INDUCTION PROGRAM PROPOSAL AND RECOMMENDATIONS

OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON INDUCTION

GEORGIA STATE UNVIERSITY

 Committee Members: 2001-2004  

What We Know and Have Learned at the National Level

• Over twenty percent of teachers leave their position within the first three years, and 9.3% do not even finish their first year (Fideler & Haselkorn, 1999)

• Many educators believe one way to achieve effective school reform is to implement induction programs (Fieman-Nemser et al., 1999)

• Schools in Texas that have been successful in closing the achievement gap for poor and minority students reported that a strong induction program develops quality teaching (The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality, 2003)

• A growing number of low wealth urban districts with acute shortages are turning toward induction programs to keep new teachers from leaving. Urban districts reported a 93% retention rate for teachers who participated in such programs (Quartz, 2003; Recruiting New Teachers, Inc., 1999).

• University-based induction programs, when implemented properly “can represent a new conceptualization of teacher development in which the responsibility for teacher learning is shared across traditional institutional boundaries by linking university teacher preparation with in-service learning” ( New Teacher Center, USC, p.3).

• Close partnerships with local school districts allows the university to “work intensively…to prepare teachers in ways that are more responsive to the districts” (Ballinger, 2000, p. 7).
  

DEFINITIONS:

Educator- A person employed in the public schools that Georgia State University has recommended for a clear renewable certificate from the Georgia Professional Standards Commission.

 

Certified- Has received licensure as an educator by the Georgia Professional Standards Commission upon recommendation by Georgia State University.

 

Guarantee- A statement of essential preparation requirements that a certified educator, without exception, will have met in completing an approved program of study leading to recommendation of licensure.

 

Warranty- A statement of performance standards certified educators will be able to meet during the first two years of employment in a Georgia school immediately following receipt of the institution’s recommendation for initial certification, provided they are teaching within the state guidelines, a reasonable number of subjects in the field of their certification, have been giving an induction to the school and district, and have been assigned a mentor who provides guidance and support.

 

Recommendations to Enhance Georgia State’s Induction Program

Background

The University System of Georgia requires that teacher education programs follow their graduates into the first two years of teaching and that the programs guarantee their graduates. For a complete description of the Georgia State University Quality Assurance Guarantee for Educators, please refer to Appendix A.

Georgia State University, Atlanta Public Schools, DeKalb County Schools, Fulton County Schools, Gwinnett County Schools (the four largest districts in the metro area), and the Georgia Association of Educators formed a consortium, the Metro Atlanta Beginning Teacher Support and Induction Consortium, to address the induction and retention problems afflicting so many schools. The consortium began planning in March, 2001 and included district administrators, principals, mentor teachers, beginning teachers and university faculty. That same year, Georgia State University recognized the importance of the Board of Regents’ mandate and responded by establishing the ad hoc Induction Committee within our College of Education. The committee developed the Georgia State University Induction Model (see Appendix B).

During the past three years, the committee gathered information about the needs of first year graduates and developed avenues for an induction program to address these needs. The committee members learned much of what was needed for our graduates and collectively have come to the main conclusion that the induction program should be continued and expanded. The following proposal for continuation of the induction program provides recommendations and the data used to support the recommendations.

Recommendation One:

Additional funding is needed to support those serving as Georgia State University induction contacts.

Induction Contacts

The responsibilities of the induction contact will vary with the number of students in the program. For example, in small programs one contact person with support can carry out the induction efforts. However, larger programs may require additional personnel to effectively organize their induction program. It is therefore important to determine what constitutes participation in the program for each contact person. For example, how many students is the contact person responsible for? How often must contact be made? In what format (site visits, web chats, email)? We project that about 80% of students in small programs and 30% of students in larger programs will participate in the induction program.

It is also important to determine what constitutes participation in the induction program for each graduate. This is an especially important issue if participation in the induction program is tied officially to graduate or SDU credit.

Kinds of Support

The committee recommends that one course release is appropriate for 15 students, if one visit per semester is conducted along with other contact. One possible support system for larger programs is that part-time instructors or GTAs could fill the role of the contact person. These individuals could be hired to teach with Georgia State University faculty for each cohort. Additionally, they would follow the cohort of students into student teaching and their first year of teaching (four semesters). The cost for one PTI per semester for one year in the program and two years of induction is $15,600 per ~35 students. Given that all students will not participate, the cost may be lowered by one PTI handling students who finish certification at different times.

Another possibility is to hire retired teachers to work with graduates. Some school systems have retired teachers as part of their induction programs, so the university and the school might share resources in this model.

Financial Support

Program costs may be reduced if we offer new teachers one graduate credit for participating in our induction program. The graduate or the school system would be responsible for paying the one graduate credit-hour fee. For this to work, programs, especially those without electives, may have to alter existing graduate programs to ensure that the graduate credit gained through participation in the induction program would count towards a degree. This could be achieved if programs create a new course, or alter an existing course, with variable credit. For example, if a student has already participated in the induction program, the student would only have to pay for two of the three course credits.

Alternatively, we could make arrangements with school systems to allow participation in the induction program to be counted towards the mandatory 20 hours of Continuing Professional Development or SDU credits. In this way the school systems would help underwrite some of our program expenses. We could also have graduate students in M.Ed. or Ed.S programs serve as mentors to new teacher graduates of Georgia State University.

 

Data to Support Recommendation One

Findings

Beginning Teacher Needs Survey administered to graduates, May 2001

• Students felt well prepared and believed that they had few needs as they transferred from the university to a classroom of their own. In addressing their own needs, graduates indicated that school mentors would play a strong role in helping them address their needs. Georgia State University faculty members were rarely viewed as a resource.

Standards Based Teaching Survey administered to beginning teachers (<3 years experience in 3 school systems), March 2002

• Overall, survey data indicated that our teacher education programs were providing adequate preparation in teaching to standards. However, data also indicated that within some areas of certification and for some teacher tasks (closing the achievement gap, developing knowledge of appropriate standards, using the community as a resource, and communicating with and involving parents in students’ education), improved preparation in addition to regular contact after graduation might benefit our students.

Focus groups conducted with beginning teachers, May, 2002

• Teachers expressed concerns related to involving the community and parents in the classroom in school activities, creatively and effectively. They would like more assistance in how to develop relationships with parents and utilize the community as a resource.
• Teachers were concerned with their opportunities for growth, given that they have little control over their professional development.
• Teachers suggested they need mentoring to improve their practice.

Telephone interviews with beginning teachers, October 2002

• Approximately half of the teachers did not know the name of their current Georgia State University contact person.
• None of the teachers were very familiar with the website or information and/or support offered via the induction program.
• The majority of teachers interviewed were willing and want to maintain personal contactwith a Georgia State University representative, especially someone in their area or a contact person familiar with the needs of new teachers.
• All the teachers indicated that they would be more interested in participating in a seminar sponsored by GSU if it offered SDU credit(s) as an incentive.

Onsite Observations and Interviews with Beginning Teachers: May 2003

• Three themes emerged during interviews: time management issues, the need for effective mentoring programs, and student issues. While all teachers expressed satisfaction with the preparation they received at Georgia State, the teachers recognized that “some things just can’t be learned until you actually get in the job.”
• These new teachers feel they need “a helping hand” in order to get a handle on the many aspects of the job, yet they feel that asking for help from administrators and colleagues is beyond any realistic realm of possibility because they too are overworked and “don’t have time.” Additionally, new teachers indicated that they felt disconnected or a burden on their colleagues or system administrators when seeking additional support.
• New teachers suggested that the Georgia State University’s induction program have liaisons within each school system to support new graduates. The teachers also recommended having a “new teacher hotline” available for first year teachers.

 

Implications

• Many new teachers face unexpected obstacles in their first few years in the field. Georgia State University’s induction program can play an important role in supporting beginning teachers as they confront emerging issues in the classroom.
• Beginning teachers believe that maintaining contact with a university representative is both necessary, helpful, and a means of professional development.
• There are a variety of pedagogical and content related areas that new teachers would like to improve. Individual and group mentoring via the induction program is one way for new teachers to learn about community resources and teaching strategies to improve their practice.
• A dedicated Georgia State University contact person would fill the essential role of supporting new teachers who feel overwhelmed with their current responsibilities or disconnected from their assigned school mentors.
• Georgia State University contacts should be given the opportunity to establish a relationship with students long before graduation. Moreover, students must be introduced, prior to graduation, the resources, technology, and support that the induction program provides. In this way students will become more familiar with the resources that the induction program provides as well as their assigned contact.

 

Recommendation Two:

Technological support should extend beyond program completion.

 

Financial Support

Funding required to expand the induction program’s technological capabilities could be provided with grants such as the PT3 grant. The program could apply for monies from Student Technology fees to provide computer support for students and graduates through web logs. Other grant opportunities could be explored through internal or external grants for induction activities and research.

 

Data to Support Recommendation Two

Findings

Website Survey Evaluation, spring 2002

• Georgia State University ’s induction program maintains a website that includes information about teaching methods and resources, classroom management, working with parents and with students with special needs, assessment and testing, teacher certification, graduate education, mentoring, sharing of ideas, and professional growth.
• Participants evaluating the website responded that it was easy to log into and use, although several participants indicated that they had difficulty finding the information they needed, as the directions for using WebCT were unclear to them. In general, new teachers indicated that the induction web site was the very helpful and found the links and autonomy in use of the web site its greatest strength. They rated the site high on whether it was useful and high to moderate its importance to them.

Chat room seminars with beginning teachers, spring 2002

• Similar to the group seminars, the chat rooms provided participants with opportunities to discuss the topic of dealing with parents and classroom management.
• While no one participated in the chat room dealing with parental involvement, three participants interacted in the chat room on classroom management.
• The three who participated found the experience helpful in terms of providing a venue for sharing ideas in a friendly manner that is easily accessed from home. All participants indicated that they would participate again in the future.
• Teachers specifically noted the desire for grade or subject specific information, classroom organization information, or undirected opportunities to share ideas and concerns. Their concerns regarding access to the chat rooms revolved around problems with logging in or missing the scheduled time(s) for chat room discussions. They all found the venue comfortable for discussion.

Onsite Observations and Interviews with Beginning Teachers: May 2003

• All of the participants agreed that having web space available for them to remain in contact with their peers would be beneficial. Both ECE and MCE students complete their respective programs as a cohort and would like to remain in contact with their colleagues during their first years of teaching.

Reports from Faculty/Staff Maintaining WebCT Contact with Graduates in a Cohort: 2002-ongoing

• Beginning teachers indicated that the regular contact with Georgia State University faculty, the ability to communicate via Web CT with faculty and colleagues, and informal meetings arranged by a faculty member as being extraordinarily beneficial. Particularly these teachers felt less isolated and were better able to discuss and collectively address problems they were experiencing.

 

Implications

• Students have indicated that they would like to remain in contact with the university and their colleagues during their first years of teaching. Additional web space would allow graduates the opportunity to communicate with their Georgia State contact person as well as with colleagues within their own system.
• The website can be valuable resource to new teachers; however graduates must be aware that this resource is available and knowledgeable regarding accessing it. Moreover, the website must be continually updated with relevant and current information.
• Chat rooms can be a useful and convenient way for new teachers, practicing at a distance, to keep in contact with the university.
• Low participation and technological difficulties experienced by teachers might be remedied if Georgia State’s induction program capabilities were expanded to include a frequent and regular flow of information to beginning teachers. Thus, beginning teachers would be aware of chat room seminars well in advance.

 

Recommendation Three:

The Georgia State University induction program should establish regular contact with school systems throughout metro-Atlanta in order to coordinate induction efforts and mentoring programs.

 

Data to Support Recommendation Three

Findings

All day sharing with four metro-Atlanta school systems, May 2002

• Conversations with school system personnel indicate their need for strong induction program and willingness to collaborate with Georgia State University.

Onsite Observations and Interviews with Beginning Teachers: May 2003

• Half of the schools represented by these teachers have a formal mentoring program in place. However, it became clear that only one of the mentoring programs that existed had a systematic approach, even comparing those within the same school system. The others can be described as sporadic in nature.

 

Implications

• School systems desire to augment existing induction efforts through partnering with Georgia State University’s induction program.
• Mentoring programs currently in place by the school systems are not sufficiently supporting new teachers. Therefore, Georgia State University’s induction program would not necessarily replicate existing support, rather it would offer teachers, at the very most, additional or, in some cases, the only support and mentoring they are receiving.

 

Recommendation Number Four:

Additional funding to support scholarly research related to Georgia State’s induction program is needed.

 

Rationale to Support Recommendation Number Four

 

Georgia State University is a research university, therefore the proposed induction program should include the collection of longitudinal data which follows graduates into their first years of teaching, including surveys completed upon graduation, after the first year of teaching, and after the second year of teaching. This could also include observational data on selected graduates.

Funds for GRAs are also needed to support quality research. The committee estimates that for every 30 graduates, a GRA should be assigned. Additionally, individuals involved in the induction program should be provided funding for conference attendance and presentation. The committee also believes that research should be collaborative among programs.

 

Recommendation Number Five:

The induction program should be linked to other alumni activities and fund raising.

 

Rationale to Support Recommendation Number Five

 

The induction program will create stronger relationships between Georgia State University and teacher education graduates. People are more likely to contribute to their alma mater when they have had continuing links.

 

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY

QUALITY ASSURANCE GUARANTEE FOR EDUCATORS

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION FACULTY

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY

 

THE BOARD OF REGENT’S QUALITY ASSURANCE 

Appendix A  

 

The Professional Education Faculty, Georgia State University will guarantee the quality of any educator that it recommends for initial certification in Georgia.

 

GUARANTEE

 

• Georgia State University’s Professional Education Faculty guarantees that each individual recommended for initial educator certification:
  1. has completed an educator preparation program that is accredited by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), Georgia Professional Standards Commission (PSC), and The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS);
  2. has passed or exempted PRAXIS I (knowledge of basic skills) and PRAXIS II (in certification areas(s));
  3. has successfully completed a supervised capstone student teaching and/or practicum/internship experience in an accredited school setting;
  4. has demonstrated knowledge of subject matter required to teach QCC Objectives in their specialization field of preparation at Georgia State University;
  5. will demonstrate success in bringing students form diverse cultural, ethnic, international, and socioeconomic groups to high levels of learning; and
  6. will use telecommunication and information technologies as tools for learning when appropriate.

 

LIMITED WARRANTY

 

Georgia State University will guarantee educators during the first two years immediately following graduation form Georgia State University or following recommendation by Georgia State University for an initial certificate, whichever occurs first. Any Georgia State University educator in a Georgia school, who fails to demonstrate the essential skills, will be provided additional training by Georgia State University’s Professional Education Faculty at no expense to the educator or the employer. That training will consist of an individualized plan agreed upon by the school district and the university that includes specified learning outcomes. Georgia State University assumes no responsibility for the educator’s employment contract with the employer.

 

The professional Education Faculty at Georgia State University will not be held accountable under this warranty for graduates who during the life of the warranty

• commit criminal acts;
• engage in unethical behaviors that violate the Georgia Educators Code of Professional Ethics;
• teach outside of their field of certification or concentration (middle school graduates: two major fields of content concentration);
• teach under a provisional certificate in a field while attempting to secure enough courses at Georgia State University to secure clear renewable certification in that field.

 

PROCEDURE FOR HONORING THE WARRANTY

 

• Initial contact will be with the Dean of the College of Education

Principals must provide to the Dean of the College of Education documentation that the educator’s performance does not meet the criteria established by the warranty. Included will be:

 

• a copy of a minimum of two criterion based assessments;
• documentation of professional development support provided by the school;
• a copy of the professional improvement plan;
• a written explanation of the principals’ rationale for identifying the educator as someone who does not perform to the level specified by the warranty; and
• a signed statement from the Superintendent and/or his/her designee indicating that all documentation has been reviewed and is supported by the Superintendent.
  • The Dean’s office will forward the request to the department(s) responsible for preparing the educator.

 

• The Department Chair(s) will convene a committee to develop a remediation plan with the educator within 30 working days of the receipt of all documentation. Committee members, at a minimum, should consist of (a) a student teaching/internship supervisor, (b) one or more faculty member(s) representing the content area(s) of certification, and (c) an employing school mentor. Enrollment in regularly scheduled relevant university courses will not be offered for this purpose.

• At the end of the remediation plan’s timeline, which shall not exceed two years, a letter of progress for each identified professional development outcome will to the employing school.

Approved by the College of Education Department Chairs on 7/14/99; approved by the Professional Education Council on 11-30-99’ approved by the Professional Education Faculty on 12-3-99

Appendix B

 

GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY INDUCTION MODEL

A Proposed Framework for Quality Teachers

 

The foundation for the program is based on professional and state standards for teachers and students. The standards provide focus for the consortium, especially in success for teachers in bringing all students to high levels of achievement. INTASC standards and the State Curriculum are standards that inform the work.

One primary function is to facilitate the training of mentors who work with beginning educators. Many school systems provide mentor training. The state has a certification add-on endorsement for mentor teachers. It is conducted by school systems and higher education institutions and includes one course and an internship. Endorsed teachers receive a stipend for working with other teachers. The State Teaching Force Center reports that the metro area had over 800 teachers who received stipends for mentoring working with 1200 beginning teachers. The consortium can reach more teachers. In addition to direct training, the consortium supports school leaders in developing new teacher induction and mentoring programs in their schools. This support will include training, assessing the needs of new teachers, and providing a resource for information on best practices in mentoring and induction.

The Consortium developed an induction program for University to complement what the schools do. The University Induction Program has support components and professional development components. The University program involves university faculty directly with beginning teachers, another unique element to the work of this Consortium. Three major support components are: (1) personal and one on one contact with beginning teachers and mentors; (2) group contact with beginning teachers and mentors; and (3) web contact with beginning teachers and mentors.

In the first component, personal contact, each teacher education program designates a contact person (who also is the steering committee member) for its graduates. This person is available for e-mail and telephone contact about any problem a beginning teacher is experiencing. The contact person provides whatever help seems appropriate which includes putting the teacher in contact with another University faculty and visiting the classroom of the teacher. The contact person provides professional support for and advocacy for the beginning teachers. Mentors and administrators also are given information about the University program and also can ask for support or provide suggestions for improvements in the program.

University Induction Program group contact is through three voluntary seminars for its graduates per semester, approximately every 6 weeks. The topics are determined according to assessed needs of beginning teachers. Seminars can be conducted for all beginning teachers in a school system, if requested. Seminars also can be conducted for mentors, administrators, and schools, as possible and as requested. All seminars will be developed around the community theme, that teaching is participation in a learning community and that beginning teachers should be provided and use all the resources of the community.

The purpose for the technology component is to provide an additional dimension of access to resources, support from experts and colleagues, and as a clearinghouse for sharing information. Through technology, project participants can access resources on induction at their convenience and can be linked to a network of mentors, to experts at University, and to other beginning teachers who are in their discipline. The technology resources are another dimension of community, providing cognitive resources to as well or social and emotional support for beginning teachers. The technology infrastructure consists of two parts: a public website that provides information and support about induction and a password protected website that provides beginning teachers with personal information and support through chat rooms, threaded discussion sites, and specialized links to resources. The ‘open to the public’ website (http://education.University.edu/induction) provides information and links to resources for effective teaching, mentoring, and model induction programs. This site is available to beginning teachers, mentors, and anyone interested in information and links to teaching and learning in K-12 settings. The site also provides links to each of the Metro school systems participating in the project, links to professional organizations, and links to the resources of the Georgia Department of Education. From the public site, participants in the induction program can access the password protected WebCT site. This site, the “Virtual Teachers’ Lounge”, has been developed that will permit access to information, sharing ideas, asking for help, and storing documents related to the project within a limited access site. The WebCT site also offers chat rooms that will be scheduled for synchronous interactions related to topics chosen by the beginning teachers For example, on Tuesday at 7 p.m. an expert on working with parents might lead a discussion designed to prepare beginning teachers for upcoming parent teacher conferences. Or, in some occasions, the beginning teachers may decide to have a discussion on certain issues without the experts. For other topics, the threaded discussion site is available to provide an asynchronous opportunity to ask questions, raise concerns, or share information or successes. Because WebCT is password protected, the questions and comments of the participants are accessible only to those in the induction project.

 

Back to Top