject or grade-level teams on a scheduleddaily or weekly basis to plan and align curricu-lum and lessons, refect on their own practice, ordiscuss student work, per ormance, or needs.

No Teacher Is an Island:The Importance o In-School Partnerships

and Teacher Collaboration


25/32


In these structures, teachers have the opportuni-ty to learn rom their peers and build their owninstruction while maintaining a clear ocus onstudent learning and are also connected to new

developments in their eld. It is important tonote, however, that structure or time alone doesnot guarantee the success or sustainability o teacher collaboration e orts. School and districtadministrators must be deliberate in workingwith teachers to acilitate collaboration andteam building and ensuring that the work beingdone is use ul, relevant, and ultimately a ectsstudent outcomes.

The types o school-based advancement oppor-tunities or teachers mentioned earlier in thisdocument, including coaching and mentoringroles, can contribute signi cantly to a schoolscollaborative culture. Some teachers may alsohave joint appointments, in which part o their time is spent sharing their expertise andworking with other district o ces or programs,community-based organizations, or universities.This can broaden a buildings social capital toinclude pro essional allies and partners romacross a district or external organizations. Fur-thermore, building relationships with colleaguescan help teachers discover techniques to makeconnections to and strengthen their relationshipswith students and amilies. Finally, an empha-sis on the idea that everyones work is tied tostudent learning rom building administratorsto teachers to ront-o ce sta and custodians can help to rein orce a sense o communityand instill in people at multiple levels a respon-sibility or being active contributors to schooland student success. And when a positive andcollaborative culture isnt just tied to one leaderor a small group o people, it is more likely tobe sustained through changes in leadership orpersonnel.


Sanger School District: The Sanger School Dis-trict in Cali ornias Central Valley has attractedsigni cant attention or its continually increas-ing achievement levels or all students. Namedin 2004 as one o the ninety-eight lowest-per-

orming districts in the state o Cali ornia, the

district put in place a comprehensive turnarounde ort with a marked ocus on student learning,as well as adult learning, to support this goal.Creating a districtwide culture and common

language is a priority o district leadership, anda central strategy in achieving this has been thedistricts use o systems- ocused Pro essionalLearning Communities (PLCs) to build not onlythe capacity o teachers and district sta , buttheir ability to collaborate, develop relation-ships, and commit to change.

PLCs were put in place or teachers, schoolleadership, and central o ce leadership. At theteacher level, in 2006 the district required thatall o its schools create teacher teams, based onthe PLC model, to continuously improve studentachievement. Sanger ocused on developing acommon vision and shared ownership or PLCsamongst all teachers; technical capacity, par-ticularly in the areas o data access and use anda unctional communications system; organiza-tion capacity, including schedules that allowedteachers time to e ectively participate in PLCsand ongoing pro essional development to PLC

acilitators to ensure that the time was wellspent; and a culture change in which teacherswere expected to be com ortable with sharingdata and practices with one another.

Teachers have ound that PLCs have been help-ul in acilitating data use as an improvement

strategy and ocusing instruction on studentneeds and have brought about a sense o sharedaccountability and e cacy throughout schoolsand the system at large. In a recent survey, 85percent o Sanger teachers agreed that PLCs arecritical to their schools success.

More in ormation: http://www.stan ord.edu/ group/suse-crc/cgi-bin/drupal/sites/de ault/ les/

Sanger-Report.pd http://www.sanger.k12.ca.us/

LEARN MORE:

Allen, David, and Tina Blythe. 2003. A Facilita-tors Book o Questions: Resources or Looking Together at Student and Teacher Work. NewYork: Teachers College Press.


26/32


Carroll, Thomas, Kathleen Fulton, and HannaDoerr, eds. 2010. Team Up or Twenty-First Century Teaching and Learning: What Researchand Practice Reveal About Pro essional Learn-

ing (Condensed Excerpts). Washington, DC:National Commission on Teaching and Ameri-cas Future.

Daughtrey, Alesha, and the TeacherSolutionsTeacher Working Conditions Team. 2010.Trans orming School Conditions. Carrboro,NC: Center or Teaching Quality.

Jackson, Clement, and Elias Bruegmann. 2009.Teaching Students and Teaching Each Other:The Importance o Peer Learning or Teachers.NBER Working Paper 15202. Washington,DC: National Bureau o Economic Research.

Johnson, Susan Moore. How Best to AddValue? Strike a Balance between the Individualand the Organization in School Re orm, Voicesin Urban Education, no. 27 (Spring):715.

Kronley, Robert, and Marla Ucelli-Kashyap.2010. Collective Practice: Strategies

or Sustainable Improvement, Voices inUrban Education, no. 27 (Spring):5866.

Leana, Carrie. 2010. Social Capital: TheCollective Component o Teaching Quality, Voic-es in Urban Education, no. 27 (Spring):1623.

McLaughlin, Milbrey, and Joan Talbert. 2010.Pro essional Learning Communities: Build-ing Blocks or School Culture and StudentLearning, Voices in Urban Education, no. 27

(Spring):3545.Metropolitan Li e Insurance Company. 2009.The MetLi e Survey o the American Teacher:Collaborating or Student Success. New York,NY: Metropolitan Li e Insurance Company.

National Commission on Teaching and Amer-icas Future. 2008. Learning Teams: Creating Whats Next. Washington, DC: NationalCommission on Teacher and Americas Future.

Pil, Frits, and Carrie Leana. 2006. Social Capi-

tal and Organizational Per ormance: Evidencerom Urban Public Schools, O rganizationScience 17, no. 3:353366.

Silva, Elena. 2008 The Benwood Plan: A Lessonin Comprehensive Teacher Re orm. Washington,DC: Education Sector.

Smith, Thomas, and Richard Ingersoll. 2004.What Are the E ects o Induction and Mentor-ing on Beginning Teacher Turnover? AmericanEducation Research Journal 41, no. 3:681714.

Talbert, Joan, and Milbrey McLaughlin. 2002.Pro essional Communities and the ArtisanModel o Teaching, Teachers and Teaching:Theory and Practice 8, no. 3/4:325343.

WHAT CAN I DO?

Questions to Ask: Do teachers have professional learning

communities or dedicated common plan-

ning time during the school day? Is that time structured and facilitated by a

skilled leader?

Are teachers free to observe each othersclassrooms or have organized intervisita-tions with other schools?

Advocate For: School schedules that allow common

planning time among grade levels and/orsubject areas.

Evaluation and compensation systemsthat take into account teachers pro es-sional responsibility to work e ectivelywith their ellow teachers.


27/32

6Annenberg Institute for School Reform / 21

THE PROBLEM

Schools and school districts have struggledto improve schooling in many communi-ties, largely in isolation rom community-development initiatives. In some cases, gainshave been made within schools and districts

through re orm strategies, only to disappearwhen there are changes at the school or district the principal or superintendent leaves, or ex-ample because the re orms are not connectedto or supported by the community. Lack o com-munity involvement in schools and districts hasa number o drawbacks. Schools cannot teachchildren well i teachers lack an understandingo their students cultures and lives, i they lackmeaning ul relationships with their amilies, ori educators see amilies as only problems to be

xed. Some teachers may have de cit views

o low-income parents o color, seeing them asincapable o supporting their childrens successrather than as untapped resources. This can leadto a hostile environment where parents dont

eel com ortable, and to a vicious cycle: parentsdont come in because they dont eel welcome,then the school urther blames parents or notbeing involved. On the fip side, parents alsomay have negative views o teachers. Withoute orts to build relationships between the two,parents and teachers can become locked in acounterproductive cycle o mutual blame. Even

more important, there is power in both numbersand in common cause. Teachers, parents, andcommunity working together can truly changetheir communitys schools or the better.


Over the last ew years, more and more evidencehas emerged that e ective parent and communityinvolvement can positively impact school cul-

ture, working conditions, and student achieve-ment. A school that actively welcomes parentsand sees them as important stakeholders withvaluable knowledge and expertise can buildthe trust and support throughout a communitythat is necessary to build and sustain re ormand enhance parent and community e orts tosupport learning outside o school. Parents, with

the help o community-based organizations, canplay a key role in initiating a culture shi t thatbridges cultural and racial di erences and posi-tively a ects teacher quality and retention. Inresponse to these ndings, the United States De-partment o Education is now unding a numbero Promise Neighborhoods, whose purpose isto signi cantly improve the educational anddevelopmental outcomes o children and youthin the most distressed communities and trans-

orm those communities by building a completecontinuum o cradle-to-career solutions o both

educational programs and amily and commu-nity supports, with great schools at the center.And parent/community involvement has to gobeyond bake sales, PTA meetings, and parent-teacher con erences to really engaging parents inmaking decisions about their childrens learningand drawing rom their interests and talents.

Similarly, community-based organizations canplay a key role in creating opportunities orpositive and productive relationships betweenschools and the community. This may in-clude introducing educators to the communitythrough open houses, home visits, and com-munity tours or participating in e orts to builddeeper cultural understanding in schools.

Recent research has shown that e ective com-munity organizing has resulted in higher stu-dent outcomes including higher attendance, testscore per ormance, high school completion, andcollege-going aspirations. It can also help build

No School Is an Island:Partnerships with Parents and Community


28/32


school-community relationships, parent involve-ment, and trust that contribute to improvedschools. Finally, it can stimulate importantchanges in educational policy, practices, and

resource distribution including the equitabledistribution o highly e ective teachers atthe system level that expand school capacityand equity, especially in historically underservedcommunities.


The New York City Coalition or Educational Justice: In 2006, as the New York City schoolsystem became increasingly centralized, threecollaboratives, CCB (Community Collabora-tive to Improve Bronx Schools), BEC (BrooklynEducation Collaborative), and BQ4E (Brooklyn-Queens 4 Education) came together to orma new citywide organization called the NYCCoalition or Educational Justice (CEJ). CEJ isa citywide collaborative o community-based

organizations and unions organizing the powero parents and community to create a moreequitable educational system. Each individualorganization continues to organize public school

parents and community residents within theirneighborhood and also commits time, resources,and support or a shared campaign to improveeducational outcomes at a city level. CEJ con-tinues to engage in accountable collaborationwith the teachers union and the New York CityDepartment o Education.

A ter CEJ member groups developed a missionstatement and a citywide structure, CEJ leadersresearched key school re orm issues, discussedpaths to school re orm with parents in theircommunities, and eventually de ned middleschool improvement as the key lever to reducingdropout rates and enhancing pathways to col-lege. CEJ then began to develop its initial strat-egy to shape citywide education policy. As parto a multi-dimensional organizing campaign,CEJ released a report on achievement gaps in

WHAT CAN I DO?

Questions to Ask: Are there are any community and parent

organizing groups in your community orschool district?

What kinds of supports do the schoolor administration provide to enhanceteacher collaboration with parent andcommunity groups to advance studentlearning?

How can I start a community or parentorganizing group?

Are parent-teacher conferences meaning -ul? Do they allow or real understanding

o the instructional plan and relationshipbuilding between parents and teachers?

Are there meaningful opportunities forparents and teachers to collaborate aspeers?

Are parent engagement structures goingbeyond bake sales to engage parents insubstantial issues regarding the quality o education?

Advocate For: Outreach efforts to parents and students

through a ter-school and neighborhoodprograms.

A parent advisory council that engagesparent leaders in issues o district-wideeducation policy concern.

Neighborhood walks or home visits,in which teams o teachers and parentleaders go to students homes to meet

amilies, learn about their concerns, andrecruit new leaders. (These strategies de-pend on good relationships with schoolsand teachers.)


29/32


New York City middle schools in January 2007:New York Citys Middle-Grade Schools: Plat-

orms or Success or Pathways to Failure? Thereport called on the City Council to convene

a task orce that would create a plan o actionto address the ailing middle schools. TheSpeaker o the City Council chaired this task

orce, which CEJ parents sat on, along witha variety o experts in middle school re orm.CEJ launched an intense organizing campaignto marshal public input into the work o thistask orce and to secure unds to implementthe groups ndings. This complex campaignby CEJ concluded with an agreement by theCity Council and the Mayor to und a middle-grades re orm package in the lowest-per orming

schools, largely based on the recommendationso the task orce.

More in ormation: http://www.nyccej.org

LEARN MORE:

Annenberg Institute or School Re orm. 2011.Parent Power: Education Organizing in NewYork City, 19952010. DVD, produced by EricZachary and directed by Jos Gonzalez andNorm Fruchter. Providence, RI: Brown Univer-

sity, Annenberg Institute or School Re orm,Center or Education Organizing. More in or-mation at: http://annenberginstitute.org/project/ parent-power.

Gold, Eva, Elaine Simon, and Chris Brown.March, 2002. Strong Neighborhoods, Strong Schools: A Series o Reports on the Findings o the Indicators Project on Education Organizing. Philadelphia, PA: Research For Action.

Henderson, Anne, and Karen Mapp. 2002. ANew Wave o Evidence: The Impact o School,Family, and Community Connections on Stu-dent Achievement. Austin, TX: National Center

or Family and Community Connections withSchools.

Henderson, Anne, Karen Mapp, Vivian John-son, and Don Davies. 2007. Beyond the BakeSale: The Essential Guide to Family-School

Partnerships. Karen Mapp, Vivian Johnson, and Don Davieso. New York: The New Press.

Hong, Soo. 2011. A Cord o Three Strands: TheImpact o School, Family, and Community Con-nections on Student Achievement. Cambridge,MA: Harvard Education Press.

Mediratta, Kavitha, Seema Shah, and SaraMcAlister. 2009. Community Organizing orStronger Schools: Strategies and Successes. Cam-bridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Ramirez, Fred, and Ivannia Soto-Hinmann.2009. A Place or All Families, Educational Leadership 64, no. 2:2327.

Sebring, Penny, Elaine Allensworth, AnthonyBryk, John Easton, and Stuart Luppescu. 2006.The Essential Supports or School Improvement.Chicago, IL: University o Chicago: Consortiumon Chicago School Research.

Warren, Mark. 2005. Communities andSchools: A New View o Urban EducationRe orm, Harvard Educational Review 75, no.2:133173.

Warren, Mark, Karen Mapp, and The Com-munity Organizing and School Re orm Project.

2011. A Match on Dry Grass: Community Or- ganizing as a Catalyst or School Re orm. NewYork: Ox ord Press.

Zeig, Susan. 2011. A Community Concern: ADocumentary on Education and CommunityOrganizing. DVD, produced and directed bySusan Zeig. More in ormation at:http://www.acommunityconcern.org.

Contact the Annenberg Institutes Center orEducation Organizing or research, policy analy-sis, and training to support individual groups

and national networks to meaning ully engagein education re orm. The Center also acilitatesalliance building among education organizinggroups and between those groups and otherstakeholders such as civil rights and advocacyorganizations, teachers unions, academics, andeducation researchers: http://www.annenberginstitute.org/project/center-education-organizing
http://annenberginstitute.org/project/center-education-organizinghttp://annenberginstitute.org/project/center-education-organizinghttp://annenberginstitute.org/project/center-education-organizing


30/32


At the beginning o this guide, we citedthree areas o competence essential toe ective teaching: instructional quality,student learning, and pro essional responsibility.And we borrowed a simple, but power ul im-age o an e ective teacher as one who helpsstudents learn more and spreads her or his ownexpertise to colleagues. When it comes to what

makes or good teaching, people will alwaysnd plenty to argue about especially the ar-

ther away they get rom classrooms. But wheth-er you are a parent, an educator, a student, amember o a district or school governing board,or simply a concerned community member, youcan help keep the conversation on the righttrack with the in ormation in this guide. And,while quali cations and career paths, evaluationand compensation systems, and supports andsanctions ( rst hal o this guide) may get moreair time, you can help keep the other essential

topics o climate and culture, collaboration,and community in the conversation.

In this brie guide, we could not do justice to allthe sources upon which we drew, or to all theavailable examples o people doing somethinggood. We invite you to visit http://www.annenberginstitute.org/publication/StraightTalk

or a complete list o sources and many moreexamples and other resources than we couldre erence in this document, and to submit your

own best practice examples or resources youveound use ul. Like the e ective teachers who

spread their own expertise to their colleagues,by sharing our experiences o what works andhow to keep the conversation about teachingquality on track, we multiply the impact o the good work being done in cities across thenation.

Keeping the Conversation on Track
http://annenberginstitute.org/publication/StraightTalkhttp://annenberginstitute.org/publication/StraightTalk


31/32


32/32

Annenberg Institute for School ReformBrown University, Box 1985Providence, RI 02912

www.annenberginstitute.orgTwitter: @AnnenbergInst

www annenberginstitute org/publication/StraightTalk

Documents

Straight Talk on Teaching Quality: Six Game-Changing Ideas and What to Do About Them