| 
Strengthening teacher quality through regional K-18 data-driven
collaboration
ADDRESSING CALIFORNIA’S TEACHER CRISIS
THROUGH REGIONAL COLLABORATION
Highlights from a WestEd evaluation of the Presidents
and Chancellors Regional Database Initiative
Introduction: California’s Teacher Crisis and the
Opportunity of Regional Collaboration
California is in the midst of what many have termed a
“crisis” in the teacher workforce for K-12 public
education. Several recent studies show, and common wisdom
confirms, that teacher quality is the single most important
factor in student achievement 1.
Yet, in California, increasing numbers of students find themselves
in classrooms taught by inadequately prepared teachers. With
rising student enrollment, new laws mandating class size reduction,
and increasing rates of retirement among experienced teachers,
demand for fully credentialed new teachers has been consistently
outstripping availability 2. In
response, communities across California have seen a surge
in the issuance of emergency permits (which allow individuals
without full credentials to teach), in costs for recruiting
teachers from out of state and even outside the country, and
in teachers teaching courses outside of their subject matter
areas of expertise. Moreover, the burden of these problems
does not fall evenly. It is often the schools in the poorest
communities, serving minority and disadvantaged children,
which have the highest numbers of underprepared teachers.
| Recent
research by the Center for the Future of Teaching
and Learning indicates that the dynamics of supply
and demand for teachers are largely regional, rather
than local or statewide. |
|
Many solutions to this “crisis” have been proposed
and pursued, ranging from recruitment programs, to salary
increases, to changes in credentialing rules, to mentoring
and support for beginning teachers, to new professional development
programs. Efforts are being undertaken at the state and local
levels. But despite these new policies and programs, the gap
remains, and with it insufficient improvement in student performance.
The difficulty it seems, is not only changing policy and
creating the right new programs, but also translating the
change down to the “ground level,” and doing so
simultaneously among multiple large, complex organizations.
The system through which teachers are recruited, prepared,
and supported is complicated and multidimensional. Changing
it requires a systemic approach in order to change behavior
from top to bottom. The teacher development system in California
also has a strong regional dynamic. Recent research by the
Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning indicates that
the dynamics of supply and demand for teachers are largely
regional, rather than local or statewide. That is, while people
may travel beyond their city or county to obtain their teacher
training, most stay within a hundred miles and, after graduation,
prefer to teach in their home region.
Building on these understandings of California’s teacher
development system, the Center for the Future of Teaching
and Learning (CFTL) has joined with education leaders in Kern
County, California, to create the “Presidents and Chancellors
Regional Database Initiative.3”
The PCRDI is a data-driven, K-18 collaboration intended to
substantially revamp the teacher development system in Kern
County.
The PCRDI is not only a systemic change effort, it is also
consistent with a broader trend in education, of schools and
universities forming partnerships with each other, and with
others in their communities, to pursue key reforms. In the
realm of teacher development, the need for partnership, especially
between K-12 and higher education institutions, is increasingly
apparent. After all, schools prepare young people for higher
education and can encourage them to consider careers in teaching,
and public schools are the largest employers of teachers,
while colleges and universities provide the training programs
and credentials. Yet, the most effective structures for such
partnerships are not so apparent given the bifurcation of
policymaking responsibility between the state and local jurisdictions.
This challenge also points to the potential of regional approaches.
This assessment report, prepared by WestEd at the request
of The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning, reviews
the first 18 months of the Presidents and Chancellors Regional
Database Initiative. Its purpose is to document and analyze
the key success factors and problems involved in establishing
the PCRDI, in the context of statewide education policy challenges
and the known lessons for managing an effective education
partnership. The report identifies strategies, tools, and
other learnings which may assist funders and communities in
pursuing similar efforts elsewhere. It also seeks to provide
preliminary feedback and guidance to future planning and evaluation
activities of the PCRDI leaders. The report does not purport
to be a rigorous empirical evaluation of outcomes or even
to determine objectively that the Initiative is on a certain
path to success. Because the planning phase of the PCRDI is
just now being completed, it is much too early for such data
gathering and conclusions. The report relies instead on relatively
subjective methods, gathering information through extensive
interviews with 25 leaders, participants, and supporters of
the PCRDI, conducted from April through June of 2002.
Background: Teaching and California’s Future and
the Presidents and Chancellors Initiative
The PCRDI has its roots in a statewide, multiyear initiative
called “Teaching and California’s Future.”
A project of the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning,
Teaching and California’s Future is bringing together
researchers, policymakers, and practitioners in California
to strengthen and make more cohesive the entire system of
teacher development, from teacher recruitment and pre-service
through induction and professional development for veteran
teachers. The work of CFTL is characterized by three principal
strategies:
- High quality research to track the quality of teaching
throughout the state.
- Sophisticated communications campaigns to raise important
issues and provide sound, reliable information to decision
makers.
- Ongoing discussion and debate with members of the education
policy community to inform decision making.
| The
goal was to engage college and university leaders
in collaboration with K-12 leaders to strengthen
teacher quality in a specific region where there
are high concentrations of underprepared teachers
and low-performing schools. |
|
Teaching and California’s Future was publicly launched
in late 1999 with the release of a report titled The Status
of the Teaching Profession: Research Findings and Policy Recommendations.
This report, produced by SRI International for CFTL, assembled
previously unanalyzed data and aggregated findings from several
statewide databases to create an inventory of the distribution
and key attributes of teachers in California. The report provided
a stark picture of the shortage and maldistribution of fully
prepared teachers across the state, and pointed out the regional
dynamic of supply and demand. The report also highlighted
the need for increased collaboration between K-12 and higher
education to successfully carry through on suggested reforms.
Around the same time, in December 1999, the heads of Stanford
University, California State University and the University
of California (with funding support from the James Irvine
Foundation), convened 50 presidents and chancellors of California
colleges and universities for a summit meeting at Stanford
University. The purpose of the summit was to focus the attention
of the presidents and chancellors on the problem of teacher
quality in the state. The diagnosis of the meeting participants
coincided with much of the CFTL report, and concluded with
a call for increased dialogue among university, school, and
public officials to lead more strategic action to improve
the quality of teacher preparation. Out of the summit, the
“Presidents and Chancellors Initiative” was organized
to support follow-up activities, including investigating ideas
for regional partnership and action.
The PCRDI emerged in the spring of 2000 to link Teaching
and California’s Future with the Presidents and Chancellors
Initiative by putting the expert data analysis capabilities
of CFTL into the hands of education leaders from a single
region of the state. The goal was to engage college and university
leaders in collaboration with K-12 leaders to strengthen teacher
quality in a specific region where there are high concentrations
of underprepared teachers and low-performing schools. The
James Irvine Foundation and the Stuart Foundation joined with
CFTL to develop the PCRDI concept and identify Kern County
as the first pilot site.
Findings from the Assessment
This report, prepared by WestEd at the request of CFTL and
its funders, investigates whether a regional education partnership
of the type developed by CFTL in Kern County can succeed in
inducing the kinds of far-reaching changes that are needed
to solve the teacher workforce crisis. Based on extensive
interviews conducted from April through June of 2002 with
25 leaders, participants and supporters of the PCRDI, the
report looks at the first 18 months of operation of the Initiative
and asks what lessons it might offer for local officials and
funders interested in launching similar projects in other
regions.
| External
organizations can be important change agents by
bringing financial resources, technical expertise,
or simply a fresh perspective to a problem. |
|
External Partners: The Catalyst to Action
External organizations can be important change agents by bringing
financial resources, technical expertise, or simply a fresh
perspective to a problem. CFTL, in partnership with the James
Irvine Foundation and the Stuart Foundation, was an essential
catalyst for the PCRDI. CFTL first raised the idea of a regional
initiative with Kern education leaders and convened a conversation
that helped the local officials to reframe the problem and
recognize the potential benefit of working together to solve
it. Later, as the Initiative got underway, staff from CFTL
and from the research firm SRI International served as essential
managers, brokers and facilitators, leveraging their neutrality
and access to outside expertise to support discussion of politically
sensitive issues, build local capacity, and keep the project
moving forward.
Leadership: The Fundamental Ingredient
Given the complexities of the teacher recruitment, preparation,
and retention systems, effective leadership is essential to
undertake a coherent reform effort. In Kern, the existence
of a longstanding leadership group of the region’s top
education officials, a high level of trust and familiarity
within the community as a whole, and the timeliness of the
issue provided essential conditions for committed, effective
leadership to emerge. Kern also offers lessons on strategies
for developing a high-functioning leadership and management
structure:
-
| …the
existence of a longstanding leadership group
of the region’s top education officials,
a high level of trust and familiarity within
the community as a whole, and the timeliness
of the issue provided essential conditions for
committed, effective leadership to emerge. |
|
Hire a Well-Respected Local Liaison. The PCRDI
was able to move forward more quickly and productively because
it employed full-time project staff who knew the region
and were well respected by the leaders of the partner organizations.
- Sustain the Personal Involvement of Top Leaders.
The heads of the lead organizations devoted considerable
personal time and political capital to the Initiative, serving
to underscore the importance of the project to their colleagues
and the broader community.
- Form an Inclusive Leadership Structure.
The Steering Committee and the working committees for the
Initiative contained representatives from across the county
educational establishment who collaborated to define goals,
objectives, and plans for the project. This distributed
and pragmatic style of leadership encouraged broad participation
and buy-in.
- Pledge Essential Commitments and Resources Early.
Key partner organizations made commitments early in the
project to change long-standing practices and dedicate resources
to the Initiative, thus building trust and enabling expanded
commitments by other partners.
| Overall,
the use of data has proven to be a central driver
of discussion and decision making in the PCRDI,
supporting the emergence of basic partnership success
factors. |
|
Data: The Workhorse of Collaboration
The PCRDI established a local research team, supported by
CFTL and SRI International, which provided new, in-depth analysis
of the region’s teacher workforce. Widespread use of
this data helped to put everybody “on the same page”
and encouraged communication on new issues, especially between
the K-12 and higher education systems, and between the public
and private IHEs. Kern’s experience suggests the following
strategies for effective use of data:
- Maximize Research Team Capacity Through Partnership.
The Initiative brought together the technical expertise
of SRI International and the local knowledge of Kern education
researchers to form a highly capable team which delivered
more thorough and accurate data than had previously been
available.
- Use Current Year Data. Kern researchers
arranged with local districts to get early access to the
most current data, thereby increasing the credibility and
utility of the resulting analysis.
- Agree to Guidelines About the Dissemination of Data.
Kern officials succeeded in obtaining and working with key
data sources in large part because they made clear commitments
early-on about how data would, and would not, be shared.
- Allot Sufficient Resources. Data collection
and analysis is a resource-intensive activity that is often
overlooked and underfunded. Data was a major driver of action
in the PCRDI because substantial staff and financial resources
were allocated in this area.
Overall, the use of data has proven to be a central driver
of discussion and decision making in the PCRDI, supporting
the emergence of basic partnership success factors. Data was
the workhorse, carrying the burden of providing all partners
with a common understanding of the teacher workforce problems
in the county and helping them shape shared vision, goals,
and strategies to solve the problems. Using data encouraged
communication on new issues, especially between the K-12 and
higher education systems, and between the public and private
IHEs. Credible data also helped build trust and quality leadership
by shifting the conversation from assigning blame to seeking
joint solutions.
Progress, Challenges, and Next Steps
Moving forward, Kern’s challenge is to sustain the momentum
and ensure it translates into the desired improvements in
teacher recruitment, preparation, and retention. This will
depend on infusions of new funding, institutionalization of
key functions within the local partner organizations, and
rigorous evaluation to ascertain changes resulting from the
Initiative and to support continuous improvement. It will
also depend on the maintenance of existing success factors—personal
commitment, trust, and quality staffing.
| Moving
forward, Kern’s challenge is to sustain the
momentum and ensure it translates into the desired
improvements in teacher recruitment, preparation,
and retention. |
|
Beyond these broad, and difficult to measure, changes in
the operating environment in Kern, another, somewhat more
measurable interim indicator of progress might be the number
and types of new projects and programs that are being developed
as a result of the Initiative. Many interviewees were insistent
that the PCRDI is, and will continue to be, a powerful change
agent. They cite as evidence the emergence of new projects
and cooperative activities that are moving quickly towards
implementation, even before the Action Plans are formally
complete. They also cite several unilateral and bilateral
actions which they credit to the influence of the Initiative.
These actions and projects include:
- The commitment of district superintendents to eliminate
emergency permits in the county by September 2002. Early
plans by the Teacher Preparation Committee set a one-year
timetable to achieve this goal by September 2003. However,
superintendents have stepped up and are requiring all uncredentialed
teachers to enroll in intern or pre-intern programs by fall
2002.
- The commitment of CSUB leadership to increase funding
for the university’s teacher education department this
year, even as the university as a whole faces large state
budget cuts.
- Increased cooperation with K-12 as CSUB has undertaken
the CTC-mandated rewrite of its teacher preparation curriculum.
- New cooperation between Bakersfield City School District
and CSUB to design district-based professional development
programs.
- Plans for an “information clearinghouse” and
website to be established at KCOE to provide comprehensive
information on credential requirements, training programs,
and employment opportunities to anyone interested in entering
the teaching profession.
- Plans of CSUB Extension School to launch a program of
Saturday classes leading to a multi-subject teaching credential.
- Organization of new professional development offerings
for school districts on the east side of Kern County, a
traditionally underserved area.
- Plans to launch “career academies” structured
around teaching and education careers at seven high schools.
While some of these actions may have occurred in the absence
of the PCRDI, everyone involved with the Initiative insists
that the actions are happening more quickly and in more integrated
ways as a result of the focus and high-profile attention generated
by the Initiative. As one higher education administrator stated,
“We’re continuing to grow, but it wouldn’t
have been so intentional without the Initiative.” Another
participant said that when it comes to obtaining funding for
a planned new teacher preparation program, “being part
of the Initiative increases the likelihood of internal approval.”
|
