Recruiting Washington Teachers 2015 – 2016 Annual Report A Collaborative Program Evaluation Prepared by J. Lee Schultz Professional Educator Standards Board Eric Hougan Central Washington University
Published October 2016 at http://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/future-educators/rwt/reports
Suggested citation: Schultz, J. L., & Hougan, E. (2016). Recruiting Washington Teachers: 2015-2016 Annual Report. Olympia, WA: Professional Educator Standards Board.
Table of Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… i Background and Rationale ............................................................................................................................ 1 Program Description ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 Future Directions ........................................................................................................................................ 25 References .................................................................................................................................................. 27 Appendix: Special Issue Report ................................................................................................................... 28
Recruiting Washington Teachers 2015-2016 Executive Summary Program Description
Evaluation Findings
The Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT) program is designed to grow our own diverse group of future educators who closely reflect today’s student population. With support from the state legislature since 2007, RWT pilot programs recruit diverse cohorts of high school students who are underrepresented in the teaching profession, and support them in exploring and preparing for careers as educators in shortage areas.
In 2015-2016, RWT pilot programs served a total of 78 students across four sites: 25 at Burlington-Edison, 29 at Mount Vernon, 20 at Tacoma, and 4 at Renton. This represents a 51% drop in enrollment compared to the previous year, but sites will be expanding next year.
RWT program strategies vary considerably, reflecting the context and needs of their local communities, but all focus on achievement in academics and leadership; emphasize equity and culturally responsive pedagogy; and affirm culture, language, and identity as assets for learning and empowerment in school and in life. Based on intentional partnerships and targeted recruitment, RWT programs provide students with the following:
An intensive academic year program (and in some cases summer academy), using the newly revised Careers in Education curriculum that embeds cultural competence, academic support, high expectations, and leadership opportunities A supportive cohort experience Mentored, hands-on classroom field experiences Ongoing advising, mentorship, and support Exposure to higher education options, including campus visits, workshops, and conferences An articulation agreement with a higher education partner formalizing the transfer of course credit
Through targeted recruitment strategies, RWT programs are successfully recruiting a diversity of students, including underrepresented, multicultural, and multilingual students. Overall, the 2015-2016 cohort of RWT participants included:
76% students of color 82% from homes in which a language other than English is spoken 68% representing the first generation in their family that will attend college
Survey results indicate overwhelmingly high satisfaction with the program among students: About three-quarters described their overall experience as “very good,” with about another quarter describing it as “good.” Students reported that the program components supported them in achieving their academic and career goals, with the classroom field experience as the highest rated component, followed by one-on-one advising with the lead teacher and the course itself. The lead teacher plays an important role in recruiting and supporting students and is seen as the “key ingredient” to the program’s success. RWT students self-reported high achievement of program objectives. Most RWT students reported that their participation in RWT had helped them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” when it came to learning how to teach children (90%), serving as a role model to younger students (88%), and learning about the teaching profession (83%). In addition, focus group participants reported developing skills and confidence in leadership, networking, advocating for themselves, and communicating.
i|Page
RWT students are achieving high rates of success on indicators of college readiness, with sites reporting that nearly all participants had taken a college placement test (97%), applied for college (98%), and been accepted to college (98%). In addition, 82% of RWT participants improved their cumulative GPA over the course of the year, and 64% of RWT seniors had earned college scholarships. All four sites saw 100% of their RWT seniors graduate on time. The vast majority of RWT students reported that their participation in RWT had strengthened their plans to attend college (81%) and had increased their interest in a teaching career (76%). Practical lessons for program implementation, including potential challenges and key features, are described in the full report. A special issue report examining the challenges and potential of Renton’s RWT partnership model is including in the Appendix to the full report.
Next Generation Building upon the new RWT-based curriculum for Careers in Education and the recommendations from the RWT Redesign Work Group, the Professional Educator Standards Board is now launching a Grow-Your-Own (GYO) teacher initiative including the following interconnected components:
Professional development supporting new and existing teacher academies and the statewide adoption of the new curriculum Online platform serving as a hub for teachers to interact and share curricular resources and for students to stay connected throughout their pathway to a teaching career Data system connecting programmatic, secondary, post-secondary, and educator employment data to evaluate the success of Washington State’s GYO initiatives
Recommendations
Focus attention on developing and implementing more effective strategies for recruiting males, who currently make up only 14% of participants. Find ways to improve class attendance in order to maximize the program’s impact. Ensure that students’ needs in applying for financial aid and college are being met by balancing the support provided by RWT with that of other existing resources. Consider ways in which RWT can better support its alumni, especially in collaboration with the higher education partners.
This summary presents highlights of the Recruiting Washington Teachers: 2015-16 Annual Report published October 2016 and available online at http://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/futureeducators/rwt/reports Suggested citation: Schultz, J. L., & Hougan, E. (2016). Recruiting Washington Teachers: 2015-2016 Annual Report. Olympia, WA: Professional Educator Standards Board.
ii | P a g e
Background and Rationale The Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT) program recruits diverse high school students and supports them in exploring and preparing for careers in education. Through its Grow-Your-Own approach, RWT seeks to address the dual goals of ameliorating the teacher shortage while diversifying the educator workforce.
Demographic Data on the Diversity Gap between Students and Teachers Demographic trends show that the increased diversity of the student population has far outpaced that of the teacher workforce, resulting in a significant diversity gap (Putnam, et al., 2016). White teachers made up 82% of the United States teaching force compared with roughly 50% of the student population in 2014 (ibid.). The diversity gap between teachers and students is even more pronounced in Washington State. In fact, Washington State ranks second to last in the nation for a teaching force that is representative of the state’s ethnic composition (Peterson & Nadle, 2009). In 2015-16, white teachers accounted for 90% of the workforce, while only 56% of the state’s public school students identified as white (OSPI, 2016). Future teachers of color accounted for only 20% of the candidates enrolled in Washington’s teacher preparation programs in 2013-14 (ED, 2015) and only 18% of newly certified teachers in 2014-15 (PESB, 2016), suggesting little improvement to the racial diversity of the teaching workforce in coming years. Gender is also a teacher workforce representation issue, with males accounting for only 26% of the classroom teachers (PESB, 2016) compared with 52% of the student population in 2015-16 (OSPI, 2016).
Benefits of Diversifying the Teacher Workforce Recent rigorous research provides evidence confirming the importance of students having teachers from similar backgrounds and demographics (Goldhaber, et al., 2015; Putnam, et al., 2016). Some benefits include “more effective role modeling, higher expectations for learning and their future, and fewer cultural differences to effectively teach” (Putnam, et al., 2016, p.3). Most importantly, research has shown that “having a teacher of the same race has a small but meaningful impact on student test scores” (Goldhaber, et al., 2015, p.3), especially for low-performing black students, suggesting that “diversifying the teacher workforce could help close racial achievement gaps in public schools” (ibid., p.4). These findings have led researchers and policymakers alike to conclude that diversifying the teacher workforce must be considered “a crucial component of a comprehensive strategy for addressing the achievement gap” (Villegas & Irvine, 2010, p.187).
What It Would Take to Achieve Parity Researchers from the Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings recently published a report examining what would it take to achieve the “indisputably important” policy goal of increasing teacher workforce diversity (Putnam, et al., 2016). They identified leaks all along the pipeline where actual and potential minority teachers exit at rates higher than their white counterparts, including gaps in the proportion earning college degrees, demonstrating interest in a teaching career, getting hired into a teaching position, and staying in teaching year after year. They examined the potential impact of strategies for patching each of these leaks and found that achieving racial parity will require proactive strategies at all stages of the education pipeline. This is in contrast to the proliferation of well-intended but costly initiatives that typically fail to address the reasons behind the shortfall, and the enormity and persistence of it, with many initiatives attempting to address the leak far too late in the pipeline. Indeed,
1|Page
the fundamental problem stems from both “the low rate of college completion by black and Hispanic students and then the inability to persuade them to consider a career in the teaching profession.” (ibid., p.15). The researchers conclude:
“The only possible approach to build a teacher workforce that resembles the students of our country is a long-term, whole-system approach that ensures minorities are not leaking out at any point in the pipeline. And truly, the pipeline should start not at college, but well before it.” (Putnam, et al., 2016, p.17)
The “Grow Your Own” Teacher Strategy One strategy that starts early and supports prospective teachers along their pathway is “Grow Your Own” teacher academies targeting high school students. This strategy is highlighted as one of 15 research-based policy recommendations for solving the teacher shortage, as published in a recent literature review conducted by researchers at the Learning Policy Institute (Podolsky, et al., 2016). They describe the more extensive high school teaching academies as those that embed career-focused courses on education topics with personalized supports and real-world, work-based experiences. Such programs “have been found to be associated with the recruitment and retention of diverse teachers” (ibid., p.26).
Washington State Priority In accordance with the research, current state policy initiatives lend support for approaches to diversifying the teacher workforce. For instance, the Achievement Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee identified the need for “expanding pathways and strategies to prepare and recruit diverse teachers and administrators” as the fourth of ten high priority recommendations to reduce the differential achievement of students of color in Washington State (AGOAC, 2010). The Recruiting Washington Teachers grant program is one such strategy, supported by the Washington State legislature, for recruiting and preparing a diversity of future teachers.
Program Description The overarching goal of the Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT) program is to “grow our own” diverse group of future teachers who more closely reflect the population of today’s children and youth. To this end, RWT grant funding supports the recruitment and preparation of a diverse group of high school students for future careers as educators in the teacher shortage areas of Mathematics, Science, Special Education, Early Childhood Education (P-3), English Language Learner, and Bilingual Education. Specifically, the grant funding supports partnerships between high schools, teacher preparation programs, institutions of higher education, parents/guardians, and community based organizations to design and deliver innovative pilot programs that support students, underrepresented in the teaching profession, in exploring and preparing for careers as educators. By supporting participants as they complete high school, apply to and attend college, the RWT program strengthens the pathway from high school to teaching, with the goal that students will become not only certified teachers, but also community leaders who make a difference in their communities.
2|Page
With funding from the state legislature since 2007 (RCW 28A.415.370), the Professional Educator Standards Board, in coordination with the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, has issued RWT grant funding to pilot programs operating at six sites: • • • • • •
North Seattle Community College serving urban schools in Seattle (2007 – spring 2010) Educational Service District 105 serving schools in the Yakima Valley (2007 – spring 2012) Renton School District (planning year 2007, operational 2008 – current) Burlington-Edison School District (2009 – current) Mount Vernon School District (planning year 2012, operational 2013 – current) Tacoma School District (planning year 2012, operational 2013 – current)
The funding history of RWT is shown in Table 1 below. Note that all grantees reported using other district funding to supplement the 2012-2014 reduced funding levels. TABLE 1. RWT FUNDING HISTORY Year FY 2007-2008 FY 2008-2009 FY 2009-2010 FY 2010-2011 FY 2011-2012 FY 2012-2013 FY 2013-2014 FY 2014-2015 FY 2015-2016
Funding* $55,000 $73,000 $56,500 $64,000 $89,500 $20,000 $21,500 $21,500 $21,500
Grantees Renton SD, ESD 105, N. Seattle CC Renton SD, ESD 105, N. Seattle CC Renton SD, ESD 105, Burlington-Edison SD, N. Seattle CC Renton SD, ESD 105, Burlington-Edison SD Renton SD, ESD 105, Burlington-Edison SD Renton, Burlington-Edison, Mount Vernon & Tacoma SDs Renton, Burlington-Edison, Mount Vernon & Tacoma SDs Renton, Burlington-Edison, Mount Vernon & Tacoma SDs Renton, Burlington-Edison, Mount Vernon & Tacoma SDs
*Funding amount is for each grantee listed
RWT program strategies vary considerably, reflecting the context and needs of their local communities, but all focus on achievement in academics and leadership; emphasize equity and culturally responsive pedagogy; and affirm culture, language, and identity as assets for learning and empowerment in school and in life. Based on intentional partnerships and targeted recruitment, RWT programs provide students with the following:
An intensive academic year program (and in some cases summer academy), using a revised Careers in Education curriculum that embeds academic support, high expectations, and leadership opportunities A supportive cohort experience Mentored, hands-on classroom field experiences Ongoing advising and support Exposure to higher education options, including campus visits/workshops An articulation agreement with a higher education partner formalizing the transfer of course credit
See Table 2 for a logic model presenting the program’s resources and strategies alongside the intended short-term, mid-term, long-term, and system-level outcomes.
3|Page
TABLE 2. RWT LOGIC MODEL (UNDER DEVELOPMENT) Inputs/Resources
Strategies/Services
Funding Partnerships Targeted recruitment of diverse, underrepresented, multicultural, multilingual student participants (originally
Intensive academic year program (and in some cases summer academy), using a revised Careers in Education curriculum that embeds academic support, high expectations, and leadership opportunities Supportive cohort experience Mentored, hands-on classroom field experiences (internship tutoring younger students + reflective seminars) Ongoing advising and support Exposure to higher education options, including campus visits/workshops Articulation agreement with higher ed partner
targeted those at greatest risk of dropping out)
Implementation support for the teachercoordinator
Short-Term Outcomes (Changes in KSA*) Explore and consider teaching as a career Develop knowledge about the teaching profession, including knowledge about the educator professional code of conduct and the WEST-B Develop knowledge and skills for how to teach all children well, including knowledge and skills in the principles of cultural competence, academic language, and student voice in education pedagogy Develop leadership skills Learn how to navigate the college and financial aid application processes Come to see their culture, language, and identity as assets for learning and empowerment in school and life Come to see college and teaching career as a real option, better future
Mid-Term Outcomes Grow or maintain interest in teaching; clarify career passion Achieve academic success in high school and develop readiness for college Apply for college and gain acceptance Apply for scholarships and financial aid and receive them Serve as a role model to younger students Develop readiness for entering a teacher preparation program (better prepared for teaching profession) Graduate high school
Long-Term Outcomes Enroll in higher ed + enroll in teacher prep program Persist in higher ed + persist in teacher prep program (maintain interest in teaching profession) Graduate from higher ed + complete teacher prep program Enter the teaching profession Become community leaders
System-Level Outcomes RWT student-driven outcomes: Increased diversity of teacher workforce Better reflect and better serve the P12 student population Make a positive impact on the community
Other RWT outcomes: Garner closer relationship between school system and community Push the thinking of current teachers by bringing CIE up to standard Build equity in educational experiences for both RWT participants and the future students they will serve
*Generally speaking, changes in Knowledge/Awareness, Skills/Abilities, and Attitudes/Motivation happen before changes in behavior.
4|Page
Evaluation Since 2010, the RWT program has been evaluated by a collaborative team comprised of teacher preparation faculty from partnering institutions (CWU and, in prior years, WWU) and PESB staff.
Evaluation Questions The evaluation is focused on answering the following overarching questions: 1. How do the RWT grantees support underrepresented, multicultural, and multilingual students as they explore and prepare for future teaching careers (in Washington State teaching shortage areas)? 2. What are the major accomplishments, innovative strategies, and mechanisms of support (i.e., promising practices) of the RWT grantees? 3. What are the challenges RWT grantees have faced, and what do they need to enhance the program’s ability to meet their goals?
Data Collection Methods This report includes data on the four programs that are currently operational, focusing on the 20152016 academic year, but also including some data dating back to the beginning of their operation as RWT funded programs (2008 for Renton, 2009 for Burlington-Edison, 2013 for Mount Vernon and Tacoma).
Document Review The evaluation team reviewed the grantees’ original applications and the annual progress reports that grantees had submitted in prior years.
Site Visits, Interviews, and Focus Groups Beginning in 2010, the evaluation team visited each site once (spring) or twice (fall and spring) each academic year. During these site visits, the evaluators conducted individual interviews and focus group conversations with key personnel and student participants, and in some cases with community partners and higher education faculty. In addition, the evaluators conducted individual interviews and focus groups with available alumni of the Renton and Burlington-Edison programs in the spring of 2010-2016, as well as interviews with the Mount Vernon and Tacoma primary staff and administrators in the winter of 2013-2014. The Renton and Burlington-Edison programs were able to provide additional student focus group and interview data in collaboration with the research team in the spring of 2011-2015.
Progress Reports Beginning in 2011, the evaluation team developed a progress report form to request more specific and detailed information from grantees about their progress on required grant program activities. In 2015, the evaluation team revised the report form to improve the consistency of the information collected from grantees and to reduce the evaluation burden on them by streamlining the reporting requirements. The downside is that fewer data elements are collected now compared to previous years, but the upside is that concentration is focused on data that grantees can more reliably and consistently collect. This year’s report form included student demographics, college readiness outcomes, program description updates and lessons, and an end-of-year reflection.
5|Page
Student Survey In 2015-2016, the evaluation team developed a survey to collect feedback directly from RWT participants. In addition to collecting respondent characteristics and participation details, the survey asked students about recruitment, their overall experience, challenges faced, supports received, achievement of program objectives, and their academic and career outlook. The evaluation team programmed and hosted the survey online, while the grantees were responsible for coordinating time and space for their students to take it. The survey was administered in the spring of 2016 (March 21 May 13). The response rate varied from site to site (62% at Mount Vernon, 75% at Renton, 90% at Tacoma, and 100% at Burlington-Edison), but was high overall at 82%. The characteristics of survey respondents matched well with the profile for all participants, suggesting that the respondents are a good representation of the cohort as a whole.
Data Collection Limitations The RWT grantees have been unable to follow all their students after they graduate from high school. Tracking past and future RWT high school graduates in order to report annually on their higher education outcomes requires funding beyond present levels. High school and university faculty have provided anecdotal evidence, with the permission of individual former RWT students, who are currently in Washington State teacher education programs.
Results Participant Characteristics In 2015-2016, the RWT programs served a total of 78 high school students across the four sites (see Table 3). Overall, the program served only about half as many students compared to the previous year, with all four sites experiencing a drop in enrollment. Mount Vernon had the largest program, serving 29 students, followed by Burlington-Edison with 25 and Tacoma with 20. Renton had particularly small numbers, with only 4 students, due to scheduling issues and competing priorities. TABLE 3. NUMBER OF RWT STUDENTS SERVED BY YEAR AND GRANTEE
Year 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015 2015 - 2016 Tot. (duplicate count)
Renton School District 22 27 12 18 22 20 16 4 141
Grantee Burlington-Ed. Mount Vernon School District School District n/a n/a 22 n/a 19 n/a 21 n/a 19 n/a 20 52 31 77 25 29 157 158
Tacoma Public Schools n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 37 35 20 92
Total 22 49 31 39 41 129 159 78 548
Source: Data received from sites as of June 30, 2016
Demographic data on RWT participants in 2015-2016 indicates that the programs are successfully recruiting, through their targeted strategies, a diversity of students, including underrepresented, multicultural, and multilingual students (see Table 4). 6|Page
First generation The majority of RWT participants at Burlington-Edison (84%), Tacoma (75%), and Renton (3 out of 4), and almost half at Mount Vernon (48%) represent the first generation in their family that will attend college, with 68% overall. Home language Students hailing from homes in which a language other than English is spoken accounted for all of the participants at Burlington-Edison (100%) and the majority at Mount Vernon (83%), Renton (3 out of 4), and Tacoma (60%), with 82% overall. Race/ethnicity While the racial/ethnic composition of the participant groups varied from site to site, students of color were consistently the majority, accounting for 100% of participants at Burlington-Edison, three out of four participants at Renton, 70% at Tacoma, 59% at Mount Vernon, and 76% overall. Figure 1 shows the gaps between RWT students, the general student body, and teachers in the percentage who were people of color at each of the sites and statewide. Targeted recruitment of racially diverse students was especially successful at two of the sites, where the percentage of participants who were students of color was higher among RWT than among the general student body (100% vs. 47% at Burlington-Edison and 70% vs. 59% at Tacoma). FIGURE 1. PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE OF COLOR IN THE 2015-16 SCHOOL POPULATION BY GRANTEE AND SUBGROUP 100%
100% 80%
76%
75% 73%
70% 59% 61%
60%
59%
47%
44%
40% 20%
19%
18% 7%
10%
9%
0% Renton
Burlington-Edison RWT Students
Mount Vernon Student Body
Tacoma
Statewide
Teachers
Source: OSPI Washington State Report Card and data received from RWT sites as of June 30, 2016
Gender On the other hand, the underrepresentation of males, who account for only 14% of RWT participants overall, is worse than that observed in Washington’s current teacher workforce, which is 26% male. This indicates that RWT programs need to develop and implement more effective strategies for recruiting males.
7|Page
TABLE 4. RWT STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS FOR 2015-2016 BY GRANTEE RWT Student Demographics for 2015 – 2016 Race/ethnicity African American Asian American Hispanic/Latino Native American White, non-Hispanic Multi-Ethnic Gender Female Male Home Language Speak home language other than English Family College History Student will be first generation in college One or more parent(s)/guardian(s) attended some college One or more parent(s)/guardian(s) graduated from college Cohort New (first year in RWT) Returning Grade level Junior Senior
Renton (N=4) n
Grantee Burl.-Ed. Mt. Vernon (N=25) (N=29) % %
Tacoma (N=20) %
Total (N=78) %
1 1 0 0 1 1
0% 0% 92% 0% 0% 8%
0% 3% 55% 0% 41% 0%
10% 15% 35% 0% 30% 10%
4% 6% 59% 0% 24% 6%
3 1
88% 12%
83% 17%
90% 10%
86% 14%
3
100%
83%
60%
82%
3
84%
48%
75%
68%
1
12%
38%
15%
23%
0
4%
14%
10%
9%
3 1
72% 28%
90% 10%
75% 25%
79% 21%
1 3
56% 44%
17% 83%
10% 90%
28% 72%
Source: Data received from sites as of June 30, 2016
8|Page
Participation Details Recruitment methods The RWT teacher is the biggest sources of recruitment for the program, with the majority of RWT survey respondents (57%) reporting that they learned about RWT directly from the teacher. Word of mouth from other others was also common: a notable percentage of RWT survey respondents reported learning about RWT from a friend, classmate, and/or teammate (33%), from a family member (24%), from a school counselor (22%), and/or from another teacher (19%). Other forms of recruitment, including print and web materials, announcements, and recruitment events, were far less common. RWT staff and students discussed some of the challenges with recruitment during our spring 2016 site visits. They noted that it can be hard to get students interested in exploring teaching as a career option due to the public perception of teachers not making a livable wage and family pressure to go into a higher status, higher paying career field. In addition, scheduling challenges can serve as an obstacle to recruitment; some sites reported difficulty fitting the RWT course into students’ schedules given the 24credit graduation requirements and competition with other college preparatory courses like Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate. Overall satisfaction with experience RWT survey results show overwhelmingly high satisfaction with the program among students (see Table 5). About three-quarters (74%) described their overall experience as “very good,” with about another quarter (24%) describing it as “good.” Satisfaction was highest among participants at Tacoma, with 88% reporting a “very good” experience.
“Life changing” – Tacoma RWT Student’s one-word description of RWT, Spring 2016
TABLE 5. OVERALL EXPERIENCE How would you describe your overall experience in the Teacher Academy program? Very good Good Fair Poor Very poor
Renton (N=3) n 1 2 0 0 0
Grantee Burl.-Ed. Mt. Vernon (N=25) (N=17) % % 76% 65% 24% 35% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Tacoma (N=17) % 88% 6% 6% 0% 0%
Total (N=62) % 74% 24% 2% 0% 0%
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
9|Page
Challenges Students Face RWT survey respondents were presented with a list of potential challenges and asked to indicate the extent to which each one had been a challenge for them personally during this school year. The response scale included five options ranging from “not at all” to “a great deal.” Table 6 presents the results with the lower two and upper two options combined for ease of interpretation. Unsurprisingly, the results show that financial challenges are the most predominant and serious for RWT students. The vast majority (89%) indicated that they had faced financial challenges to at least a moderate extent, with over half (53%) being challenged “quite a bit” or “a great deal” by financial concerns.
It’s more the financial things that could change our paths because we don’t have a certain future from a financial standpoint. If someone were to say, ‘I’m going to pay for your career, but you have to come back,’ I’d say, ‘Where do I sign?!’ – BurlingtonEdison RWT Student, Spring 2016 The personal challenge is just getting to college and knowing how to pay for it since I know I’m definitely going to college because I really want to be a teacher. – Tacoma RWT Student, Spring 2016
About three-quarters of RWT students (74%) reported being at least moderately challenged by time management, with 31% describing it as a serious challenge, affecting them “quite a bit” or “a great deal.” In addition, two-thirds (66%) reported being at least moderately challenged by application hurdles, with 38% finding the process of applying for college and financial aid to be a serious challenge. The remaining challenges were less likely to be seen as serious, with smaller but notable proportions feeling challenged “quite a bit” or “a great deal” by academics (28%), ambivalence about what direction to take in career/life (26%), family/home challenges (21%), health issues (15%), and social challenges (13%). These survey results are consistent with findings from focus groups and interviews conducted with RWT students and staff during our site visits over the years. RWT staff identified poverty, family hardships, and trauma as barriers that are hard for some students to overcome. Likewise, former RWT high school students cited financial and life stressors as primary reasons for not persisting in college or pursuing a career in teaching. Some other challenges for RWT students include the high school and teacher preparation graduation requirements, as well as student life and educational transitions.
Students who live independently from their parents may want to attend college, but the hardships and the realities of being 18 years old and unsupported by a parent are often so overwhelming that they struggle to stay in high school, much less have the grades, finances, and determination to get into and stay in college. – Renton HS staff, 2014
10 | P a g e
TABLE 6. CHALLENGES STUDENTS F ACE Below is a list of challenges that could potentially make it harder for students to achieve their academic and career goals. Please indicate the extent to which each one has been a challenge for you personally during this school year. Total N = 61 Not at all Quite a bit or Moderately or Potential challenge Slightly A great deal Financial challenges For example: Concerns about how to pay for college, how to financially support self and/or loved ones while in college
11%
36%
53%
34%
28%
38%
26%
43%
31%
46%
26%
28%
45%
30%
26%
67%
11%
21%
67%
18%
15%
61%
26%
13%
Application hurdles For example: Feeling overwhelmed by, or unsure about, the process of applying for college and financial aid
Time management For example: Challenges with balancing and managing time, schedules, roles, and priorities
Academic challenges For example: Difficulty meeting high school graduation requirements and/or college entry requirements, concerns about how academically challenging college will be
Ambivalence For example: Uncertainty about what direction to take in career/life
Family/Home challenges For example: Lack of support from family members, family obligations/expectations, challenging home life, unstable living situation, etc.
Health issues For example: Physical, mental, and/or emotional health issues of self or loved ones
Social challenges For example: Lack of support from friends/peers, lack of role models and mentors, anxiety about the social environment and fitting in at college Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
11 | P a g e
Supports Program components RWT survey respondents were presented with a list of program components and asked to indicate the extent to which each one had helped support them in achieving their academic and career goals. The response scale included five options ranging from “not at all” to “a great deal.” Table 7 presents the results with the lower two and upper two options combined for ease of interpretation. The highest rated program component was the classroom field experience, which typically consists of the RWT students engaged in tutoring and teaching opportunities with younger students at feeder schools. RWT survey respondents reported participating in 2 to 6 hours of classroom experience per week over the course of the school year, with an average of about 4 hours per week. When asked how much this experience had supported them in achieving their academic and career goals, 90% of RWT survey respondents indicated “quite a bit” or “a great deal.” This finding is consistent with feedback collected from RWT students and staff who participated in focus groups during our spring site visits. They cited meaningful field experiences with younger students that are regularly debriefed with their teachers as essential to their engagement and learning about the teaching profession.
You’re not just getting that talk about [how] it’s great being a teacher. We’re actually experiencing it. Over there [at the elementary school], they actually call me Ms. X. I like working around kids and how they come over and try hugging me really tight. It’s really cool. I like it. I can see myself actually teaching kids one day. – BurlingtonEdison RWT Student, Spring 2016 It’s something that they take seriously, [and] that says a lot for the program. Students aren’t taking the class just to take it, they feel that they’re accountable not just to here, but to someone else. It changes their whole mindset. – Burlington-Edison Higher Education Partner, Spring 2016
The next highest rated program component was one-on-one advising with the Teacher Academy teacher, followed closely by the course itself. The percentage of survey respondents reporting that these components supported them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” was 79% and 75%, respectively. Some RWT programs host a Summer Institute or other activities over the summer; however, survey results suggest that participation was fairly minimal in the summer of 2015. While all respondents from Renton reported participating in summer activities, respondents from the larger programs were less likely to participate, including only 12% of respondents at Mt. Vernon, 29% at Tacoma, and 32% at Burlington-Edison, with an overall participation rate of 29% across the sites. Among the survey respondents who had participated in summer activities, 59% reported that these activities had supported them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” in achieving their academic and career goals.
12 | P a g e
Most of these kids have not had the opportunity to go onto a college campus. [The Summer Academy] is a motivator and great way to get things started. – Renton RWT Staff, Spring 2016 Summer Academy was really fun. It was my first time on a college campus. You kind of have to be there to want to go there. Central was really important and a great aspect of the program. Being at highline too. – Renton RWT Student, Spring 2016
Finally, 58% of RWT survey respondents reported that the college campus visits helped support them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” in achieving their academic and career goals.
I was first generation college student. I’d never had a college experience and couldn’t reflect on my parents’ experience for that. So one thing that was great about the program was having the college visits and university partners, like [faculty] at Highline, having that connection. So when I first graduated from the program and not knowing where I was going. I didn’t feel accomplishment at [my first college], and [my RWT teacher] was able to connect me with [faculty at Highline] and she helped me map out my plan, and [the new RWT teacher] was brought into it, and they gave me more resources about Central. I felt like the support was there for me to be successful. – Renton RWT Alumnus, Spring 2016
TABLE 7. PROGRAM COMPONENTS To what extent have the following Teacher Academy program components helped support you in achieving your academic and career goals? Total N = 59* Not at all Quite a bit or Moderately or Program component Slightly A great deal Classroom field experience/ practicum
4%
7%
90%
6%
14%
79%
The course itself (curriculum, content)
8%
17%
75%
Summer Academy
12%
29%
59%
College campus visits
19%
24%
58%
Advising (working one-on-one with the Teacher Academy teacher to discuss your goals and how to achieve them)
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016 *N = 17 for the Summer Academy program component, since this was not applicable for the other respondents
13 | P a g e
People support In addition to asking about support provided by the RWT program components, the survey also asked students to indicate the extent to which various people had helped support them in achieving their academic and career goals. The response scale included five options ranging from “not at all” to “a great deal.” Table 8 presents the results with the lower two and upper two options combined for ease of interpretation. Survey results show the Teacher Academy teacher as the highest rated support person overall, with over three-quarters of RWT respondents (77%) indicating that their RWT teacher had helped support them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” in achieving their academic and career goals. This compares to 58% of survey respondents who reported that high level of support from their own family members, followed by 57% for the field placement mentor teacher, 49% for Teacher Academy classmates, 47% for friends, 44% for school guidance counselor, and 36% for other school personnel. TABLE 8. PEOPLE SUPPORT To what extent have the following people helped support you in achieving your academic and career goals? Total N = 55-59 Not at all Quite a bit or Moderately or People Slightly A great deal The Teacher Academy teacher 5% 19% 77% Family members 12% 31% 58% Your field placement mentor teacher 23% 21% 57% Teacher Academy classmates 14% 37% 49% Friends 16% 36% 47% Your school guidance counselor/ advisor 32% 24% 44% Other school personnel 35% 29% 36% Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
Postsecondary support RWT alumni who participated in our focus groups and interviews reported feeling a reduction of support (e.g., advising, community building, etc.) once they are enrolled in college. This is unsurprising given that the RWT program components are focused at the high school level. Nonetheless, RWT programs may want to consider whether they can do more to support their alumni, especially with the support of their higher education partners.
Achievement of Program Outcomes As the survey results in Table 9 show, most students reported that their participation in RWT had helped them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” when it came to learning how to teach children (90%), serving as a role model to younger students (88%), and learning about the teaching profession (83%). In addition, about three-quarters of RWT respondents indicated that their RWT participation had helped them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” with developing leadership skills (75%), doing well in school (72%), preparing for college (71%), and coming to see their culture, language, and identity as assets that will help them in school and in life (70%). 14 | P a g e
TABLE 9. OUTCOMES Total N = 57-58 To what extent has your participation in the Teacher Academy helped you… Learn how to teach children Serve as a role model to younger students Learn about the teaching profession Develop leadership skills Do well in school Prepare for college Come to see your culture, language, and identity as assets that will help you in school and in life Learn how to apply for financial aid and scholarships Learn how to apply to college
Not at all or Slightly 2% 2% 3% 0% 5% 9%
9% 10% 14% 24% 22% 21%
Quite a bit or A great deal 90% 88% 83% 75% 72% 71%
11%
19%
70%
25% 22%
21% 26%
55% 52%
Moderately
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
On the other hand, only about half of the survey respondents reported that their RWT participation had helped them “quite a bit” or “a great deal” when it came to learning how to apply for financial aid and scholarships (55%) and learning how to apply for college (52%). The lower endorsement of these outcomes could be due to the fact that RWT teachers oftentimes rely on other college preparatory resources at their sites (e.g., AVID, Upward Bound, career center) to provide the majority of this guidance. Nevertheless, college access is a main focus of the RWT curriculum, and it is important for programs to determine that their students’ needs in this area are being met. For instance, Tacoma has taken the following approach to balancing the support provided by RWT and other existing resources:
This year I figured out all the college support programs in the school, gave my students a survey to see where they were connected, where they were getting outside help. The majority are connected with another program, so I don’t have to reinvent the wheel. They are getting support, I can check in with them, but I’m not having to create this brand new huge curriculum with that piece. It’s more about me educating myself about my individual students’ needs.” – Tacoma RWT Teacher, Spring 2016
Some additional themes about the impacts of RWT emerged from the feedback we have collected from RWT staff and students through our site visits over the years. Their comments suggest that RWT has a positive impact on students’ learning, identity, and efficacy. Students report they are breaking down stereotypes and changing views of some high school educators and even their own view of themselves through participation in RWT.
15 | P a g e
It turned out to be an incredible program that changed my whole high school experience. I didn’t think that this class was going to teach me so much about myself and where I come from… I did not expect to learn so much about my culture and my identity. – Burlington-Edison RWT Student, 2013.
The process of learning how to teach others and of being a role model to younger students seems to offer insight into high school student’s own learning and educational success.
I didn’t consider myself a role model before this class. I didn’t know how to open up to people and didn’t have the potential to help others. Now I have learned what leadership is and have seen that to help little by little can make a difference that changes people’s lives…Now knowing that they are looking up to me, that changes the way I think about myself; now I have to be a good role model more than ever before. – Burlington-Edison RWT Student, 2013.
Another theme that emerged was the impact of RWT on helping students to develop skills in networking and in advocating for themselves:
The advantage with [RWT] is that they know names of people they can go to for ideas. Let’s say you head down a pathway and are not happy with it or school doesn’t feel the right fit or you changed your mind about your major. You now know names with real people who are invested in helping you find the right fit. So they kind of know, but it’s almost like you don’t know what you don’t know. Then when you’re in the situation, having a phone call and a person is so helpful. If they were to go to Highline, they know where the office is to go to if they don’t have money and their financial aid forms are confusing because we talked about it and walked to the office and met the guy. Central does a good job of passing out their cards when we visit. – Renton RWT Teacher, Spring 2016 I don’t really like to talk, but I realized this year that you do need to find a person and build that connection. Maybe not everything will help you, but they have certain key things that they know that you should take hold of. So just building a connection and knowing how to use that connection to get where you want to be. – Tacoma RWT Student, Spring 2016
16 | P a g e
Likewise, RWT students and staff discussed how the program helps students to develop leadership skills, and in particular, confidence in communicating:
It also gives you leadership skills, communication skills. I wasn’t a really talkative person; I didn’t talk as much. [RWT] really changed my point of view and how I was acting at the beginning of school. I felt like I had to do more for myself and be more open and communicating, and this program really helped me with that. – BurlingtonEdison RWT Student, Spring 2016 I’m always impressed with your students’ ability to communicate with adults in clear ways. That’s a leadership skill, to have confidence, especially as English Language Learners. – Burlington-Edison Higher Education Partner, Spring 2016
Through a qualitative case study of the Burlington-Edison Latinos in Action (LIA) program, Timmons Flores, Chu, and Sampson (2012) observed the following positive outcomes:
Students developed academic success skills and achieved positive academic and social outcomes Students persisted in overcoming considerable barriers to high school attendance and RWT program participation Students experienced transformative shifts in their own view of themselves as learners and as possible future teachers and/or leaders
High school graduation rates Over the years, RWT seniors have achieved high rates of on-time graduation (see Table 10). Grantees reported that their RWT participants graduate on time from high school at rates previously unheard of for students of comparable backgrounds in their districts. This year all four sites saw 100% of their RWT seniors graduate on time1. These findings provide promising evidence that the RWT program has a positive impact on participants’ success in completing high school. However, another potential factor that may contribute to these positive results is the possibility that students who are more likely to succeed are the ones who decide to participate in RWT. It is impossible to separate the portion of impact that should be attributed to the program itself from the portion of impact that is due to the characteristics of the students who choose to participate (i.e., selection bias) without a well-matched comparison group (or other strong quasiexperimental evaluation design).
1
Although senior year graduation rates are not available at the district level for comparison, the four-year graduation rates for the Class of 2015 provide a convenient benchmark: 69% for Mount Vernon, 76% for Burlington-Edison, 79% for Renton, and 83% for Tacoma (OSPI WA State Report Card, 2016).
17 | P a g e
TABLE 10. PERCENTAGE OF RWT SENIORS WHO GRADUATED HIGH SCHOOL ON TIME BY YEAR AND GRANTEE
Year 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015 2015 - 2016
Renton School District 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Grantee Burlington-Ed. Mount Vernon School District School District n/a n/a 100% n/a 89% n/a 80% n/a 100% n/a 100% 94% 76%a 89% 100% 100%
Tacoma Public Schools n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 100% 95% 100%
Source: Data received from sites annually a The remaining 24% plan to graduate in Spring 2016 due to family moves, a health crisis, and math remediation.
College readiness Overall, RWT students are achieving high rates of success on indicators of college readiness (see Table 11). Academic progress was observed across the sites, with grantees reporting that 82% of RWT participants improved their cumulative grade point average over the course of the year (between June 2015 and June 2016). Nearly all RWT participants had taken a college placement test (97%), and nearly all RWT seniors had applied (98%) and been accepted (98%) to college. In addition, about two-thirds of the RWT seniors (64%) had earned scholarships. On the other hand, results suggest that attendance is one area for improvement. The percentage of participants who attended at least 95% of RWT class sessions ranged from a low of 55% at Tacoma to a high of 90% at Mount Vernon, with a total of 73% across the sites. Grantees should consider what they can do to improve class attendance in order to maximize the RWT program’s impact. TABLE 11. COLLEGE READINESS INDICATORS FOR 2015-2016 RWT COHORT BY GRANTEE
Students (juniors and seniors) who… Attended at least 95% of RWT class sessions Improved their cumulative GPA from June 2015 to June 2016 Took a college placement test
Students (seniors) who… Earned scholarship(s) Applied to college Accepted to college
Renton (N=4) n
Grantee Burl.-Ed. Mt. Vernon (N=25) (N=29) % %
Tacoma (N=20) %
Total (N=78) %
3
68%
90%
55%
73%
1
100%
100%
45%
82%
4 Renton (N=3) n 1 2a 2
100% Burl.-Ed. (N=11) % 82% 100% 100%
93% Mt. Vernon (N=24) % 63% 100% 100%
100% Tacoma (N=18) % 61% 100% 100%
97% Total (N=56) % 64% 98% 98%
Source: Data received from sites as of June 30, 2016 a The other senior has decided to take a gap year to work full-time to save for college.
18 | P a g e
College and career outlook Survey results suggest that RWT participants entered the program with already high intentions of going to college; nonetheless, participating in RWT over the course of the school year helped to strengthen these intentions for many. Figure 2 shows that nearly all respondents (97%) were already considering going to college, but the percentage who considered college as the only option for after high school, versus one of multiple options being considered, increased from 79% to 86% over the course of the school year participating in RWT. In addition, the vast majority of RWT respondents (81%) reported that their participation in RWT had strengthened their plans to attend college (see Table 12). FIGURE 2. COLLEGE PLANS Percentage of students planning to go to college, prior to joining the Teacher Academy vs. currently 100% 17%
10%
80%
Maybe (college one of multiple options being considered for after HS)
60%
40%
79%
86%
Yes (college the only option being considered for after HS)
20%
0% Prior
Current
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
TABLE 12. INFLUENCE OF TEACHER ACADEMY ON COLLEGE PLANS How, if at all, has your participation in the Teacher Academy influenced your plans to attend college? It has not influenced my plans to attend college. It has strengthened my plans to attend college. It has weakened my plans to attend college. Other
Total (N=58) 19% 81% 0% 0%
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
Likewise, the majority of RWT participants (85%) indicated they were already considering a career in teaching prior to joining the RWT program, and the same percentage (85%) expressed current interest at the time of our spring survey. Nevertheless, the percentage of students who indicated teaching as their only career under consideration, versus one of multiple career options, grew substantially from 28% to 40% over the course of the school year participating in RWT (see Figure 3). In addition, about 19 | P a g e
three-quarters of the RWT respondents (76%) reported that their participation in RWT had increased their interest in a teaching career (see Table 13). FIGURE 3. CAREER PLANS Percentage of students considering a teaching career, prior to joining the Teacher Academy vs. currently 100%
80%
60%
45% 57%
Maybe (teaching one of multiple careers being considered) Yes (teaching the only career being considered)
40%
20%
40% 28%
0% Prior
Current
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
TABLE 13. INFLUENCE OF TEACHER ACADEMY ON INTEREST IN TEACHING CAREER How, if at all, has your participation in the Teacher Academy influenced your interest in a teaching career? It has not influenced my interest in teaching. It has increased my interest in teaching. It has decreased my interest in teaching. Other
Total (N=58) 16% 76% 3% 5%
Source: RWT Student Survey, Spring 2016
The students get so happy when they see you. When I do lessons or something, they are so attentive and do whatever I want, try to engage with you and make a connection. Seeing those students who are having problems confide in you. I wonder about teachers who’ve been doing this for years and their students come back and say their life changed because of you. That makes me wonder about teaching. – Renton RWT Student, Spring 2016
20 | P a g e
A couple students reported that RWT had actually decreased their interest in teaching as they learned more about what the profession entails, including the workload and obstacles. While contrary to the overarching aim of RWT to grow future teachers, this should be considered a success in its own right, as the RWT program is geared at exploration and helping students determine whether the teaching profession is right for them. The program is successful in helping to clarify participants’ career aspirations, whatever they may be. Oftentimes those who expressed uncertainty about teaching were interested in other roles in the school setting and intend to serve as advocates for education regardless of their career.
This class has taught me that it’s important to be a teacher, but also [the importance of] being an advocate for education whether or not I go on to be a teacher…I feel like an advocate for education, and that’s still important whether or not you become a teacher.” – Renton RWT Student, Spring 2016 Now with [RWT] being in the building, I just know that I need to be in a school building, I don’t see myself anywhere else. I have some days where I want to be a psychologist, others where I want to be a teacher, either one I am going to choose. I know for sure now I want to be in an elementary school. – Tacoma RWT Student, Spring 2016
Postsecondary outcomes The RWT programs have faced obstacles in tracking participants after they graduate from high school, and the data that have been provided by the grantees to date have been incomplete and inconsistent. RWT teachers typically keep in touch with only a handful of their program alumni as they continue along their postsecondary journeys. During our interviews, RWT teachers anecdotally reported that many of the RWT alumni with family responsibilities and lower incomes were attending college part time and taking time off school due to the need to work. Furthermore, approximately half of the program alumni who had stayed in touch were choosing to go into fields other than teaching. Their goals for career and life remained ambitious, but tended to expand to a variety of career options as they entered college. Plans are in the works to strengthen this component of the evaluation by contracting an external evaluator to track the outcomes of RWT participants across the pipeline from high school through postsecondary and onto their careers (see Future Directions on page 26).
21 | P a g e
Key Features This section presents key findings across programs based on the analysis of qualitative data collected from 2007 to 2016. A number of features have been identified as key to the program’s success. Partnerships among high schools, community organizations, community colleges, and universities are foundational to designing an RWT program that is right for the local community. Effective partnerships require the following: • •
Advisory and internal teams consisting of a diverse group of education professionals and community members A common vision of “growing our own future teachers” A commitment to work through the considerable challenges Support for the program teacher-coordinator
Program staff reported increasing their recruitment of diverse students through the use of course readings and classroom/community experiences that affirm language, culture, and identity as personal and professional assets. Participating students and program coordinators cite the following program components as helpful in supporting persistence from high school to college acceptance: academic support, a focus on student success skills, engagement in future teacher education, and tutoring and leadership activities. Providing students with ongoing advising by a key program coordinator and other high school and college advisors is central to how the program promotes student success. A theme that emerged from RWT student comments was receiving encouragement from adults pushing them to achieve their potential.
I have learned that there is help for us if we need it, and that we are not alone in our path to accomplish our dreams. There are people out there wanting to help us to get where we want to go. –Burlington-Edison RWT Student, 2013. It helps the seniors a whole lot to be a step ahead. Having people come visit helps us look at what we’re going to do after high school. People coming over and talking to us gives us an extra push. – Burlington-Edison RWT Student, Spring 2016 Every students need a mentor of some sort to get you on that path; an adult besides your parents needs to help push you toward that path. – Tacoma RWT Student, Spring 2016
RWT staff and students discussed how the program provides a supportive cohort experience of peers, teachers, and college faculty, placing value on the relational aspects of bonding and establishing a family environment.
22 | P a g e
My big take-away is that it’s a program, and the more you open it up for other people [e.g., guest speakers, program allies] to come in, the better the quality it gets. Everyone involved is considered part of the family environment. The way to do that right in a cohort model. – Burlington-Edison RWT Teacher, Spring 2016 It’s more than just a classroom. The trips we take, everyone bonds with each other; that makes it different. – Burlington-Edison RWT Student, Spring 2016 I kind of like this feeling…like we’re a clique, we’re the Renton crew. Having a sense of that family that we were talking about that you can rely back on. – Renton RWT Student, Spring 2016
When asked what is the key ingredient or secret to the program’s success, RWT students consistently cited the important role of having an outstanding teacher lead the program.
You really have to have the one teacher that connects…there has to be that connection because some teachers just work and teach for the sake of teaching but they don’t connect with the students. – Burlington-Edison RWT Student, Spring 2016 Having encouraging teachers who really want you there and get involved with you. – Mount Vernon RWT Student, Spring 2016 She’s on us, a teacher that’s always going to be on you and not let it slide. Also if something is going wrong or not capable, she’s always there to tell you it’s going to be fine and there is a team behind your back no matter what, and taking the time to make sure we match with the teacher we are matched with to make this experience the best to us. That’s why she’s our secret sauce. – Renton RWT Student, Spring 2016
Through a qualitative case study of the Burlington-Edison Latinos in Action (LIA) program, Timmons Flores, Chu, and Sampson (2012) identified the following features as key to the success of the program:
Focused on providing a diverse group of frequently marginalized high school students with carefully developed experiences upon which to build the next steps of a college pathway Sought to understand the challenges faced by students and provided support for actively addressing them Viewed language and cultural diversity as assets in future teaching careers Developed strong, positive academic and social relationships between program coordinators, mentor teachers, and RWT peers Provided support for language development needed for academic success (i.e., “academic language”) with connections to tutoring resources 23 | P a g e
Programmatic Lessons Programmatic challenges Two major challenges that RWT programs have faced include the turnover of key program staff and inadequate financial resources. When faced with both of these challenges at the same time, it is difficult for programs to be sustained. This was observed in 2011-2012 when funding levels dipped. Programs with well-established coordinating staff and administrators were able to weather the negative impact of decreased funding and continue to achieve positive outcomes. In contrast, programs that experienced staff turnover in addition to the decreased funding produced markedly different activities and outcomes, with the programs ultimately choosing to conclude. Another programmatic challenge has been the inadequate support for the teacher-coordinator. The complex RWT program structure adds considerable teaching and program management duties, requiring more planning time and resources than currently provided. Practical lessons for implementation Lessons learned from the two longest running programs – Renton and Burlington-Edison – provide some guidance for the implementation of future RWT programs. Lessons for high schools:
Choose a teacher with community/cultural knowledge as well as education background to serve as the RWT teacher-coordinator. Focus on one or two high schools. Coordination is challenging for programs with wide geographic areas and multiple high school sites. Use existing successful high school programs/assets and build on them with RWT goals. Use the broader resources of the school district to integrate the program into the school, with a careful focus on general high school success, preparation for college, and experiential exploration of a career in education.
Lessons for higher education partners:
Students need strong advising, sense of community, and financial support to persist in the first two years of college. Mentoring is especially important in order to problem solve financial, life, and academic issues. Financial aid is key to completion of college, and college scholarships help keep students’ vision for a teaching career alive. Involve teacher-education faculty and students with the RWT high school students in academic year and summer programs. Advise high schools on course approaches that align with teacher preparation programs and teacher certification requirements. Give frequent and timely advising information that does not overwhelm students. Involve families and provide translation of materials. Track the progress of RWT students.
24 | P a g e
Future Directions Grantee Sites The four current grantee sites have been awarded funding to continue operating their RWT pilot programs for the 2016-2017 academic year. Renton is planning to expand from offering RWT at one high school to offering it all three of the district’s comprehensive high schools. Burlington-Edison is planning to add additional sections in response to demand for the RWT program. Tacoma will continue offering one section of RWT at two high schools, and Mount Vernon will continue with one section at one high school, but with a new lead teacher.
Redesign Work Group Over the years, RWT programs have achieved great success. However, the impact of the program has been limited by its small scale and by areas in which the program and broader system of educator pathways could be improved. Given the need for strengthening our grow-our-own programs as a key strategy for addressing the teacher shortage crisis, and piggybacking on the momentum of the new RWT-based curriculum for Careers in Education courses statewide, the PESB determined the time was right for a redesign work group to help build on the success of the RWT program and bring it to scale. The PESB convened over 30 individuals representing a wide range of stakeholder groups, including school districts, institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, education associations, program staff and alumni, and others. Over the course of 6 meetings between January and May of 2016, the work group was charged with combining their stakeholder input with lessons learned from the program history and other research to:
Redesign the RWT program, building on strengths and addressing weakness, to increase its impact Identify scalable components and best practices to expand the impact of RWT beyond the grantfunded sites to statewide Make programmatic, policy, and funding recommendations
Some of the key recommendations proposed by the work group include the following:
Create a professional develop initiative to support existing and new teacher academies Establish a conditional scholarship program for RWT alumni enrolling in teacher preparation programs Create a position for regional connector staff to connect students with resources and assist them with navigating transition points throughout their pathway to a teaching career Launch an online portal to help students stay connected throughout their pathway and to serve as a medium for teachers to interact and share curricular resources
For more information about these and other recommendations, see the RWT Work Group Recommendations Summary posted online. These recommendations are being incorporated into a decision package that will be presented to the governor for future legislation. The PESB is also making progress towards realizing some of these recommendations through the grow-your-own teacher initiative described below.
25 | P a g e
Transition to Statewide Curriculum In 2014, the Washington State Legislature, through a special proviso in the supplemental operating budget (ESSB 6002, Sec.501(1)(d)(iv)), charged the PESB with revising the model framework and curriculum for high school Careers in Education (CIE)/Career and Technical Education (CTE) courses to incorporate standards of cultural competence, new research on educator preparation, and curriculum and activities from the Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT) program. This work resulted in the Recruiting Washington Teachers into Careers in Education: Program, Framework and Curriculum Guide, published June 30, 2015. The guide includes a curriculum for the CIE course documented through the summary and evaluation of the best practices noted in the pilot RWT program, with clear strategies for how to scale up the effectiveness of the pilot program to all CIE classes around the state. The curriculum is culturally anchored, aligned with current teacher standards, and supports a pipeline for future teachers. In addition, the curriculum includes a framework of equity pedagogy with resources, activities, and strategies for recruitment and development of partnerships to support a diverse student body of future teachers. The revised curriculum and framework are designed to support teacher academy instructors in drawing students from varied and diverse groups within the school into the course or program, linking to and embedding academic advising and college access information into their courses, demonstrating appropriate and current knowledge and skills about a career in education, and conveying a passion to be a role model for future teachers who will work to eliminate the opportunity gap. Anecdotally, we have heard that transitioning to the new curriculum has proved to be a challenge for teachers. When asked for feedback during our latest round of site visits, RWT teachers reported that they have been picking and choosing elements to incorporate into their instruction, rather than fully transitioning over. They reported seeing the value and potential of the curriculum, but indicated a need for professional development (especially breaking it down unit by unit) and desire for more “boots on the ground” pieces. In order to support the statewide adoption of the new curriculum, and with grant support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, PESB has contracted the Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession to develop the needed professional development and communications plan. This work sits within a broader grow-your-own teacher initiative, as described below.
Statewide Scale-Up as Part of Broader Grow-Your-Own Teacher Initiative Building upon the new RWT-based CIE curriculum and the recommendations from the RWT Redesign Work Group, the PESB is now launching a Grow-Your-Own (GYO) initiative including the following interconnected components:
Professional development supporting new and existing teacher academies and the statewide adoption of the new curriculum Online platform serving as a hub for teachers to interact and share curricular resources and for students to stay connected throughout their pathway to a teaching career Data system connecting programmatic, secondary, post-secondary, and educator employment data to evaluate the success of Washington State’s GYO initiatives
26 | P a g e
References AGOAC. (2010). Closing opportunity gaps in Washington’s public education system. Olympia, WA: Achievement Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee. http://www.k12.wa.us/Workgroups/EOGOAC/pubdocs/ClosingOpportunityGapsinWashingtonspubliced systemjan2010.pdf ED. (2015). Higher Education Act Title II State Report Card System. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. https://title2.ed.gov/Public/Home.aspx Goldhaber, D., Theobald, R., & Tien, C. (2015). The theoretical and empirical arguments for diversifying the teacher workforce: A review of the evidence. Seattle, WA: Center for Education Data & Research. http://m.cedr.us/papers/working/CEDR%20WP%202015-9.pdf OSPI. (2016). Washington State Report Card. Olympia, WA: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary.aspx?groupLevel=District&schoolId=1&reportLevel=State&yr s=2015-16&year=2015-16 PESB. (2016). PESB annual report on educator preparation and workforce. Olympia, WA: Professional Educator Standards Board. http://data.pesb.wa.gov/ Peterson, P. & Nadle, D. (2009). What happens when states have genuine alternative certification? We get more minority teachers and test scores rise. Education Next, Winter, 70-74. http://educationnext.org/files/ednext_20091_70.pdf Podolsky, A., Kini, T., Bishop, J., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2016). Solving the teacher shortage: How to attract and retain excellent educators. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/productfiles/Solving_Teacher_Shortage_Attract_Retain_Educators_REPORT.pdf Putnam, H., Hansen, M., Walsh, K., & Quintero, D. (2016). High hopes and harsh realities: The real challenges to building a diverse workforce. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2016/08/browncenter_20160818_teacherdiversityreportpr_hansen.pdf Timmons Flores, M., Chu, M., & Sampson, M. (2012). Latinos in Action: Cultivating academics, access, equity, and future bilingual educators. The Northwest Passage, 10(1), 24-35. https://nwate.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/northwest-passage-spring-2012.pdf Villegas, A. M., & Irvine, J. J. (2010). Diversifying the teaching force: An examination of major arguments. Urban Review, 42, 175-192. 27 | P a g e
Appendix: Special Issue Report Examining the potential and challenges of a Recruiting Washington Teachers partnership model Each year, the PESB commissions the RWT research collaborators to write reports on special issues. This year’s report, written by Eric Hougan of Central Washington University, highlights some key lessons learned from Renton’s RWT partnership model.
Introduction It’s all about relationships! – Carla Smith, the Renton Teacher Academy coordinator, reflecting on key lessons learned about her grow-your-own partnership model (August 4, 2016)
The shortage of teachers is a serious issue facing schools across the country and is prompting governmental and school officials to take action. Washington State is no exception (PESB, 2015). One strategy receiving increased attention is establishing grow-your-own (GYO) teacher programs - a pipeline approach of encouraging and supporting high school students to pursue a career in education. Whereas the peer-reviewed research literature is shallow on best practices of GYO programs, WA State is fortunate to have evaluated and reported on several model GYO teacher programs for nearly a decade. These GYO programs were part of the Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT) grant, and from the evaluation reports, it is clear that each of the RWT GYO teacher programs has a unique story to tell. The stories consist of successes, challenges, and the contextual factors that contributed to each site’s model evolving differently. The RWT GYO stories also include the goals, hopes, and adaptations to meet the future needs of GYO students, program stakeholders, and the community. Indeed, key components and lessons learned can be gleaned from these sites’ stories. One key component shared across the RWT sites is the belief that relationships matter inside and outside the classroom. This report foregrounds one of the RWT grant sites, Renton Teacher Academy, describing their GYO teacher program and specifically highlighting their respective partnership models that is, the supportive network of education and community partners that push the program’s vision and work forward. The Renton Teacher Academy’s partnership model is visually represented, and special attention is paid to the affordances and constraints of this particular model. As such, this report presents this GYO program as a heuristic model to aid educational leaders interested in 1) expanding their GYO program or 2) starting a new GYO program. The Renton Teacher Academy story offers fertile ground to examine how a GYO program, that initially developed a strong partner network, responded with a pioneering approach when faced with formidable challenges to the program’s future. This report highlights a few key lessons learned from the Renton story:
28 | P a g e
Ensuring continuity of support from school administration during turnover and in the face of competing priorities (e.g., International Baccalaureate degree program); Reshaping the Renton Teacher Academy model by expanding the program district-wide; Strengthening the higher education partnership.
Data were collected from multiple sources to formulate and triangulate the report’s findings. I conducted RWT site visits in the 2015-16 school year, interviewed teacher academy coordinators, reviewed past evaluation reports, and drew from my experience. I have been involved with the RWT program for the past seven years in varying roles: as a former RWT site coordinator, researcher, university partner, and board member of the PESB advisory committee overseeing this work. These experiences have provided me insights that were useful in writing this report. One such insight was the importance of the partnership network in the success of student outcomes in GYO programs. For nine years, the RWT Collaborative Evaluation Team has put forth research reports on how to bolster the effectiveness of the GYO programs across the state. What is clear from these evaluation reports is that there are identified best practices across each Recruiting Washington Teacher site: a developed vision, comprehensive programming, and robust partnership networks (Hillis, 2015). In the 2014-15 Research Team Pathway Report, Dr. Hillis wrote, “the next important step [after vision setting] is to develop partners who will actually carry out the work of the program” (Chu, Timmons Flores, Hillis, Manuel, & Maxfield, 2015, p. 26). Dr. Hillis’s report outlines typical key stakeholders, their responsibilities, and the activities that occur within these partnership networks. This year’s report builds on Dr. Hillis’s work by examining the:
Renton’s RWT partnership network structure (visually represented) Contextual factors that influenced the various partnership structures Affordances and constraints of these partnership models
Defining Partnership Network In conceptualizing the RWT partnership model for this report, partners were grouped into the following categories: in-district, institutions of higher education, and community. For simplicity’s sake, below is a list of potential partners for each category, emphasizing the place or institution rather than the persons (actors) in each partnership. For richer detail on the actors within these partner locations, refer to Dr. Hillis’s 2014-15 Research Team Pathway Report (included in the RWT Program Year Update for 2014-15).
In-District This category may include, but is not limited to, (a) sites where the RWT programming occurs (e.g., the high schools), (b) district office that is responsible for directing resources, and (c) partner schools where RWT students conduct their practicum (typically elementary feeder schools).
Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) This category may include, but is not limited to, (a) community colleges and (b) colleges and universities.
Community This category may include, but is not limited to, (a) community-based organizations (e.g., UW’s Dream Project), (b) student organizations (e.g., Educators Rising), (c) students’ parents and family, and (d) other support partners.
29 | P a g e
Renton Teacher Academy’s District-Wide Partnership Model Starting in 2016-17, the Renton Teacher Academy (RTA) will shift from serving one comprehensive high school to being implemented district-wide. For the past few years, RTA has faced strong headwinds in operating and growing their RWT program at Renton High School. The enrollment numbers were being eroded namely from competing school priorities for resources, such as Renton High School’s strong focus on the International Baccalaureate (IB) degree program. Understandably, the IB degree program has taken root in many schools because evidence suggests the program better prepares students for postsecondary education (Coca, et al., 2012). Despite the best intentions of providing the IB program, scheduling became a challenge due to the potential crowding out of elective, non-IB courses, such as teacher academy courses. It is noteworthy that this unintended outcome of IB (and other advanced college-level preparatory courses, such as Advanced Placement and Running Start) is felt beyond Renton, such as in Maryland’s statewide teacher academy program (Hougan, 2016). The pressures to Renton’s RWT program were amplified with school administration turnover that resulted in the current administration having less buyin than the outgoing administration. This makes sense considering the outgoing administration had been an integral part of the program since its conception. The IN THE FACE OF ADMINISTRATIVE key lesson here is that, in the face of administrative TURNOVER, COMMUNICATING turnover, communicating what is a grow-your-own program, illustrating its impact, and describing the WHAT IS A GROW-YOUR-OWN administration’s role in support are crucial moves for PROGRAM, ILLUSTRATING ITS the continuity of the program. It is reasonable to IMPACT, AND DESCRIBING THE assert that having multiple network partners, especially the teacher academy coordinator and ADMINISTRATION’S ROLE IN district leaders, convey this information will lead to SUPPORT ARE CRUCIAL MOVES FOR increased buy-in from the incoming administration. THE CONTINUITY OF THE In response, RTA had to evolve. As a result, district leadership made the ambitious decision to expand RTA and have programming at all three comprehensive high schools. In addition, district leadership moved the RTA teacher coordinator position to full-time, providing additional time for planning, coordinating activities, building partnerships, strategizing, traveling to practicum sites, and much more. As a result of these recent changes and unique contextual factors, a new partnership model emerged for the 2016-17 school year. See Figure 4 below for a visual representation highlighting the connections existing within this partnership model.
30 | P a g e
FIGURE 4. VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE RTA PARTNERSHIP MODEL
Renton’s In-District Partnerships (represented as blue squares in Figure 4) Expanding the RTA program By having the central coordination of RTA activities (at the district office), RTA programming can be offered at each comprehensive high school. This approach is advantageous to the school district by enlarging the pipeline of potential teachers. At the same time, this emergent model comes with unique challenges. First, the coordination of the RTA program requires creative programming and scheduling since the RTA coordinator, Carla Smith, cannot be physically present on all three sites at the same time. To address this challenge, RTA students will engage in independent and personalized learning and will utilize technology to stay connected with the coordinator and their peers from other schools. Carla offered various ways technology could be used, “I want to start utilizing our technology: Canvas [a learning management system], and virtual check-ins, scanning phones for time checked in and out, having groups Skyping in when I’m on another campus.” 31 | P a g e
Another challenge is keeping the three RTA sites and their respective students connected in a meaningful manner across the district to prevent the model from devolving into three distinctly different programs. To address this, Carla plans to bring these three sites together (physically and virtually) to report on progress, present on learnings, and to take joint field trips such as attending education courses at the Central Washington University Des Moines campus. To accommodate the three active RTA sites, the RTA partnership model has expanded to include three additional partner schools where the RTA students carry out their practicum experience. These partner schools are feeder elementary schools and often located geographically close to the RTA high schools. The immediate challenge in 2016-17 is for the coordinator to build relationships with the administration and mentor teachers at the RTA sites and partner sites. Carla remarked, “It takes a certain synergy and like-mindedness between all partners, which may be difficult to create. It is somewhat organic, I believe.” There are a few notable benefits to having additional partner schools. For one, having high school students return to their former elementary schools, often observing and teaching in classrooms with their former elementary teachers, develops a bridge of sorts between the elementary and high school communities. Another benefit, often understated, is that, because principals of the partner schools see the value in having high school students return to tutor and teach, there is greater buy-in and support for the program district-wide. In short, the good work of RTA students is seen at scale across the district.
Institutions of Higher Education (represented as yellow rounded rectangles in Figure 4) Establishing focus and coordination between IHE partners The two key higher education partners in the RTA model are Central Washington University and Highline College, and they have experienced change as well. Being the newly appointed CWU university partner, I can report that there has been a renewed energy focused on supporting the RTA students throughout the post-secondary continuum. In previous years, there had been a lack of communication and coordination between Highline College and the CWU Des Moines campus despite the fact that both institutions’ education programs are jointly located in the same building. In contrast, I now meet regularly with Highline College to outline joint activities. For example, when RTA students visited the CWU education program at Highline College, Patricia McDonald, an education faculty member, met with the students and introduced her Highline College education program, which feeds into CWU’s education program. Additionally, teacher candidates from Highline College and CWU held a joint student panel and luncheon with the RTA students, answering questions and addressing concerns from RTA students. The added benefit was that the CWU and Highline College education students met and learned from each other.
32 | P a g e
Sharing a cohesive vision and building relationships are at the heart of the RTA-IHE partnership. Carla wrote, “Partnerships between Renton HS, CWU - Des Moines, CWU - Ellensburg, and Highline College are stronger and more focused because of the groundwork and the relationships that have been formed between teacher-leaders of these campuses and work groups. We all share a vision for growing our own teachers, and through these relationships, the educational pipeline between these schools continues to get stronger.” Strong coordination between IHE and teacher academy partners provides a cohesive postsecondary and career plan for RWT students, and, in some cases, may be a strong influence in keeping students on the college track. A recent RTA alumni commented on the IHE support: “Thinking about colleges. I was a first-generation college student. I’d never had a college experience and couldn’t reflect on my parents’ experience for that. So one thing that was great about the program was having the college visits and university partners, like Patricia Macdonald at Highline, having that connection. So when I first graduated from the program and not knowing where I was going. I didn’t feel accomplishment at Green River [College], and Eric [Hougan] was able to connect me with Patricia and she helped me map out my plan, and Carla was brought into it, and they gave me more resources about Central [Washington University, Des Moines campus]. I felt like the support was there for me to be successful.” Maintaining regular communication and coordination between university faculty and teacher academy coordinator Past communication between CWU and RTA had been inconsistent and infrequent. Coming aboard last year as the university partner to RTA, I wanted to implement a strategy that the Tacoma teacher academy uses: monthly meetings among partners. Carla and I met monthly for one hour to brainstorm, plan, coordinate, and determine how best to support each other. Each meeting ended with action items,
33 | P a g e
and status updates provided the next time we met. This regular communication ensured we were focused on the same vision and held ourselves accountable to that vision by committing to action items. This communication and coordination take considerable time and energy, but the dividends are evident in how the pipeline is strengthened. For instance, we have designed joint learning activities such as having the RTA students join in on CWU education courses and having my CWU teacher candidates provide feedback on RTA student work. However, all of this headway could be disrupted in the event of any staff turnover. For example, Carla noted, “It is also hard when there seems to be a high turnover rate in higher ed leaders. During my five years as a RWT teacher, I have had five different partners in higher ed. It can easily feel like starting over if the person leaving has not done due diligence when handing over the mission and values of the RWT Teacher Academy.” To ensure continuity in the face of turnover, higher education partners can foster a smoother transition by documenting and clearly communicating the faculty’s role and commitment in supporting the grow-your-own teacher program.
RTA Community Partnerships (represented as gray circles in Figure 4) Exploring new opportunities Carla plans to continue to maintain previous partnerships that support the RTA students, such as the UW Dream Project that offers students a supportive network and resources in transitioning to higher education. Furthermore, with the coupling of RTA program expansion and the strengthened IHE partnership, there is the promise of additional community partners that could bolster the GYO work. For example, Educators Rising, formerly known as Future Educators of America, provides an online platform to connect teacher academy leaders and students (both at the secondary and postsecondary levels) and provides valuable educator resources, notably ATLAS videos of National Board Certified teachers accompanied by written commentary. Educators Rising also offers national competitions around teaching activities, opening a space for the broader community (in-service teachers, retired teachers, CWU teacher candidates, etc.) to mentor RTA high school students on these competitive events, and in turn, building new professional relationships between RTA students and diverse education professionals.
34 | P a g e
References for Special Issue Report Chu, M., Timmons Flores, M., Hillis, M., & Manuel, A., Maxfield, J., (2015). Recruiting Washington Teachers 2014 – 2015 Annual Report. Olympia, WA: Professional Educator Standards Board. http://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/future-educators/rwt/reports Coca, V., Johnson, D., Kelley-Kemple, T., Roderick, M., Moeller, E., Williams, N., & Moragne, K. (2012). Working to My Potential: The Postsecondary Experiences of CPS Students in the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme. Consortium on Chicago School Research. Hillis, M. (2015). Report on the Development and Maintenance of Recruiting Washington Teachers Programs. Olympia, WA: Professional Educator Standards Board. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8ftb0H1UT9ScVB4MEVsVzBmWFU/view Hougan, E. (2016, February). Leveraging Insights from the Teacher Academy of Maryland (TAM). PowerPoint presented at the meeting of the Recruiting Washington Teachers Redesign Work Group, Des Moines, WA. http://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/innovation/work-groups/rwt-redesign State of Washington Professional Educator Standards Board. (2015). Addressing the Recurring Problem of Teacher Shortages. http://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/future-educators/grow-your-own
35 | P a g e
