Report on the Development and Maintenance of Recruiting Washington Teachers Programs Mike Hillis, Pacific Lutheran University, June 30, 2015

Context Over the past year, I was a member of the Recruiting Washington Teachers team in Tacoma (Teach 253) as a well as part of the state evaluation team from the Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB). During this period of time, I was able to talk with various individuals from each state program as well as more in-depth conversations with participants of the Renton Teachers Academy. In the midst of these conversations, I attempted to focus my inquiry on the development and maintenance of the programs, both from more established programs (e.g., the Renton Teachers Academy) to more recently developed ones (e.g., Teach 253). The goal of this project was to ascertain what are some of the key elements to both establish and maintain RWT programs for other potential sites in the state. Setting of a Vision While many people, both within the state and nationally, have demonstrated that there is a lack of P-12 teachers from underrepresented groups, there remains a significant amount of lethargy within the field to address the problem. While there are probably many reasons for this response (e.g., competing demands of responding to district, state, and national policy, ownership of the issue, complexity of the problem, etc.), what is also true is that to establish RWT programs there is a need for a person and/or a team to set a vision of what can possibly be done within a local context. Within the Renton Teachers Academy (RTA), a team was created consisting of a university partner and two central office administrators. As Jay Leviton stated, “The desire to create the RTA emerged out of our work where we had been working on similar issues for many years.” This initial planning team was able to create a proposal and begin the process of establishing the program at Renton High School. In a similar way, the Teach 253 program developed with both a university partner (Pacific Lutheran University - PLU) and district personnel. When the RFP was first announced by the PESB, two groups emerged simultaneously within the Tacoma community. I had been in contact with Mea Moore, the director of the program at the time, and she encouraged me to seek a partner for this work. I contacted Tacoma Public Schools (TPS) and discovered that they already had a group that was meeting to develop a proposal. Consequently, we met and decided to combine our efforts in planning and submitting a proposal. What was evident from the beginning is that all of us involved had a strong desire to diversify both the teaching programs at PLU and the teaching force within the district. What is also evident, however, is that even when the vision is clear and there’s a commitment made, there will be forces that resist the work. In Tacoma, I have heard comments over the past 1

two years that have been dismissive of the program (e.g., “Haven’t we already tried this?”). Consequently, it is critical that people who are involved in these programs continually seek support from other colleagues, the state, and, perhaps most importantly, the community in which they reside. Developing Partners While starting with people who have a clear vision of what they want to achieve in a RWT program is critical, the next important step is to develop partners who will actually carry out the work of the program. School District Personnel – The primary district personnel that have to be identified include the teacher(s), the counselors, the school administrators, and central administrators. Teacher – As Carla Smith related, the most important quality of a RWT teacher is to be a “kid magnet.” Since the teacher is usually going to be the “face” of the program, there is a need for that person to be able to draw students from a variety of sub-groups within the school. Additionally, there is little doubt in reviewing these programs that the teachers who are involved are required to increase their workload as teachers. This includes additional meetings, school internship visits, and being more highly involved in the lives of the students. As Eric Haugan stated, “You need a rock star for these programs because much of the time is uncompensated, the challenges are immense, the pressures continue to mount and there are constant battles. Consequently, you have to have someone who believes in the program.” This has the possibility of creating “teacher burnout,” which I will address later in this report. Internship Cooperating Teachers – A challenge for all of the programs is to develop partnerships with district schools to provide a place for internships (e.g., field based experiences such as tutoring younger students). All of the sites commented on how important it was to find key people in the schools who would advocate for the program. For example, in the Latinos in Action program, the elementary school principal talked at length about how these students are known in the community and, as a consequence, it has been relatively easy to place the high school students in the classrooms. However, as one of the cooperating teachers for the RTA commented, “It’s critical that the teachers understand the expectations of the internships. There is additional work (and also benefits of course) that will be required.” Counselors – While I was not able to talk directly with any of the school counselors, multiple people indicated that it was essential to establish a strong working relationship with the school counselors. Since counselors are the ones who are directing students into various curricular choices, people involved in the RWT programs need to ensure that counselors are fully aware of the program and are actively promoting it. For example, in the LIA program, one student commented, “I had a passion for change and when I read the description of the program in the catalog when scheduling, I knew that it was speaking to me.” The fact that the program was being promoted in written materials is critical and would come out of a counseling office as part of their scheduling responsibilities.

2

School Administrators – In all of the programs I visited, the role of a supportive administrative staff was evident. While the administration does not need to be directly involved in the program (although I’m sure it would only add to the program’s success), ensuring that the school administrators are aware of the work, support the goals of the program, and understand that these will potentially be teachers in the future will help to solidify the program’s existence. For the Teach 253 program, school administrators have been present on panel discussions, at year end ceremonies, and involved in advisory groups. Central Administrators – The RWT programs require additional resources of the district. This includes transportation, meeting spaces, and monies for various activities. Consequently, there is a need within these programs to elicit support from central administrators who can help coordinate the work. For example, in Renton, Mr. Leviton is a critical partner since he provides a significant amount of additional monies to the program and has advocated for Ms. Smith’s planning time to address the many logistical demands of the program. Community Colleges and Universities – One of the primary goals of the RWT programs is to ensure that the students are aware of the path to higher education. This includes both community college and universities. Community Colleges – For many of the students targeted in these programs, a route to teaching through a community college will be the most practical option. Consequently, establishing strong relationships with the community colleges is a critical element for student success. At the RTA, they have been able to find key people at Highline Community College (HCC) who work with the high school students closely. This is facilitated first in their summer academy when the students are brought to the HCC campus for two days. Additionally, the high school works closely with the admissions department to help facilitate their entry into the college. The relationship with local community colleges has been described as not being easy to establish and maintain as a result of distance from the high school. In Tacoma, the Teach 253 program has additionally had a difficult time developing key relationships as a result of changing personnel and a lack of connections between the program participants and college. Universities – The universities can provide an important link within these programs for a number of reasons. First, all of the teacher education programs within the state are required to follow the standards that have been established by the PESB. This is a critical function for many of the objectives of the RWT program are embedded in the state standards (e.g., cultural competency), but have not existed in the previously approved Careers in Education curriculum. The universities can help with this transition. Second, universities can provide experiences for the students that might not be available in other high school programs. For example, the summer academy in Tacoma brings students to the PLU campus where they are provided with admissions information, are able to interact with college students, and are given a glimpse of what is possible in their educational careers. Additionally, students have also come to campus during the school year and participated in panel discussions with PLU teacher candidates. At the RTA, the program brings students to the Central Washington University (CWU) campus where they spend a night in the residence halls. Even if RWT students decide to pursue a path that is different than becoming a teacher, these experiences are important in helping them imagine what it would be like to attend a university and to realize that it is within their grasp. As one of the LIA students

3

stated, ““If I hadn’t been a part of Latinos in Action, I wouldn’t know what I wanted to do with my life.” Community – Establishing a strong community presence for the programs can be manifested in many ways. For the Teach 253 program, there has been an intentional effort to reach out to community groups who support students of color in multiple ways. For example, the Teach 253 Steering Committee consists of people from the district, College Success Foundation, Achievers Program, the Northwest Leadership Foundation, and university personnel. Additionally, during its first year, the program hosted a “listening post” that invited people from various groups within the community to solicit their feedback into how the program was being set up. The rationale for this approach is that with broader community knowledge and support of the program, there is a greater likelihood that the work will continue and students will be encouraged to enroll by members in their communities. State – Another important partner within this work is the state. While it’s obvious that the monies being furnished for the grant are an important piece of helping to initiate these programs, more importantly are the networks that have been established to share the knowledge gained about these programs. For example, during the first year of Teach 253, a primary program teacher was able to travel to Skagit Valley to hear about the work of LIA. By participating in this visit, the RWT teacher started to imagine a far different program than the one she had been teaching in the previous years. Furthermore, my involvement this year as part of the site teams allowed me to have deeper insight into the programs and what would be important next steps for Teach 253. Programming One of the most overwhelming aspects of establishing an RWT program is determining what all of the steps are needed to bring the planning into existence. This includes curriculum development, the summer academy, and program logistics. Curriculum Development – When the program first started in Tacoma, there was significant discussion on what should be the focus of the curriculum. Consequently, we ended up having two curriculum meetings with two different sets of individuals. In the first meeting, we brought together university teacher educators, community educators, and the Teach 253 teachers. At the meeting, it was clearly evident that there were two very different approaches towards the curriculum. The university personnel, who must constantly negotiate changes to the teacher preparation curriculum, had a broad, philosophical view of the curriculum. Rather than “getting in the weeds” of topics like lesson planning, classroom management, and admission requirements, they advocated for a more “educational foundations” approach – sociocultural impacts, philosophical positions, and education for social justice. This was very different than the traditional Careers in Education (CIE) curriculum and, as a result, was difficult for the teachers to completely accept. A second meeting was held in Tacoma with other K-12 teachers. At this meeting, they examined the CIE curriculum and tried to determine what they thought would be the best approach for the program. As a result of these two meetings, it was difficult to make any significant program changes on creating a new curriculum that both honored the

4

approved curriculum for the district and reflected the goals of the program as required by the RWT grant. As one RWT teacher mentioned to me in talking about the curriculum, “The reality of the dayto-day teaching of the program is that it ‘was all on me.’” Even if a program has supportive partners with the district, universities, and the state, the bottom line is that the RWT teachers must plan on teaching each day pretty much in isolation. Consequently, developing new ideas and approaches is going to land primarily into the workload of the teacher. The recent development of a curriculum team established by the state may help alleviate some of this pressure, but it will still be up to the teacher for full implementation. Summer Academy – Currently, the monies that the state supplies for the RWT programs are used for the summer academy programs. For example, within the RTA program, they use almost every dollar of the grant to pay for the summer academy. This academy consists of five days: an introduction on campus to the teacher-preparation program, two trips to the local community college, and an overnight trip to the CWU campus in Ellensburg, WA. The rest of the academic year program is supported by the Career and Technical Education Department – a level of support that might be difficult to provide in other districts. The goals of the summer academies will vary depending on each site. For the RTA, they have a strong focus on college pathways, which is one of the reasons why they elect to visit both the community college and the university. For the Teach 253 program, the primary goals are to introduce students to the teaching profession and to provide them with an experience on a college campus. Internship Management – There is little doubt in examining these programs that they require tremendous attention to the management of people, information, and monies. Unlike many courses in a high school curriculum, a RWT program requires that the teacher arrange internships at neighboring schools. The logistics involved in this are many and, as multiple teachers indicated, require significant planning and time. Identifying cooperating teachers: One of the first steps for creating internships is to determine where the fieldwork will occur and who will be willing to host a student from the program. As one RWT teacher acknowledged, “You need to find exemplary teachers who you can count on. Then use them to identify additional teachers for the program.” This approach was supported by one of the cooperating teachers I surveyed who indicated that she works to recruit more teachers into the program. The Teach 253 program used a similar approach and also worked directly with principals to help determine if there would be an appropriate match for the student. An additional consideration for programs to consider for this is the grade levels for the internships. In Tacoma, the teachers had decided to focus exclusively on elementary schools for the internships as a result of some potential conflicts they could imagine between high school aged students and middle school students. Scope of the student’s work: Cooperating teachers expressed a need to have clear expectations for both their role and the role of the student. If the responsibilities of the internship are not clearly specified, the result is often that the student will be asked to do a lot of menial,

5

administrative work (e.g., making copies) and not engaging deeply with the students of the classroom. One suggestion made by a teacher of the Teach 253 program was to create an “internship handbook.” This handbook provided an overview of the program, the goals of the internship, specific activities for the student, and the expectations of the student during the internship (e.g., proper language, behavior, etc.). Transportation: While some communities may have schools that are relatively close together, most RWT programs will require that the teachers develop a transportation plan for the students. In Tacoma, the students relied on public transportation to move to and from the elementary school. However, if this is unavailable, then sites will need to determine whether the district will have the means to transport students. Scheduling: In order to link theory to practice, different sites have structured their internships in various ways. In Tacoma, the two different sites, Mt. Tahoma High School (MTHS) and Lincoln High School (LHS), use two separate approaches. MTHS has a year-long program, focuses on coursework in the fall, and then conducts the internship in the spring. At LHS, they created a block schedule where they conduct both the course and internship in a single two-hour block during one semester. Other programs use a model that may start with coursework and then slowly phase in the internship during the year. This might start in mid-fall with one day a week at the internship and then slowly add a day so that by the end of the year they are in a full-time internship. Other Annual Program Considerations Ceremonies and Celebrations – All of the programs talked about the importance of celebrating the work that is being done in these programs. This is not only to recognize the work of these students, but it can also be used as part of a larger strategy to publicize the program within the school and community. For example, in the RTA program, they have an end of the year ceremony where they celebrate the graduates, recognize alumni, and foreshadow the program for future students. One of the keys with this approach is that early on, an administrator decided that in order for the program to succeed, he needed some “political juice” to keep it going. Consequently, he invited members of the school board, the superintendent, and a local legislator to the function. This remains an important approach for the program as it more deeply cements the program into the community and creates a “sense of expectation” that the program will remain a vital part of the district’s offerings. Finances – As noted previously, the RWT programs do require additional monies for transportation, celebrations, summer academies, etc. Additionally, these monies need to be accounted for and appropriately dispersed. In both the RTA and Teach 253, the finances are held and tracked by the CTE departments of the district. This is an important role that should not be minimized – if this were also part of the workload of the teacher (who still must track expenses), it would make the job of the teacher extremely difficult to maintain. Keeping track of students – One of the expectations of these programs is that they will track students through the course of the program and as they move into post-secondary education. Consequently, it is essential that programs set up databases from the very beginning and

6

determine the types of data that will be needed through the course of the year. Teach 253 has collected their data through the following mechanisms:   

Survey of students with questions specifically linked to data required (e.g., ethnicity, gender, college preparation of parents, etc.). Accessing district databases for student GPAs, attendance, SAT scores, etc. Specific essay/short answer questions during the Summer Academy and at the end of the program assess student perceptions of the program.

A difficult logistical issue confronting programs is how to track students once they have graduated from high school and moved on to post-secondary education or some other activity (e.g., military, job, etc.). Some programs have reported using Facebook and “permanent” email address (e.g, gmail, outlook, etc.), while others rely on being in smaller, more stable communities where they can stay in contact with families. On-Going Challenges Over the past year, it is clear the RWT programs in Washington State have significant challenges that need to be addressed if the programs are to remain a vibrant part of the educational landscape. I’ve identified four of the most pressing issues that need to be attended to: Transitions with Personnel – As one RTA teacher said, for these programs to succeed, you need teachers who are “kid magnets.” While there are many teachers in every school who fit this profile, the problem is that the teacher must be able to fit a course like this into their teaching schedule and within a specific content area. For example, in the RTA, one teacher represents CTE as a teacher in business education; in Teach 253, the teachers are both in Family and Consumer Sciences, which is also true of Mount Vernon High School; the teacher in LIA is an ELL teacher. All of these content areas can obviously work, but it’s also true that when a transition happens (i.e., a teacher leaves for some reason), that teacher must be replaced and probably in a similar content area. Given the demands of this position, changes will occur. In the RTA, the program started under the leadership of one teacher and then transitioned to another. As the leaders of this program indicated, this transition was difficult. First, they had to identify the replacement and determine if she was interested in overseeing the program. Then there were the transitions that needed to take place within the program itself to better reflect the personality and tendencies of the new teacher. Finally, this teacher had to learn a new program, build relationships with the students who were already enrolled, and address all of the previous issues around logistics in short order. As this teacher stated, “I had to hit the ground running.” A similar situation happened this year in the Teach 253 program when another teacher left the district and was replaced …..As another RTA teacher aptly stated, “At times, it feels like we’re in this alone, even though we receive the positive comments from other teachers, administrators, and counselors.” There are other transitions in personnel that also prove to be challenging for these programs since they are currently still small and “owned” by a limited number of people. An administrator, for example, noted that, whenever a new administrator begins work at Renton High School, he

7

has to convince the new employees of the importance of the program. The current teacher also commented on this and noted that as new administrators arrive, they feel less and less of a connection to the work of the program. Additionally, when I decided to leave this year for another university, I had to find someone to replace my role as part of the university partnership work with Teach 253. Thankfully, there was a person on my staff who has been a strong advocate for diversity issues within the university and wanted to become involved in Teach 253. As we envision these programs in the years to come, there will inevitably be additional changes in personnel and, as much as possible, they should be anticipated. Perhaps creating broader based steering committees of people close to the work would help since they could more easily step into roles that they helped to create. Transitions for Students from HS to CC to Universities – The challenge for all of the students who are ideally being targeted in this program (i.e., first generation college students and students from underrepresented groups) is to clearly identify the paths through the program and on to post-secondary programs with the ultimate end goal of a teacher education program. The more mature programs (LIA and RTA) have clearly advanced in this area and, consequently, are significantly more developed than the two newer programs. RTA – The RTA begins their program with a structured approach to helping students see the routes to teacher education and putting them in contact with individuals to help them achieve the goal of being a teacher. By starting with the summer academy right after school is out, they capture students still in a “school mode” and begin the process by taking them to HCC and then on to CWU. They continue this work by maintaining a connection with HCC and CWU during the academic year and making sure that there are points of contact for both institutions. Additionally, they have now started to reap the benefits of their program by bringing back successful students who can help serve as mentors to the newer students. LIA – The LIA program has developed an extremely strong relationship with Skagit Valley Community College and, with its university partner Western Washington University, has a shared staff member located at SVCC to work specifically with LIA students. While there remains a significant challenge to students transitioning through the programs, this position helps to provide a point person where the student can seek additional information. The biggest challenge for all RWT students is how to finance their college education. We heard repeatedly from the students and from the staffs of the programs that students could not imagine how they were going to be able to afford a college education. While some routes are more affordable than others (e.g., community college instead of a university, a public university instead of a private university), the honest answer is that there is no simple answer to this complex question. As students frequently expressed, the difficultly in navigating the “route to education” is not the technical steps required (although there are some concerns about the process of applying for financial aid), but rather how to pay for it when they typically come from home environments that have some level of impoverishment. This is also exacerbated by the public conversations that are taking place right now about the “value of education” and whether

8

it is a wise investment. While the people involved with the project would certainly argue that it is a worthy investment, there many others who are talking to the students who would probably take a different position. Perhaps one of the next important steps for the programs is to work more closely with the alternative route providers in the state to construct new paths to teacher education. However, this will take a significant contribution of resources and there are legitimate concerns of where this will come from. Finances – As noted previously, RWT programs require resources and, as districts and schools continually must make difficult budgetary decisions, this additional funding will be challenging to maintain. For programs housed in CTE departments, historically they have been able to access additional monies that these departments are allocated. However, as Mr. Leviton noted, if CTE “essential or enhanced funding” goes away as a result how the state defines basic education, then there will be less incentive for districts to offer CTE programs due to their high cost. To address this, one potential remedy would be to transition RWT programs out of CTE and into the core curriculum. To achieve this will require significant rethinking about the type of credit students receive, what the course could typically replace, and whether there would be the political will to confront the opposition to a change like this. Furthermore, if this were to happen, there would still be significant questions about how to fund summer academies and provide additional monies for end of the year celebrations, field trips to post-secondary institutions, travel allowances for students completing internships, etc. While the amount of funding currently provided by the state is relatively small, it does provide enough incentive for new programs to continue and for more established programs to maintain many of the attractive elements they have created. If the money is not reallocated by the state, I believe it would be difficult for all of the programs to continue at this stage of their development. Policy Context – Obviously, the issue of finances is deeply connected to the policy context of districts, the state, and the federal government. What I heard repeatedly over the previous year is that as Core 24 emerges and additional testing requirements are mandated, “elective programs” like RWT will simply be unable to exist in the public schools. The RTA and Teach 253 have already started to experience the impact of these policies as they have sought to increase enrollment. For example, the teachers in Tacoma both commented on how difficult it is to enroll students in the program as a result of scheduling conflicts. Some of this was due to the students’ collegiate aspirations (e.g., AP courses, IB Diploma), but some of it was also a result of students needing to take support courses for end of course exams. In the RTA, both administrator and teacher noted how they are struggling with enrollment as a result of increased demands on students’ schedules. While it should be noted that students can make it work, there is little room for any missteps. Finally, within a broader understanding of context, it’s important to note that many students agree with a broad public perception of teaching. Rather than teaching being a career that can provide professional satisfaction, an opportunity to change students’ lives, and give back to the community, many students commented on why they were reluctant to join the program – lack of

9

pay, low status, dangerous work, etc. This program helped to change these views, but obviously they will prevent many students from considering it in the first place. Conclusions The RWT programs over the past few years have demonstrated that they can be an important part of a high school student’s life. While it would be difficult to assess the full impact of the programs, there is certainly case study evidence to suggest that each program is having an impact on individual student lives and, to a lesser degree, within their community. Students at all of the sites commented on how the program “helped me grow up,” “gave me an appreciation for the work of teachers,” or “showed how I can have an impact on the community.” However, these programs are also in precarious positions as a result of a number of factors. As one teacher stated, “A foundation has been built here, but there remain threats that challenge its existence.” These factors include financial resources, policy decisions, and, to be quite honest, an inability to stay focused on the issue of supporting a pathway to teaching which will take many years to impact. This last issue is the one which I am most concerned about when I consider these programs – unless districts, the state, colleges and universities, and the communities make a concerted, financial commitment to stay engaged, the programs may end up being remembered as a fascinating set of projects that could never be sustained.

10