THE PILGRIMAGE of ALTERNATE-CERTIFICATION TEACHERS in HIGH-NEED SCHOOLS a Thesis Submitted
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
EDUC 1225 Pursuing Teacher Quality; How Policy Shapes Teaching Spring 2020
EDUC 1225 Pursuing Teacher Quality; How Policy Shapes Teaching Spring 2020 Day and time: Monday and Wednesday, 8:30-9:50 am Location: Salomon Center 203 Instructor: Emily Kalejs Qazilbash Professor of the Practice of Education 164 Angell Street, 2nd floor, Room 236 [email protected] 401-863-6910 Office hours: Monday, 11:00-3:00 Course Description and Objectives Syllabus is subject to change over the course of the semester Course description: Teachers are critical for transforming schools and changing trajectories of students’ lives; our experiences as students and research underscores their importance in changing students’ academic trajectories. We tend to think of teachers as doing their work alone, but they are part of a greater education ecosystem. In this course, we will examine the constraints - those imposed by principals, district policy, and state and federal law - under which teachers work. What can policy makers consider as they work to improve the experience students have in the classroom, especially as we ensure that our most vulnerable students have the most effective teachers? Class activities include discussions, policy analyses, lectures and simulations. Students will complete two memos and one final paper. This class has no prerequisites and no enrollment cap. Course objectives: Students will broaden their understanding of what it means to teach and will deepen their commitment to what it is that they value related to the act of teaching. Specifically, the course has the following goals: 1. Course content goals: a. Students will gain a deep understanding of the role of a teacher and who is currently teaching in K-12 schools in the US with a focus on an analysis of the diversity of the workforce. -
Teacher Quality 2.0
Teacher Quality 2.0 A MERICAN E NTERPRISE I NSTITUTE Special Report 2 The Hangover Thinking about the Unintended Consequences of the Nation’s Teacher Evaluation Binge Sara Mead, Andrew Rotherham, Rachael Brown | September 2012 Special Report 2 Teacher Quality 2.0 Foreword There is incredible interest and energy today in addressing issues of human capital in K–12 education, especially in the way we prepare, evaluate, pay, and manage teachers. States have been developing and implementing systems intended to improve these practices, with a considerable push from foundations and the federal government. As we start to rethink outdated tenure, evaluation, and pay systems, we must take care to respect how uncertain our efforts are and avoid tying our hands in ways that we will regret in the decade ahead. Well-intentioned legislators too readily replace old credential- and paper-based micromanagement with mandates that rely heavily on still-nascent observational evaluations and student outcome measurements that pose as many questions as answers. The flood of new legislative activity is in many respects wel- come, but it does pose a risk that premature solutions and imperfect metrics are being cemented into difficult-to-change statutes. AEI’s Teacher Quality 2.0 series seeks to reinvigorate our now-familiar conversations about teacher quality by looking at today’s reform efforts as constituting initial steps on a long path forward. As we conceptualize it, “Teacher Quality 2.0” starts from the premise that while we’ve made great improve- ments in the past ten years in creating systems and tools that allow us to evaluate, compensate, and deploy educators in smarter ways, we must not let today’s “reform” conventions about hiring, evalua- tion, or pay limit school and system leaders’ ability to adapt more promising staffing and school models. -
Unintended Consequences
The Case for UNINTENDED Reforming the Staffing Rules in CONSEQUENCES Urban Teachers Union Contracts By Jessica Levin, Jennifer Mulhern, and Joan Schunck © 2005 The New Teacher Project This research was funded by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. We thank Casey for its support but acknowledge that the findings and conclusions presented in this report are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Foundation. The authors would like to thank The New Teacher Project’s Board of Directors for their invaluable advice on this project. We would also like to thank the following staff from The New Teacher Project for their help with all aspects of this report: Emma Cartwright, Tysza Gandha, Megan Garber, Kaya Henderson, Jasmine Jose, David Keeling, Metta Morton, Laura Nick, Michelle Rhee, Ariela Rozman, Doug Scott, David Sigler, Andrew Sokatch, and Victoria Van Cleef. Finally, we would like to recognize the leadership, central office staff, principals, and teachers of the five studied districts for the time they gave us. TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 Foreword 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 CHAPTER ONE: Teacher Transfer and Excess Rules in Urban Contracts: How They Work 12 CHAPTER TWO: The Impact on Urban Schools 31 CHAPTER THREE: Recommendations for Change 40 CONCLUSION 41 APPENDIX A: How the Five Studied Districts Place Voluntary Transfers and Excessed Teachers 42 APPENDIX B: What Happens in Your District: A Primer 45 APPENDIX C: Methodology FOREWORD In our 2003 report Missed Opportunities: How We Keep High-Quality Teachers Out of Urban Classrooms, The New Teacher Project documented how delayed hiring in urban school districts resulted in the loss of significant numbers of new teacher applicants, particu- larly the most qualified, to other districts that hired earlier. -
Local Governments and Mayors As Amici Curiae in Support of the Employees ______Michael N
Nos. 17-1618, 17-1623, 18-107 In the Supreme Court of the United States __________________ GERALD LYNN BOSTOCK, Petitioner, v. CLAYTON COUNTY, GEORGIA, Respondent. __________________ ALTITUDE EXPRESS, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. MELISSA ZARDA, et al., Respondents. __________________ R.G. & G.R. HARRIS FUNERAL HOMES, INC., Petitioners, v. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Respondent, and AIMEE STEPHENS, Respondent- Intervenor. __________________ On Writs of Certiorari to the United States Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh, Second, and Sixth Circuits __________________ BRIEF OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND MAYORS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF THE EMPLOYEES __________________ MICHAEL N. FEUER ZACHARY W. CARTER City Attorney Corporation Counsel JAMES P. CLARK RICHARD DEARING KATHLEEN KENEALY DEVIN SLACK BLITHE SMITH BOCK LORENZO DI SILVIO MICHAEL WALSH DANIEL MATZA-BROWN DANIELLE L. GOLDSTEIN NEW YORK CITY Counsel of Record LAW DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE LOS 100 Church Street ANGELES CITY ATTORNEY New York, NY 10007 200 N. Main Street, 7th Fl. Los Angeles, CA 90012 Counsel for Amici Curiae (213) 978-8100 [email protected] i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . ii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT . 1 ARGUMENT . 2 I. Local Experience Shows That Prohibiting All Forms of Sex-Based Discrimination Benefits the Entire Community. 2 A. Non-discrimination laws and policies enhance amici’s operations. 3 B. Communities nationwide have benefitted from such anti-discrimination protections. 5 II. Workplace Discrimination—Including Sex Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People—Harms Local Governments. 7 CONCLUSION. 12 APPENDIX List of Amici . App. 1 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES PAGE CASES Adams v. -
The Village of Biscayne Park 600 NE 114Th St., Biscayne Park, FL 33161 Telephone: 305 899 8000 Facsimile: 305 891 7241
The Village of Biscayne Park 600 NE 114th St., Biscayne Park, FL 33161 Telephone: 305 899 8000 Facsimile: 305 891 7241 AGENDA REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING Log Cabin - 640 NE 114th Street Biscayne Park, FL 33161 Tuesday, August 06, 2019 7:00 pm In accordance with the provisions of F.S. Section 286.0105, should any person seek to appeal any decision made by the Commission with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made; which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, persons needing special accommodation to participate in the proceedings should call Village Hall at (305) 899 8000 no later than four (4) days prior to the proceeding for assistance. DECORUM - All comments must be addressed to the Commission as a body and not to individuals. Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks, or who becomes boisterous while addressing the Commission, shall be barred from further audience before the Commission by the presiding officer, unless permission to continue or again address the commission is granted by the majority vote of the Commission members present. No clapping, applauding, heckling or verbal outbursts in support or in opposition to a speaker or his/her remarks shall be permitted. No signs or placards shall be allowed in the Commission Chambers. Please mute or turn off your cell phone or pager at the start of the meeting. Failure to do so may result in being barred from the meeting. -
Venture Philanthropy and Teacher Education Policy in the US: the Role of the New Schools Venture Fund
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282742816 Venture Philanthropy and Teacher Education Policy in the US: The Role of the New Schools Venture Fund Article in Teachers College Record · May 2015 CITATIONS READS 49 1,288 2 authors: Kenneth M. Zeichner César Peña-Sandoval University of Washington Seattle Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso 228 PUBLICATIONS 13,513 CITATIONS 7 PUBLICATIONS 58 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: SCOPE Case Studies, Stanford University View project Development of socio-cultural competence in preservice secondary teachers: situated learning for a culturally relevant pedagogy. View project All content following this page was uploaded by César Peña-Sandoval on 12 January 2018. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Venture Philanthropy and Teacher Education Policy in the U.S.: The Role of the New Schools Venture Fund KENNETH ZEICHNER University of Washington CÉSAR PEÑA-SANDOVAL University of Washington Background & Purpose: This article focuses on the growing role of venture philanthropy in shaping policy and practice in teacher education in the United States. Our goal is to bring a greater level of transparency to private influences on public policy and to promote greater discussion and debate in the public arena about alternative solutions to current problems. In this article, we focus on the role of one of the most influential private groups in the United States that invests in education, the New Schools Venture Fund (NSVF), in promoting deregu- lation and market-based policies. -
Open Letter to the University of Michigan February 12, 2019 Re
Open Letter to the University of Michigan February 12, 2019 Re: SPG 601.38: “Required Disclosure of Felony Charges and/or Felony Convictions” and Related University of Michigan Policies We, the Carceral State Project at the University of Michigan--along with the undersigned faculty, students, and staff at the University of Michigan, as well as members of the larger community--wish to register our grave concern regarding the University’s recent implementation of a new policy, SPG 601.38.1 This policy requires faculty, staff, student employees, volunteers, and visiting scholars who find themselves convicted of a felony, and even those merely charged but not convicted, to report it to the University. The University of Michigan already requires all prospective undergraduate and graduate students, faculty members, and staff employees to disclose any previous criminal record (both felonies and misdemeanors) during the admissions or employment application process, including, in some cases, information from otherwise sealed juvenile records.2 The University also currently requires prospective employees, including graduate students, to undergo a criminal background check conducted by a private, for-profit company to identify any felony and misdemeanors convictions or pending charges.3 Although the University argues that SPG 601.38 will “better promote safety and security and mitigate potential risk,” this self-disclosure mandate adds a newly punitive element to already invasive and unjust policies that cause far more harm than good.4 Taken together, these policies promote over-criminalization rather than public safety, reinforce the racial and economic inequalities in the criminal justice system and on our campus, and have other devastating collateral consequences.5 The role of the University should be to offer education and employment rather than act as an extension of the carceral state. -
Press and Media.May 2019
Media Clips COVERED CALIFORNIA BOARD CLIPS Mar. 18, 2019 – May 15, 2019 Since the Mar. 14 board meeting, high-visibility media issues included: President Trump deciding he wants a GOP plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, before quickly being convinced to shelve the idea until after the 2020 elections. The administration’s Department of Justice declared its opposition to the ACA, filing in a federal appeals court that the legislation is unconstitutional and should be struck down. Meanwhile in California, Gov. Newsom unveiled his new budget that includes changes for Covered California, while Americans weighed in on the current health care climate. COVERED CALIFORNIA PRESS RELEASES AND REPORTS New Analysis Finds Record Number of Renewals for Leading State-Based Marketplaces, but Lack of Penalty Is Putting Consumers at Risk, May 7 ....................... 4 Open Forum: Trump abolished the health care mandate. California needs to restore it, San Francisco Chronicle, May 15, 2019 .......................................................................... 9 PRINT Articles of Significance Gavin Newsom’s health care budget has more help for Covered California, less for undocumented, Sacramento Bee, May 10, 2019 .......................................................... 10 Twelve State-based Marketplace Leaders Express Serious Concerns about Federal Health Reimbursement Arrangement Rule Changes, NASHP, April 29, 2019 .............. 13 3.6 Million Californians Would Benefit if California Takes Bold Action to Expand Coverage and Improve Affordability -
A Smarter Teacher Layoff System
A SMARTER TEACHER How Quality-Based Layoffs Can Help Schools Keep LAYOFF SYSTEM Great Teachers in Tough March 2010 Economic Times. POLICY BRIEF | March 2010 A Smarter Teacher Layoff System How Quality-Based Layoffs Can Help Schools Keep Great Teachers in Tough Economic Times The current economic downturn has forced school districts across the country to deal with massive budget cuts over the past two years. In some cases, these cuts led districts to make the wrenching decision to lay off teachers. Many other districts averted teacher layoffs only by spending temporary federal stimulus money or by sharply reducing central programs and school support services like food and transportation. If these districts face another round of budget reductions, they will have no choice but to find savings in their personnel costs. Unfortunately, with state government revenues languishing at their lowest levels since the Great Depression, further budget cuts are inevitable for most districts— making teacher layoffs inevitable, too.1 Everyone knows teacher layoffs are harmful to schools and students. But when school districts dust off the decades-old rules that govern the layoff process, they will find that the situation is even worse than they feared. That’s because most collective bargaining agreements and many state laws prevent school districts from considering the quality or effectiveness of each teacher when deciding whom to lay off. Instead, districts have no choice but to implement “quality-blind” layoffs based exclusively on seniority.2 The basic principle is “last hired, first fired;” newer teachers are laid off before more veteran teachers, regardless of how well they do their jobs. -
Isaac D. Buck the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010
THE PRICE OF UNIVERSALITY SUSTAINABLE ACCESS AND THE TWILIGHT OF THE ACA Isaac D. Buck The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) was intended to solve problems that had dogged American health care for generations. It built a comprehensive structure—by providing more Americans with accessible health insurance, revamping and reordering the private insurance market, expanding and reconfiguring Medicaid, and installing rational incentives into America’s health care enterprise. Without question, it was the most important piece of health care legislation since the mid-1960s, and it brought about positive change in millions of Americans’ lives. However, over the last eight years, the ACA has faced persistent political, popular, and policy-based challenges. It remains tenuous as its prominent insurance marketplaces precariously teeter. The law’s imperfections continue to fuel an uninterrupted barrage of legal, administrative, and regulatory attacks, which, piece by piece, weaken its overall effectiveness. Its failure to impact the cost of health care has continued to haunt it, making it unclear whether it will fully collapse or whether a mutated version of itself will lumber into the future. Either may be devastating to the future of American health care. In sum, the ACA did not change the dominant paradigm of America’s health care system because it failed to bring about meaningful cost control. While it may have relieved some of America’s worst tendencies, it further cemented a health care non-system, one whose technocratic tinkering could not tape over cracking foundation. Instead of installing a comprehensive system, the ACA opted to try to protect American patients and beneficiaries from the market’s worst effects without any effective means for cost control. -
Gradingthegraders
GRADINGTHEGRADERS A REPORT ON TEACHER EVALUATION REFORM IN PUBLIC EDUCATION BY THOMAS TOCH MAY 2016 About the Author About FutureEd Thomas Toch is the director of FutureEd is an independent, solution- FutureEd, an independent think tank oriented think tank at Georgetown at Georgetown University’s McCourt University’s McCourt School of School of Public Policy. He can be Public Policy. We are committed to reached at [email protected] and is bringing fresh energy to the causes of on Twitter at @Thomas_toch. excellence, equity, and efficiency in K-12 and higher education on behalf of the nation’s disadvantaged students. You can learn more about our work at www.future-ed.org. GRADING THE GRADERS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Grading the Graders 3 The New Evaluation Landscape 7 Impact 11 Challenges 20 Duncan’s Gambit 26 Recommendations 30 Endnotes 35 Bibliography 39 Acknowledgments 3 FutureEd Grading the Graders GRADING THE GRADERS Type “teacher evaluation” into the search engine of the District of Columbia school system’s website and pages of information cascade down the screen: the District’s rating standards, performance categories, technical reports on the role of student test scores in grading teachers, and much more. The same is true of the Tennessee State Department of Education’s site, where the Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model— known as TEAM and used to rate the majority of teachers in Tennessee’s public schools—is parsed in great detail. The comprehensiveness of the information hardly Beginning in 2009, policymakers’ stance toward seems surprising, given the centrality of teachers to teacher performance changed dramatically. -
U.S. Country Background Report
U.S. Country Background Report Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) Initial Teacher Preparation Study APRIL 2017 Jenny DeMonte American Institutes for Research This report was prepared for the National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, as an input to the TALIS Initial Teacher Preparation Study. The document was prepared in response to guidelines that the OECD provided to all countries. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the U.S. Department of Education, the OECD, or its member countries. Further information about the OECD review is available at www.oecd.org/edu/school/talis-initial-teacher-preparation-study.htm. CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1: CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................3 1.1 Trends and policies that have shaped the U.S. education system, including teacher preparation .........3 1.2 Current context of initial teacher preparation in the United States ....................................................6 1.3 National policies and developments ....................................................................................................8 1.4 State-level