NCLB Policy and Research on Alternative Route Preparation

Erling E. Boe, PennMichael S. Rosenberg,

Johns Hopkins Paul T. Sindelar, Florida

Background: Context and Policy

• To address the chronic, long-term, and worsening shortage of special education teachers…

• NCLB encourages the development of streamlined alternatives to traditional teacher preparation,

• Even though we know very little about how effective alternative routes are,

and generalizing from secondary content model to special education is specious.

• However, what we do know suggests that not all alternative routes are equally effective.

Our Purpose Today

• To ascertain the consequences of public policy promoting alternative routes, we will share findings from our recent studies of alternative route preparation.

THE SUPPLY, QUALIFICATIONS, AND ATTRITION OF

TEACHERS FROM TRADITIONAL AND

ALTERNATIVE ROUTES OF PREPARATION

Ed Boe and Bob SunderlandUniversity of Pennsylvania

andLynne Cook

California State University, Dominguez Hills

OSEP Project Directors ConferenceJuly 17, 2007

tqrm\OSEP Panel 7-07(1).ppt

PROBLEMS

• Chronic shortage of teachers in special education and other fields.

• Lack of high quality national data on the preparation of teachers by traditional and alternative routes intended to reduce the shortage.

NCES NATIONAL DATA SOURCESSchools and Staffing Survey (SASS): 2003-04

Teacher Follow-Up Survey (TFS): 2004-05

The first sources of high-quality sample survey data on teacher supply and attrition by type of preparation (i.e., traditional vs. alternative).

Caution: Numbers reported are subject to sampling and other errors; therefore, numbers reported are an approximation.

COMMON TERMS

• TTP: Traditional Teacher Preparation Program

• ATP: Alternative Teacher Preparation Program

• SETs: Special Education Teachers

• GETs: General Education Teachers

FIRST RESEARCH QUESTION

• How many employed teachers are produced by TTP and ATP programs?

61%65% 67%

70%

2%4%

14%9%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Years of Teaching Experience

Type of Preparation by Years of Experience[Public and Private Teachers Combined]

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Per

cen

tage

of

Tea

cher

s

Traditional Program

Alternative Program

1-3 4-10 11-20 21 or More

SECOND RESEARCH QUESTION

• How many SETs completed various types of preparation?

0% 50% 100%

Years 11 to 20

Years 4 to 10

Years 1 to 3

Percentage of Teachers by Type of Preparation

Special Education Teacher Supplyby Years of Teaching Experience

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Traditional Alternative 62 % 22 % 16 %

Other

72 % 9 % 19 %

74 % 3 % 23 %

All OtherAlternative ProgramsTraditional Degree Programs

THIRD RESEARCH QUESTION

To what extent did TTP and ATP programs produce beginning teachers who were hired to teach in shortage areas such as: * Special education

* Mathematics education

* Science education

Percent of Beginning Teachers Produced by Traditional Degree Programs and Alternative Programs

by Teaching Area: 2003-04 (with 1-3 Years of Experience)

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Column Percents %

Teaching Area

Demand: TotalTeaching Force

Traditional Degree Program

Alternative Program

Special Ed. 13 % 14 % 20 % a

Voc/Business Ed 5 % 4 % 9 % a

Mathematics 8 % 9 % 11 % b

Science 6 % 5 % 9 % b

Elementary Ed. 33 % 35 % 22 % c

Arts/Music 7 % 6 % 3 % c

All Other Subjects 28 % 27 % 25 %

Total 100 % 100 % 100 %

a Significantly greater than traditional degree programb Equivalent to traditional degree programc Significantly less than traditional degree program

FOURTH RESEARCH QUESTION

• How much preparation was obtained by beginning SETs who completed TTP and ATP programs?

36%

27%

37%

0%

50%

30%

20%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Traditional Degree Programs

Alternative Programs

1 or 2 Methods Courses 3 or 4 Methods Courses

5 or More Methods Courses

1 or 2 Methods Courses 3 or 4 Methods Courses

5 or More Methods Courses

Percentage of Beginning SETs

Supply of SETs from Traditional and AlternativePrograms by Number of Methods Courses (Years 1 – 3)

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

57%

28%

0%

53%

52%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Traditional Degree Programs

Alternative Programs

First Year Teaching

Third Year Teaching

First Year Teaching

Third Year Teaching

Supply of Public Teachers from Traditional and Alternative Programs Completing Five or More Methods Courses

by Years of Experience (1 versus 3)

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Percentage of Beginning Public Teachers

With Five or More Methods Courses

36%

10%

54%

0%

87%

5%

8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Traditional Degree Programs

Alternative Programs 0 Weeks Practice 1 - 7 Weeks Practice

8 or More Weeks Practice

0 Weeks Practice 1 - 7 Weeks Practice

8 or More Weeks Practice

Supply of SETs from Traditional and AlternativePrograms by Weeks of Practice Teaching (Years 1 – 3)

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Percentage of Beginning SETs

FIFTH RESEARCH QUESTION

To what extent did TTP and ATP Programs produce qualified SETs

who were?

* Fully certified

* Prepared in special education

48%

84%67%

90% 93%

81%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 -3 Years 4 - 6 Years 7 - 9 YearsYears of Teaching Experience

Fully Certified Special Education TeachersBy Years of Teaching Experience

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Fu

lly-C

erti

fied

Tea

cher

s Traditional Degree Programs

Alternative Programs

91%

6%

3%

0%

22%

20%

58%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Traditional Degree Programs

Alternative ProgramsSpecial Ed. Teaching Major General Ed. Teaching Major

Other Major

Special Ed. Teaching Major General Ed. Teaching Major

Other Major

Supply of SETs from Traditional and AlternativePrograms by Teaching Major Field (Years 1 – 3)

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

Percentage of Beginning SETs

SIXTH RESEARCH QUESTION

Attrition of beginning teachers prepared through TTP and ATP Programs: Is there a difference?

9%

3%

7%

12%

0%

3%

6%

9%

12%

15%

Years of Teaching Experience

Annual Attrition Percent

AlternativeProgram

TraditionalProgram

1 - 3 4 - 6

Attrition of Full-Time Public School Teachers by Type of Preparation

Source: 2003-05 SASS, TFS, NCES

OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

• ATP Programs have become a major source of beginning SETs (22%).

• ATP Programs have responded to the shortage of SETs.

• Beginning SETs from ATP Programs are less well prepared and qualified than those from TTP Programs.

• Attrition of beginning teachers is equivalent from TTP and ATP programs.

Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Alternative Route Teacher Preparation

Paul T. Sindelar

University of Florida

Michael S. Rosenberg

Johns Hopkins University

Nancy Corbett, David Denslow, and James Dewey

University of Florida

Where We Were: Reviews

Effective ARC programs can produce competent teachers, often as competent as graduates of traditional teacher education programs

Effective ARC programs are characterized by (Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2001; 2005):

– Collaboration among program providers (LEA, SEA, IHEs)– Program of adequate length and intensity– Substantial, rigorous, and coherent programmatic content – Meaningful and frequent observation and mentoring

Where We Were: AR Indexing Study(Rosenberg, Boyer, Sindelar, & Misra, 2007)

Development of Program Lists (n=235) Final Sample (n=101) Areas of Survey

– Program Infrastructure– Program length and intensity – Program Characteristics– Participant Characteristics

Where We Were: AR Indexing Study: General Themes

– High IHE Involvement AR programs represent an effective means for IHEs to expand

their offerings with little additional capital expenditure Impact of streamlined programs operating along with traditional

programs

– Length of Preparation and Support Regardless of length of time before assuming full teaching

responsibilities most AR programs are more than 18 months Most programs making efforts to deliver supportive programs

that promote successful induction

Where We Were: AR Indexing Study

Participants – Mid-Career Changers – 46%– Recent Bachelors - 29%

25% of Recent Bachelors Degrees are General Educators

May Require Individualized Programs

Where We Are: INVEST Phase I Cost Studies (Sindelar, Corbett, Denslow, Dewey, Lotfinia, & Rosenberg, 2007)

In-Depth Program/Cost Analysis of 31 AR Programs

Data Collection– Interviews with Program Directors – Analysis of Program Planners– Analysis of Cost Tables

Cost Studies: Definitions

Internship Program (n=14): Participants are hired as teachers and complete program while teaching

Distance Education/Online Program (n=10): Courses are delivered via internet or distance education technology

Paraprofessional Step-Up Program (n=4): Program leads to licensure and/or degree for paraprofessionals

District Sponsored Program (n=3): School district or regional consortium provides training

Program Content

GEF SEF GEM SEM FE ∑

INT 49.5 (0-180)

62(0-270)

82.5(0-240)

239(112.5-

490)

216.4(0-720)

643.6(137.5-1645)

STP 112.4 (0-240)

71.5(30-112)

198.2(144-270)

295.5(144-432)

219.7(74.7-480)

897.3(528-1392)

DIS 16.5(0-45)

69.9(0-135)

39.2(0-144)

270.8(84-515)

89.3(0-432)

485.7(144-947)

LEA 17.5(9-23.5)

31.8(10.5-45)

55.7(20-84)

27.8(0-45)

13.3(0-40)

146.2(80-223)

Program Content: All Programs

Average Program Content, All Programs

8%

12%

21%

45%

14%

1

2

3

4

5

Note: 1 = gen ed foundations, 2 = SE foundations, 3 = gen ed methods, 4 = SE methods, and 5 = field experiences

Program Content by Type

Para-Professional Step-up

13%

8%

22%

33%

24%General Foundations

SE Foundations

General Methods

SE Methods

Field Experiences

District Sponsored

9%

15%

42%

23%

11%

General Foundations

SE Foundations

General Methods

SE Methods

Field Experiences

Distance Education

3%14%

7%

56%

20%

General Foundations

SE Foundations

General Methods

SE Methods

Field Experiences

Internship Model

8%10%

12%

36%

34% General Foundations

SE Foundations

General Methods

SE Methods

Field Experiences

Program Length, % Preservice

8.9

635.3

897.3

0.0

6.3

479.5

89.257.0

Internship Step-up Distance District

Program Type

Instructional Hours, Preservice (Blue)

Discussion Points

District Programs have far fewer hours and few special education specific content hours

Distance and Internship programs primarily “on-the-job”

Phase II data to help assess influence of content allocation on outcomes

Costs & Cost Effectiveness

• How large are AR programs and does size vary by program type?

• How much do AR programs cost and does cost vary by program type?

• Is economy of scale achieved? How large does a program need to be to be efficient?

• How long does it take to complete an AR program and does completion time vary by program type?

• Does completion rate vary by program type?

Completers by Program Type

Internship Step-up Distance District

31

96

42

22

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Average Annual Completers by Program Type

Starters and Finishers

3136

2227

42 44

96

113

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

INT DIS STP LEA

Program Type

Completion Rate

Completion Rates by Program Type

85%81%

96%

85%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

INT DIS STP LEA

Estimating Costs

• Course-by-course accounting Regular faculty: rank and FTE Salary by rank estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics Survey

Non-regular faculty: $ amounts for adjuncts and graduate teaching assistants

• Administrative (including tech support)

• Facilities (pending)

Average Cost by Program Type

Internship Step-up Distance District

$14,521.99

$5,566.94

$10,536.90

$14,317.84

$-

$2,000.00

$4,000.00

$6,000.00

$8,000.00

$10,000.00

$12,000.00

$14,000.00

$16,000.00

Average Cost Per Completer

Cost Comparisons

• Five cost or cost benefit studies Darling-Hammond, 2000 (Teach for America) Denton & Smith, 1985 Fowler, 2003 (Massachusetts Initiative for New Teachers)

Lewis, 1990 Rice & Brent, 2002 (Pathways to Teaching)

• Reporting 10 per completer cost estimates (or ranges)

• Reported in constant 2006 dollars

Cost Comparisons

• $23,522 Bachelor’s Degree (Darling-Hammond)

• $14,500 Internship and Step-up Programs• $13,635 MINT Program (Fowler)• $11,710 TFA (Darling-Hammond)• $10,500 Distance Programs• $9,605 to $13,760 full-time at public institution (Rice & Brent)

• $5,600 District Programs• $4,567 to $7,365 part-time at public institution (Rice & Brent)

Program Size and Cost

Program Size and Cost

• Economy of scale is achieved at 30 participants With increasingly fewer participants, costs rise steeply

Beyond 30, per participant costs do not decline significantly

• At any given program size, distance and district programs tend to cost less

Program Length & Intensity

INT DIS STP LEAYears to

Completion1.95 2.00 2.17 1.22

% Regular Faculty

33% 53% 42% 0%

Clock Hours

653 489 897 146

Program Intensity(hours/year)

334.3 242.9 414.1 119.5

Summary of Phase I Findings

• IHEs participate in most alternative route programs

• There are discernible models of AR training Internship Distance delivery Step-up District Sponsored

Summary of Phase I Findings

• Hours of instruction vary dramatically by program type (by a factor of 6) Only district-sponsored programs seem streamlined in the NCLB sense

• Cost varies dramatically by program type (a factor of 2.6)

• Yet economy of scale is achieved with 30 participants, regardless of program type

Food for Thought

• Step-up program graduates tend to remain in the field as teachers… Will low attrition ameliorate high initial costs for step-up programs?

Recall that step-up programs have highest % completion

• Much less is known about attrition and retention of completers from other program types… Will high attrition inflate the low initial costs for completers of distance and district programs?

• Are AR program graduates competent teachers?

• Does beginning teacher quality vary by program type?

Phase II: Data Collection

• Teaching observations (Pathwise) Teacher Quality 6 teachers from 3 programs of each type (N = 72)

• Graduate Survey Unique contribution to supply Prospective study of teacher attrition

As many graduates from as many programs as possible

Phase II: Graduate Survey

• Demographics• Previous degrees and work experience

• Programs considered and chosen• Program content, including practice teaching (from SASS)

• Sense of preparation (from SASS)• Professional activity