What Would It Be Really Nice to Know about the Pathways to Teaching Steve Leinwand AIR, Washington, DC

1. 1  What Would It Be Really Nice to Know about the Pathways to Teaching?Steve LeinwandAIR, Washington, DC

2. 2 Goals Stimulate some thought on the overarching question: Does the pathway make a difference or is it the specific components of the pathway and their quality that explain effectiveness? Provide some glimpses of an impending study

3. 3 My outline: Personal context Current situation Existing research base Answering the title question

4. 4 My Personal Context

5. 5 What�s a trouble-making math educator doing here? 1979-2001: Connecticut State Mathematics Consultant 1983-4: Staffed CT Certification Advisory Council 1986: Helped design and launch CT�s ARC program 1990�s: Helped design and launch CT�s BEST program Culture of bureaucratic entrepreneurship

6. 6 Disclaimers: BUT: I�m a math dude I live, breathe and eat K-12 math My focus is math curriculum, math instruction, math reform, math assessment, professional development ERGO: the pipeline, preparation and induction are critical enabling conditions

7. 7 So, why am I here? Emily challenge NCAC database Intrigued by: Making greater use of the database Taking advantage of newly available teacher-student linked data November and December proposal development

8. 8 Thoughts on the current situation regarding pathways to teaching

9. 9 Givens Up to about 20 years ago, there was a common state-prescribed traditional college certified route. Over the past 20 years we�ve seen a proliferation of alternative or non-traditional routes. Most recent data: 60,000 of 180,000 new teachers enter via alternative or non-traditional routes.

10. 10 Trends Differences between traditional and alternative pathways increasing blurred; Significant differences among �similar� pathways;

11. 11 Implications Simple traditional vs. alternative distinctions are of increasingly limited value; Policy-makers and school and district administrators have little information about the relative benefits or drawbacks associated with specific pathways; and even less guidance about the relative impact of these pathways on quality and impact.

12. 12 Observations on the existing research base

13. 13 Until recently� We didn�t worry about effectiveness; We didn�t ask about relative impact; We didn�t do much more than crudely differentiate; and We didn�t have access to relevant data.

14. 14 Zeichner and Conklin (2005) �We know from this research that teacher education programs and those who enroll in them matter in terms of teacher and pupil outcomes, but because of the lack of close study of what teachers brought to the programs, the programs themselves and the contexts in which they operated, the inconsistencies in the findings cannot be adequately explained.�

15. 15 But now�. Boyd, et al. (2006) Complex by Design - NYC Kane, et al. (2006) What does Certification Tell Us? � NYC Harris and Sass (2007) Teacher Training, Teacher Quality and Student Achievement Mathematica IES study (2008?)

16. 16 A rough summary (since this is only lunch) Bigger differences within programs than between programs. Pathways don�t seem to make much difference (except TFA in some cases). Not randomized? Pathway distinctions to coarse? Pathway components too broad? Analysis too frail? But this isn�t very satisfying nor very informative.

17. 17 So what would it be really nice to know about the pathways to teaching?

18. 18 Unanswered question 1 Can the key characteristics of the components of specific pathways be specified, scaled and used to create a meaningful typology of pathways?

19. 19 Key components 1 The selection and recruitment system: What standards? What prerequisites? What assessments? What are the specific characteristics of highly, moderately and minimally selective?

20. 20 Key components 2 The instructional system: What courses and how many? What balance of content and pedagogy? What quantity and quality of fieldwork? What are the specific characteristics of highly, moderately and minimally demanding?

21. 21 Key components 3 The clinical experiences: What duration, content and intensity of clinical experiences? Observations and embedded methods? Student teaching? What are the specific characteristics of high intensity and low intensity clinical experiences?

22. 22 Key components 4 The support system: Formal and official vs. informal and unofficial? What type of and frequency of supervision? What school level support? What are the specific characteristics of high and low levels of support?

23. 23 Categorizing Pathways

24. 24 An emerging typology A+ programs: highly selective, highly demanding, high intensity clinical experiences and high levels of support (all clearly defined) B programs: moderately selective, moderately demanding, high intensity clinical experiences and low levels of support

25. 25 Unanswered question 2 Does the specific pathway make a difference in terms of: Teacher knowledge? Teacher practice? Student achievement?

26. 26 The possibilities: Think about a cohort of 1500 newly certified and hired mathematics teachers. Allocate each to a specific pathway Analyze measures of teacher knowledge, teaching practice and student achievement relative to pathway Does selectivity or support matter?

27. 27 The possibilities: Think about a pool of prospective teaching candidates. Can they be reliably screened on the basis of their pathway? Can their induction period needs be reliably predicted?

28. 28 Thank you! SLeinwand@air.org