Teaching teachers

Yearlong residencies for teachers are the hot new thing in teacher prep. But do they work?

For years, education advocates, policymakers and scholars have been trying to put an end to the underprepared novice teacher. The hope has been to find a training model that is just right, pairing theoretical knowledge and practical skills necessary for the messy reality of the classroom.

Now some think they’ve found an approach that works: teacher residencies.

Writing in the New York Times, three staff members of Bank Street College argued for this idea, comparing it to how doctors are trained.

“Aspiring teachers need well-designed and well-supported preparation,” wrote Shael Polakow-Suransky, Josh Thomases, and Karen DeMoss. “Year-long co-teaching residencies, where candidates work alongside an accomplished teacher while studying child development and teaching methods, offer a promising path.”

Indeed, there is consistent research showing that teachers trained through residencies are more likely to stay in the profession, potentially reducing churn in schools and costs of finding and training new teachers.

“When it’s done well, it’s kind of a solution to the teacher shortage problem that has plagued urban districts,” said Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the Learning Policy Institute, an education think tank that recently put out a report praising the residency model.

But preliminary new research focusing on Denver’s residency program showed that teachers trained through the program were less effective at improving student achievement in math than other novice teachers in Denver.

This echoes the findings of a study on the Boston Teacher Residency, a prominent example of the approach. In that case, residency-trained teachers also were less effective in math in their first years in the classroom — though they improved fairly quickly.

Together, the positive impacts on teacher retention and the more tepid effectiveness results might still suggest that residencies are worthwhile. But some see the enthusiasm getting ahead of the evidence, particularly in light of the steep price tag of such models.

“I am amazed by how much enthusiasm this idea seems to be generating, despite the fact that we don’t have much evidence to support it,” said Marty West, a Harvard professor who studied the Boston program.

A teacher residency has several key components, according to proponents.

Darling-Hammond’s group identifies several characteristics: a full year of student teaching under an experienced, effective mentor; a partnership between a school district and university so that practice and theory are closely linked; continuing mentorship after candidates become full-fledged teachers; and payment of student teachers during the residency year in return for a three- to four-year teaching commitment.

The final aspect is part of what makes the program appealing as well as costly.

“As I think about the common elements of residency program, there’s a lot that seems very promising — if also, potentially, very expensive,” West said.

Under a traditional university training model, students pay tuition; under the residency model they get paid, albeit modestly. The Boston Teacher Residency, for instance, is free for those who teach in Boston for three years, and offers candidates a $12,600 stipend as well as health insurance for their residency year. (In that program, teachers do have to pay tuition to UMass Boston to receive a master’s degree as part of the program.)

The upside is that those who go through residencies seem to remain teachers in their school districts for longer. In Denver, for instance, residents were 16 percentage points more likely than other novice teachers to return to the district. A national study of 12 teacher residency programs also showed higher retention rates.

This, Darling-Hammond hypothesizes, is explained by the quality of residence programs.

“I think that amount of student teaching and the mentor teacher being a true expert probably has a lot to do with the retention rate being strong,” she said. “You’re getting everything a beginning teacher should get.”

Although research on what makes teacher training effective has generally not come to clear conclusions, there is evidence for the idea that giving teachers practice in a real classroom is important.

But when it comes to the initial effectiveness of residency-trained teachers — at least as measured by the impact on students’ standardized English and math test scores — the evidence is mixed, and in some cases even negative.

West and colleagues found that teachers who go through the Boston Teacher Residency program were initially less effective at improving student achievement in math and no better in English, compared to other beginning teachers.

To West, these findings were counterintuitive.

“I was excited about the opportunity to evaluate the Boston Teacher Residency because I was optimistic,” he said. “I was surprised by our finding that residents were less effective than other new hires, at least initially.”

Darling-Hammond points out — and West agrees — that the teaching corps is likely to be particularly strong in Boston, where there is a robust higher education sector, so that it might be especially difficult for one program to prove particularly effective.

The Denver study, though, produced similar results: negative impacts on former residents’ students in math and essentially no effect in reading.

But there were bright spots in both evaluations. The teachers in Boston improved swiftly over time to the point that those teaching for five years were more effective than other experienced teachers. Combined with the lower turnover rates, the study estimates that the program had a modestly beneficial effect on student achievement over the long run.

And in Denver, the researchers also examined teachers’ classroom ratings, assigned by trained observers. There, former residents came out ahead of other teachers.

Other research on residency programs is thin but paints a more positive picture. A report on the New Visions Hunter College teacher residency in New York City showed that their teachers outperformed other novices in five high school exam areas, but underperformed in three others. A recent state analysis of 40 teachers trained through the Memphis Teacher Residency found they had above-average impacts on student test scores.

West says he is still optimistic about the residency model. The key question, he says, is whether the costs of the program outweigh the benefits — but no such comprehensive analysis has been done.

Darling-Hammond notes that some programs have tried to save costs by, for instance, using residents as substitutes one day a week or having them take the place of teacher aides. She also emphasizes the impact, financial and otherwise, of residencies on reducing teacher attrition.

“If you think about the costs of replacing teachers … this ends up being a cost-effective investment,” she said.

Future of Teaching

Tentative contract includes big raises for IPS teachers

PHOTO: Dylan Peers McCoy
Teachers would receive significant raises under a tentative new contract with IPS.

A month after voters approved a vast funding increase for Indianapolis Public Schools, Superintendent Lewis Ferebee’s administration and the district teachers union have reached a tentative deal for a new contract that would boost teacher pay by an average of 6.3 percent.

The agreement was ratified by union members Wednesday, according to a statement from teachers union president Ronald Swann. It must be approved by the Indianapolis Public Schools board, which is likely to consider the contract next week, before it is final.

Swann did not provide details of the agreement, but it was outlined in union presentations to teachers on Wednesday ahead of the ratification vote. The deal would cover the 2018-19 school year, and teachers would receive retroactive pay back to July 2018. The prior contract ended in June.

Raising teacher pay was a key part of the sales pitch district leaders used to win support for a referendum to raise $220 million over eight years from taxpayers for operating expenses. The referendum passed with wide support from voters last month, and although the district will not get that money until next year, the administration can now bank on an influx of cash in June 2019. Teachers could receive another raise next year, once the money from the referendum begins flowing.

The proposed deal would bring pay raises for new and experienced teachers. First year teachers in the district would see their salaries jump to $42,587, about $2,600 above the current base salary, according to the presentation to teachers. Returning teachers would move up the pay scale, with most receiving raises of about $2,600.

The deal also brings a reward for teachers who are at the top of the current scale. The top of the scale would rise to $74,920 by adding several stops above the current maximum of $59,400. That means teachers who are currently at the top of the scale would be able to move up and continue getting raises.

Many longtime teachers in the district also earn additional pay for advanced education, but teachers who joined the district more recently are not eligible for that extra money.

Teachers who received evaluations of ineffective or needs improvement in 2017-18 are not eligible for raises.

The new contract is the second time in recent years that teachers have won substantial raises in Indianapolis Public Schools. After four years of painful pay freezes, Ferebee negotiated a contract in 2015 that included a large pay increase. Teacher pay is especially important for the district because it is competing with several surrounding communities to staff schools.

Health care costs would go up this year, a policy shift that was advocated by the Indy Chamber, which urged the district to reduce health insurance spending as part of a plan to shift more money to teacher salaries.

The contract includes a provision that was piloted last year allowing the district to place newly hired teachers at anywhere on the salary schedule. It’s designed to allow the district to pay more for especially hard-to-fill positions.

Teachers at some troubled schools, known as the transformation zone, would also be eligible for extra pay on top of their regular salaries at the discretion of the administration. That money would come from state grants specifically targeted at transformation zone schools.

The idea of allowing superintendents to pay some teachers in their districts more than others is controversial.

Teacher Pay

‘Our teachers have waited long enough’: Educators say Indiana needs to act now on teacher pay

PHOTO: Shaina Cavazos
Students in Decatur Township work on physics problems with their teacher.

Educators and advocates are pushing state leaders to take action this year to raise teacher compensation — not to wait for additional research, as Gov. Eric Holcomb proposed last week.

“Our teachers have waited long enough,” said Teresa Meredith, president of the Indiana State Teachers Association, the state’s largest teachers union. “It doesn’t take a two-year study to discover what we already know: teachers need to be valued, respected, and paid as professionals.”

Holcomb’s proposal last week to study raises in the upcoming budget-writing session and make bigger steps in 2021 didn’t sit well with some, since lawmakers and advocates spent the fall talking up the need to make teacher salaries competitive with other states. But given the state’s tight budget situation, Holcomb suggested studying the impact of raises for at least a year, as well as looking at how much money would be needed and how districts would be expected to get the money to teachers.

Read: Raising teacher pay likely to be at the forefront for Indiana lawmakers and advocates in 2019

The proposal drew quick criticism. Education leaders and advocacy groups took to Twitter to express their hopes that Holcomb and lawmakers would find ways to address teacher salaries this year as well as into the future.

“IN must respond now,” State Superintendent Jennifer McCormick tweeted Friday morning, remarking that too many teachers across the state are leaving the profession because pay is too low. “Kids deserve & depend upon excellent teachers.”

“We can’t wait to act because Hoosier children are counting on all us to come together to ensure our schools can attract and retain the best teachers,” Justin Ohlemiller, executive director of Stand for Children Indiana, said in a blog post titled “The time to act on teacher pay is now.

ISTA’s 2019 legislative agenda, released Monday, will continue pushing for lawmakers and state leaders to find creative solutions to raise teacher pay and make Indiana competitive with other states.

And ISTA says they might have voters on their side. A recent ISTA poll of more than 600 Hoosiers, conducted by Emma White Research, shows that funding for education is a priority across the state, with more than 86 percent of those sampled supporting sending more money to public schools. About 72 percent of people polled believe educators are underpaid.

But it’s unclear if there would be enough money in the budget to spend on across-the-board raises after other funding obligations are met, such as funding needed by the Department of Child Services to deal with effects of the state’s opioid crisis. Senate Democrats have called for $81 million a year to ensure 5 percent raises for teachers and counselors over the next two years. Republicans have strong majorities in both chambers.

Neither ISTA, lawmakers, Holcomb nor other education groups have released specific plans for either how much they’d like to see set aside for teachers or strategies for how a pay increase could feasibly be carried out. However, the effort has brought together some unlikely allies — the union, a vocal advocate for traditional public schools, rarely aligns its education policy with groups like Stand and Teach Plus Indiana that have favored increased school-choice options, such as charter schools.

With limited dollars to go around, the focus will have to also be on how to make existing education dollars go farther, Meredith said. She, along with Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma last month, pointed to the need to curtail spending on administration, which, they argue, could free up money for other expenses such as teacher compensation.

Some have also pointed to the state’s recent budget surplus and reserves as evidence that Indiana could spend more on education if there was political will to do so.

“The surplus has come on the backs of educators and their students,” Meredith said. “Elected leaders must do more. They must do more to declare teacher pay a priority in this session, and they must take action.”

ISTA is also hoping lawmakers will act to:

  • Restore collective bargaining rights so educators can negotiate work hours and class size, as well as salaries and benefits.
  • Remove teacher evaluation results from decisions about salary until the state’s new ILEARN test has been in place for a few years.
  • Invest in school counselors, psychologists, and social workers
  • Strengthen regulations for charter and virtual charter schools, including putting a moratorium on new virtual schools until those safeguards can be enacted.
  • Study districts that have focused on how to best teach students who have experienced trauma.

Indiana’s next legislative session begins in January.

Correction: Dec. 11, 2018: This story has been updated to reflect that Stand for Children Indiana doesn’t take a position in regards to private school vouchers.