Teaching and Professional Learning

Discussion

To achieve dramatic improvements in math and science education for all students, we will need to increase the supply of teachers with strong working knowledge of mathematics and science and the pedagogical techniques necessary to teach math and science effectively. Our secondary schools will continue to need math and science teachers with deep, specialized knowledge of those disciplines, and increasing their numbers must continue to be an important priority. For the future, however, we must also aim to build a teaching profession in which all teachers, in every discipline and from the elementary grades on up, are “STEM-capable,” or sufficiently conversant with math and science content and relevance to infuse their classrooms with rigorous, motivating math and science learning. To prepare American students to participate fully in tomorrow’s economy and society, our K-14 educational system needs a STEM-capable human capital infrastructure.

The question, then, is partly one of numbers. We will need to attract many well-prepared candidates to the teaching profession, expand successful teacher recruitment programs, and provide teachers with more effective support and guidance during their first years in the classroom. We must also do more to retain effective teachers, improve their working conditions, and deploy them skillfully to improve our schools.

But numbers alone will not solve the problem: schools and districts need to manage human capital as part of an educational improvement strategy that takes seriously the practical challenges of educating all students to higher levels of proficiency. We need teachers who are knowledgeable, motivating, inspiring—and able to differentiate instruction to enable every student to achieve higher levels of math and science learning. This will require ensuring that teachers and school leaders know what excellent teaching looks like and have the necessary tools, skills, and opportunities to meet students’ diverse learning needs.

As a foundation for all this, undergraduate institutions will need to upgrade the math and science education every aspiring teacher receives, including those who do not intend to teach secondary math and science. Indeed, math and science learning is a crucial priority for all undergraduates: they are tomorrow’s teachers, parents, and leaders, and math and science will be increasingly important in all those roles. Further, to realize the full value of changes such as these, human capital management systems must be strengthened in our schools, districts, and states. As one recent analysis showed, “job dissatisfaction” is cited most often by teachers as their main reason for leaving their jobs—leading co-investigator Richard M. Ingersoll to liken efforts to increase the supply of math and science teachers to “pouring water in a leaky bucket” until teachers’ working conditions are improved.^{Debra Viadero (2009). “Educator Loss in STEM Area Called Issue: Overall Shortage Disputed,” Education Week. Richard M. Ingersoll and David Perla (2009). “The Mathematics and Science Teacher Shortage: Fact and Myth,” CPRE Research Report #RR-62.} A more dynamic, innovative, and professional teaching force will require better leadership and management of schools and systems, deeper engagement in instructional improvement and accountability, more meaningful assessment of teaching effectiveness, and expanded roles for exemplary teachers. Educators, individually and as a profession, will need to be afforded greater recognition and respect.

The best alternative certification programs hold considerable promise for the nation, especially in math and science.

1. On increasing the supply of well-prepared teachers of mathematics and science at all grade levels by improving teacher preparation and recruitment

Teacher certification is the mechanism states use to ensure that their schools are staffed by qualified professionals. Most teacher candidates obtain their initial certification by completing a college- or university-based program that combines academic coursework and supervised clinical experiences, or student teaching. Some candidates, especially those who intend to teach elementary grades, satisfy initial certification requirements during their undergraduate years and go directly from college into teaching. Others, especially those who aim for the more specialized certifications needed for secondary school teaching, enroll in post-baccalaureate, or “5th year,” programs; there, aspiring teachers who already have a bachelor’s degree in a particular discipline gain academic and practical experience in education—and the credential they need to take up a teaching position.

These two routes produce a steady supply of teachers; they do not, however, produce enough math and science teachers to meet today’s needs. The problem is especially acute in some regions of the country and difficult-to-staff schools and districts.^{Math and science were teacher shortage areas in 47 states in 2007-08. “Teacher Shortage Areas Nationwide Listing 1990-1991 through 2009-2010,” U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education (2009). ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.html.}

And it’s no wonder. Conventional undergraduate and post-baccalaureate programs have limited appeal to math and science majors and graduates, who typically have a multitude of career choices open to them—many in fields more lucrative than education. Moreover, universities are not accountable for meeting the need for math and science teachers and have historically given little attention to teacher recruitment, generally preferring to serve any qualified student who chooses to enter a program rather than recruit students whose interests and academic backgrounds match school district needs. School districts with particular recruitment challenges—for secondary math and science teachers, for example, or for teachers willing to work in difficult-to-staff urban schools—have developed their own tactics to fill those gaps, such as recruiting certified teachers from other locales (sometimes even from abroad) or establishing temporary certification programs.

In recent years, organizations such as The New Teacher Project (TNTP) and Teach for America have attempted to fill the recruitment gap by offering alternative routes into teaching for candidates who lack traditional teacher preparation, often appealing directly to candidates’ desire to do something worthwhile for children and society. Working in partnership with school systems in cities such as New York City, Chicago, and Baltimore, these independent, nonprofit programs have expanded the pipeline of teachers who are willing, even eager, to work in difficult-to-staff urban schools, often in shortage areas such as math and science.^{For example, according to the New Teacher Project’s internal data, 83 percent of its 2008 fellows were teaching in the high-needs subject areas of science, math, and special education. Presentation to the Carnegie Corporation of New York, February 2009.} The programs recruit nationally and are highly selective. In general, teachers recruited via these alternative routes have higher observable academic qualifications than the supply of teacher candidates that districts attract, and their deployment in high-poverty schools appears to have contributed to higher student achievement, especially in math and science.^{Donald Boyd et al. (2008). “The Narrowing Gap in New York City Teacher Qualifications and Its Implications for Student Achievement in High-Poverty Schools,” NBER working paper. (Note: A co-author of this study, Susanna Loeb, is a member of the Carnegie-IAS Commission.) In 2008, a Louisiana Board of Regents report showed that the New Teacher Project’s first-year math teachers had a more positive effect on students than traditionally certified teachers who had taught for 2+ years. Similarly, a 2008 Urban Institute study showed that high-school students taught by TFA corps members performed significantly better on state-required end-of-course exams, especially in math and science, than peers taught by far more experienced instructors. Louisiana TNTP report: regents.state.la.us}

Page 2

Discussion

Yet even alternative-route programs are sometimes forced to make special efforts to attract math and science majors. Math for America, a growing nonprofit that places its fellows in schools in New York City, San Diego, Washington, DC, and Los Angeles, requires “strong quantitative preparation” but not necessarily an undergraduate major in mathematics. The New York City Teaching Fellows Program—a district-sponsored initiative, described below—has taken the step of adding enhanced math and science immersion strands to its general program, each aimed at attracting and preparing candidates who did not major in science or math during college but have some math and science background and are interested in teaching in those fields.

The alternative certification field has grown dramatically in recent years, and evidence suggests that, similar to variations across other teacher entry routes, there is variation in the quality of programs. Yet the best alternative certification programs hold considerable promise for the nation, especially in mathematics and science, as well as lessons about what it takes to bring well-educated, talented, but uncertified candidates into teaching and to support them through the transitional “induction” period. Some districts are now applying those lessons in programs of their own design, often relying on philanthropic support to shape and pilot their initiatives and tailoring the components to suit local circumstances.^{See, for example, the qualifications for the math and science immersion programs of the New York Teaching Fellows Program at nyctf.org/prospective/fellowship.html.} Boston Teacher Residency, for example, trains approximately 75 fellows per year in an intensive program managed jointly by the school district and an intermediary organization, the Boston Plan for Excellence. The program offers teacher candidates a 13-month, clinically based alternative pathway to teacher certification; components include a full-year internship in a Boston school, during which the fellow works closely with a mentor teacher; summer sessions before and after the residency year; a stipend for living expenses; and a forgivable loan toward a master’s degree. By contrast, the New York City Teaching Fellows Program is larger, enrolling roughly 1,600 candidates per year. It aims to attract both career changers and new college graduates with strong academic background by placing fellows in full-time, fully paid teaching positions in their first year and providing them with an intensive pre-service summer institute, mentoring by an experienced teacher, and enrollment in a subsidized master’s degree program in education through a local university.

Some colleges and universities are using similar design elements to create unconventional teacher preparation programs aimed at undergraduate math and science majors—students unlikely to enroll in standard teacher preparation programs and attracted to the intellectual rigor and challenge of mathematics and science. At the University of Texas at Austin, for example, the UTeach Natural Sciences program was established by the dean of the College of Natural Sciences, who forged partnerships with the university’s College of Education and College of Liberal Arts and with the Austin Independent School District. UTeach vigorously recruits math and science majors to become teachers, offering them intensive clinical preparation for the challenges of secondary school teaching in science, math, computer science, and engineering. Students may enter UTeach at multiple points in their undergraduate schooling and are usually able to complete the requirements for certification by the time they graduate. UTeach also offers post-baccalaureate programs in math and science education for college graduates and already certified teachers. The program has an ambitious replication agenda, and versions of the model are now operating in 13 universities around the country.^{UTeach Natural Sciences was honored in 2009 by Harvard’s Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation as one of the Top 50 Innovations in American Government.}

To lead a revolution in math and science education, teachers themselves need opportunities to experience powerful math and science learning.

Collectively, innovative programs such as these are beginning to push other teacher preparation programs to reconsider the way they work and their lack of connection with school system needs. Commission member Susanna Loeb and Pam Grossman have argued that the rapid growth of alternative-route programs has “demonstrated the need for institutions that prepare teachers to be more responsive to the immediate needs of school districts. Alternative routes developed, in large part, because existing institutions could not respond quickly enough to projected and actual teacher shortages, especially in high-need areas."^{Susanna Loeb and Pam Grossman (2008). Alternative Routes to Teaching: Mapping the New Landscape of Teacher Education, Harvard Education Press.}

Within the bounds of more conventional teacher preparation, some colleges and universities are beginning to link their programming with school system needs in mathematics and science. For example, the University of Washington has established two post-baccalaureate fellowship programs—the Noyce Fellowship and the Lenore Annenberg Teaching Fellowship—which offer aspiring math and science teachers a year of academic and clinical preparation, followed by mentoring and support during their first years of teaching in high-needs local schools. The Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, a research center within the university’s College of Education, operates several projects that involve teacher candidates, K-12 practitioners, and faculty members (in education, and also in science and mathematics) in studying the development of teacher skill and other research questions.

In another example, the Long Beach, California, school district has become deeply involved in shaping the credentialing programs at California State University Long Beach. The district’s curriculum specialists teach in CSU’s program and have helped to develop a program in which coursework and clinical experience are well integrated. The Long Beach district also offers early employment contracts to prospective science and math teachers prepared through the CSU program. The quality of teacher preparation is an issue, but so is the role of math and science courses in undergraduate education generally, and especially for teacher candidates. Undergraduates who plan to become elementary school teachers and who are not majoring in science, mathematics, or engineering tend to study very little math or science, with few or no courses required beyond an institution’s general education requirements.^{John Dossey, Katherine Halvorsen, and Sharon McCrone (2008). Mathematics Education in the United States 2008: A Capsule Summary Fact Book. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, p. 54} Overall mathematics preparation of elementary school teachers falls below goals outlined in 2001 by the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (CBMS), which recommends at least nine semester hours, equivalent to three courses, of undergraduate study.^{Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (2001). The Mathematical Education of Teachers.} Scant preparation puts elementary school teachers and their students at a severe disadvantage, given the importance of math achievement in state accountability systems. For the middle grades, CBMS recommends that mathematics be taught by specialists with at least 21 semester hours in mathematics, including at least 12 semester hours on fundamental ideas of mathematics appropriate for middle grades students. At least one-third of the nation’s eighth graders are being taught by teachers who have not met these advisory goals.^{John Dossey, Katherine Halvorsen, and Sharon McCrone (2008). Mathematics Education in the United States 2008: A Capsule Summary Fact Book. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, p. 54.}

According to a 2008 study by the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), few colleges are giving attention to this issue—although change is possible. One teacher preparation program, at the University of Georgia at Athens, requires very substantial mathematics preparation for aspiring elementary grades math teachers: five semesters, three in math content, taught within the university’s mathematics department, and two in math teaching methods, taught within the school of education.^{Julie Greenberg and Kate Walsh (2008). No Common Denominator: The Preparation of Elementary Teachers in Mathematics by America’s Education Schools, National Council on Teacher Quality.} Named an “exemplary program” in the NCTQ report, it may well point the way for other programs. But raising standards in these ways is likely to be effective only if higher education raises standards for all undergraduate learning in mathematics and science. The core preparation in math and science needed by teachers is also needed for a wide range of professions in the new economy. The pool of students who are academically well-prepared in math and science from which teacher candidates can be recruited must be expanded. In addition, further research is needed on the impact on pupil achievement of the math and science preparation of their teachers.

Page 3

Discussion

2. On improving professional learning for all teachers, with an eye toward revolutionizing math and science teaching

To lead a revolution in math and science education, teachers themselves need opportunities to experience powerful math and science learning. Motivating, relevant, inquiry-based science and math learning—the type of learning that teachers and teacher candidates might not have received in their own earlier education but will be called upon to offer to their students—should be built into teachers’ initial preparation and ongoing professional development. Educators also need continuous contact with fresh content, especially in science and technology, where knowledge has grown rapidly in recent decades and fast-paced innovation will continue to open new opportunities for learning.

Museums and other “science rich institutions” are emerging as important sources of in-depth, up-to-date learning for teachers in science, math, and related disciplines. The Exploratorium in San Francisco, for example, offers an intensive summer institute to secondary school science teachers, during which participants conduct experiments and test curricular units that they later implement in their classrooms. In a notable trend, several leading science institutions have begun to redefine their own roles to assume more responsibility for student learning—a change that strengthens their institutional commitment to increasing teachers’ knowledge. The Urban Advantage program, developed by the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) in collaboration with the New York City Department of Education and other local institutions, shares responsibility for enabling 20,000 New York City eighth graders to complete their state-mandated science “exit projects” and provides participating teachers with 50 hours of professional development.^{For more information on Urban Advantage, see urbanadvantagenyc.org/home.aspx.} AMNH also offers online credit-bearing courses taught by its scientist faculty. The Museum of Science in Boston offers a broad menu of professional learning opportunities for teachers, including workshops, institutes, online courses linked with science and engineering curricula, and collaborations with area biotech firms. Recently, the Museum developed an introductory, year-long engineering course for students in grades 9-12, Engineering the Future, along with an in-depth program of teacher support.^{For more information on Engineering for the Future, see mos.org/etf/.}

Professional learning in math and science could be organized around using, customizing, and perfecting a set of well-documented lessons and pedagogical approaches.

Teachers need ready access to the best and most motivating materials, but they also need better mechanisms for sharing teacher-tested math and science resources. The division between professional learning about math and science and teaching math and science needs to be diminished, if not erased. A coherent approach to professional learning—for both teacher candidates and practicing teachers—would enable educators to contribute to a common store of curricular and pedagogical materials that support student progress toward meeting new, higher common standards.

Professional learning in science and math could be organized around using, customizing, and perfecting a set of well-documented lessons and pedagogical approaches. In math especially, such an approach could draw on the Lesson Study method, used widely in Japan and increasingly internationally. Schools using programs like Agile Mind, led by Commission member Uri Treisman, are already demonstrating practice in this area. Delivered to schools and districts as a blended professional development and instructional program, Agile Mind’s online system enables math educators to test curricular materials and pedagogical practices and investigate their impact on student learning. As members of an online learning community, teachers feed their observations (and students’ results) back into the system—thus strengthening the knowledge base of the entire community and capitalizing on the wide range of teacher experience and skill. Within a context of shared learning, teachers are beginning to re-conceive their roles: rather than working as independent “composers” of lesson plans and other curricular materials, they are functioning more effectively, and with better results for students, as highly skilled “conductors” of student learning.

Tools developed by Wireless Generation, led and cofounded by Commission member Larry Berger, also use technology in innovative ways to promote teacher collaboration. Wireless Generation’s FreeReading.net Web site, for example, is a wiki-based, open source literacy instructional hub where elementary school teachers can find, share, and modify lesson plans and see demonstration videos.

Teacher learning in science and math is also beginning to benefit from the more widespread engagement of master teachers in teacher preparation programs and ongoing professional development. A report by McKinsey and Company describes the practice in Singapore of giving teachers “individual feedback from the 2 to 3 percent of experienced, high-performing teachers who have been designated as peer coaches."^{Michael Barber, Mona Mourshed, and Fenton Whelan (2007). “Improving Education in the Gulf,” McKinsey Quarterly, p. 44.} Math for America recruits a corps of “master teachers” from among experienced New York City public school math teachers; master teachers receive an annual stipend to “actively participate in professional development and mentoring” within the program and contribute to the “community of math teachers, sharing best practices and learning from one another’s experiences.” New Leaders for New Schools works with the principals it places to implement systems of distributed leadership at the school level, setting up instructional supports and career pipelines that engage teachers as mentors and leaders. New Leaders’ model has produced significant improvements in many schools; overall, students in elementary and middle schools led by New Leaders principals for at least three years are making more rapid academic gains than comparable students in their districts by statistically significant margins.^{Data on the performance of New Leaders principals are available at nlns.org/Results.jsp.}

Other innovations are narrowing the gap between classroom practice and educational research, sometimes in ways that enhance math- and science-related professional learning for teachers. In a paper prepared for the Commission, Liz Gewirtzman described the “scaffolded apprenticeship model,” developed by New Visions for Public Schools, which engages school teams in a process of inquiry that involves using data to identify subgroups of students who are not “on-track” to graduate, developing interventions to raise their performance, implementing the interventions, and monitoring effectiveness.^{Liz Gewirtzman (2008). “An Unorthodox but Pragmatic Approach to National Math and Science Literacy.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education.} Conceived as a professional learning initiative (team members are nominally “apprenticing” for leadership positions and receive graduate credit toward an administrative credential), the program also provides teachers with powerful, practical training in statistics, experimental design, and the scientific method. The results in schools’ ability to differentiate instruction for subgroups of learners have been significant: in 2007, New Visions graduated 77 percent of its students (all attending high-poverty schools) on time; by comparison, the citywide rate is 57 percent.^{newvisions.org/dls/AnnualReport2007.pdf}

Page 4

Discussion

3. On upgrading human capital management throughout US schools and school systems toward ensuring an effective teacher for every student, regardless of socio-economic background

As Odden and Kelly explain in their 2008 report on human capital management in education, “It is not sufficient for districts just to find top talent and turn them loose. As the private sector has learned over the past decade, the highest performance organizations not only recruit and retain top talent, but also manage them in ways that support the strategic direction of the organization."^{Odden and Kelly (2008). Strategic Management of Human Capital in Public Education, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.} For a school or school district to be effective, the authors continue, “top talent must be professionally managed around a well-designed educational improvement strategy.”

The Commission urges schools and districts—and, indeed, states and the nation—to begin to manage explicitly against an overarching performance goal: dramatically increasing math and science learning for all students, a goal that is effectively a refinement of the more general goal of improving student performance across the board. As noted earlier, the Commission believes that science achievement in particular, because science is an integrative discipline that when it is well taught can serve as a benchmark for student achievement more generally, should be a focal point for the development of improvement strategies. Specific improvement strategies will be needed within each organization to advance that goal, and those strategies will inform the roles of teachers, school leaders, and others.

We need to study and experiment with alternatives to the basic “step-and-ladder” pay scale, including pay differentials, performance incentives, and opportunities to take on leadership roles.

Performance management will mean, first of all, developing explicit strategies to retain the most effective teachers and facilitate the exit of those who are less successful. The school and school system leaders responsible for carrying out those strategies should be able to do so within the context of clear policies—policies that enable them to act consistently and in ways that reinforce the system’s commitment to performance goals. As Odden and Kelly lay out, “when education systems create an instructional improvement strategy that includes a view of effective teaching strategies, those strategies should be embedded in all aspects of the system that have instruction at their core—day-to-day teaching, induction, professional development, mentoring and evaluation."^{Odden and Kelly (2008). Strategic Management of Human Capital in Public Education, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.} For more specific recommendations, they have developed case studies of districts that have undertaken comprehensive reform of human capital management systems. Cross-case findings show that “districts can move substantially toward solving teacher and principal quality and shortage problems” with a range of initiatives that include:^{Odden and Kelly (2009). Strategic Management of Human Capital 2.0, report to Carnegie Corporation of New York.}

• Actively recruiting more teachers and principals from top colleges and universities
• Partnering with talent recruitment organizations such as TNTP, TFA, and NLNS
• Growing their own teachers and principals
• Forging new relationships with local and high-quality colleges and universities
• Restructuring and automating the application, screening, and selection systems
• Moving the hiring calendar up to early spring
• Revising seniority transfers and eliminating seniority bumping
• Devolving selection decisions to school sites

The Commission recognizes that working conditions affect job satisfaction and are an important factor in teachers’ decisions to stay in the field or leave teaching or their current positions—often as important as wages.^{C.T. Clotfelter, E.J. Glennie, H.F. Ladd, and J.L. Vigdor (2008). “Teacher bonuses and teacher retention in low-performing schools: Evidence from the North Carolina $1,800 Teacher Bonus Program,” Public Finance Review, 36(1), 63-87. Richard M. Ingersoll and David Perla (2009). “The Mathematics and Science Teacher Shortage: Fact and Myth,” CPRE Research Report #RR-62. American Institutes for Research, Teacher Quality Research 2007.} Retaining effective teachers is an especially important issue, requiring explicit management strategies, in schools with high proportions of low-achieving, poor, black, and Latino students.^{Donald Boyd et al. (2008). “The Narrowing Gap in New York City Teacher Qualifications and Its Implications for Student Achievement in High-Poverty Schools,” NBER working paper.} This problem also affects rural schools, where small size places additional limits on schools’ ability to hire science teachers with current knowledge and sufficient mastery of more than one science discipline. Differential retention of qualified teachers in mathematics and science, not necessarily the overall retention rate, is likely to have the greatest effect on students.

We must build a teaching profession in which all teachers, in every discipline and from the elementary grades on up, are “STEM-capable,” or conversant with math and science.

Our schools should also be learning deliberately to make better use of teacher compensation and benefits. The need is especially great in mathematics and science given chronic shortages in those fields and competition from other industries for talented, well-prepared professionals. In particular we need to study and experiment with alternatives to the basic “step-and-ladder” pay scale, including pay differentials, performance incentives, opportunities to take on leadership roles, and other strategies that might help schools attract and keep qualified mathematics and science teachers. The Commission encourages research and pilot programs to assess the potential need to introduce pay differentials for teachers with strong math and science backgrounds.

School and district leaders need to be attuned to the human capital requirements of high-quality science and math learning for all students. Leadership must manage flexibly to develop and fine-tune operations and human capital policies that meet the learning needs of students and the professional needs of teachers. Those leaders, in turn, need access to diagnostic and predictive tools that enable meaningful evaluation of teacher performance and the development of effective capacity building. States, districts, and the federal government must look for ways to reward excellence and stimulate innovation in our schools and classrooms. A new, rigorous, standards-aligned national system of assessments would be invaluable as we develop those experiments and study their results.