RTTT P1 Proposal for the Seattle Teacher Residency for 2013-14

1. Problem of Practice

For the questions in this section, use disaggregated data about specific subgroups of students (i.e. African American, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Latino students, students who are English Language Learners, and students receiving Special Education services) as the basis for your answers. Provide evidence that racial inequities and other opportunity gaps are understood and addressed.

1a. Identify a problem of student learning that your project will impact. Describe that problem in concrete terms including specifically which students will be impacted.

The core problem of student learning that the Seattle Teacher Residency (STR) addresses is that on average, academic achievement among low income students, students of color, English language learners (ELL), and students who require special education (SPED) is lower than that of other students. Several data document the gap at Seattle Public Schools (SPS). The on-time (4-year) graduation rates of students of color trail the 84% rate of white students by 2 to 24 percentage points depending on the subgroup. The table below documents the rates of the distinct subgroups and students of color as a whole.

2012 FOUR-YEAR GRADUATION RATES BY RACE/ETHNICITY

SUBGROUP 2012 Cohort Graduated in 4 Years Rate GAP (Compared to White)

American Indian 53 33 62.3% -22.2 points

Asian/Pac. Islander 831 629 75.7% -8.7 points

Black/Afr. American 781 471 60.3% -24.1 points

Hispanic/Latino 374 226 60.4% -24.0 points

Multiracial 63 52 82.5% -1.9 points

TOTAL NON-WHITE 2,102 1,411 67.1% -17.3 points

White 1,246 1,052 84.4%

Low income students (regardless of race/ethnicity) also have lower on time graduation rates. This is important because 49 of Seattle’s public schools – nearly half - have Free/Reduced Lunch (FRL) enrollment rates above 40%, which is the threshold for federal Title I support.1 As the table below indicates, the gap between students eligible

1 Appendix A shows the enrollment and FRL rate of each Seattle school (source: OSPI’s report generator at

http://data.k12.wa.us/PublicDWP/web/Washingtonweb/DataTables/StudentNeedDTViewer.aspx)

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 2 of 34

for the FRLP program and other students is over 20%.

2012 FOUR-YEAR GRADUATION RATES BY FRL ELIGIBILITY

SUBGROUP 2012 Cohort Graduated in 4 Years On-time Rate

FRL Students (all races) 1,738 1,110 63.9%

Non-FRL (all races) 1,610 1,353 84.0%

GAP -20.1 Points

Achievement gaps are seen at all grade levels. The table below shows large performance gaps between 3rd through 5th grade students of color and other students in Washington’s 2012 Measures of Student Progress (MSP) exam. (STR will be placing residents in these grades in 2013-14; when they complete their residencies next summer, they will be hired in these grades for 2014-15.)

2012 MSP PASS RATES of 3rd to 5th GRADERS BY RACE/ETHNICITY

SUBGROUP READING MATH WRITING SCIENCE

American Indian 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Asian/Pacific Islander 54.9% 55.3% 49.2% 52.4%

Black 37.5% 29.2% 33.3% 26.4%

Hispanic 28.3% 22.3% 27.3% 26.3%

TOTAL NON-WHITE 40.7% 36.3% 36.6% 35.6%

White 86.2% 82.2% 75.4% 88.0%

GAP -45.5% pts -45.8% pts -38.8% pts -52.4% pts

The two tables below show the percentages of 3rd through 5th grade low income, ELL and SPED students district-wide who met the MSP grade-level standard.

2012 MSP PASS RATES of 3rd to 5th GRADERS: FRL vs. Non-FRL SUBGROUP READING MATH WRITING SCIENCE

FRL 51.4% 43.1% 49.9% 42.5%

Non-FRL 86.5% 82.6% 78.4% 87.1%

GAP -35.0 pts -39.4 pts -28.5 pts -44.6 pts

2012 MSP PASS RATES of 3rd to 5th GRADE ELL and SPED STUDENTS SUBGROUP READING MATH WRITING SCIENCE

English Language Learners 30.2% 22.0% 25.5% 28.5%

Special Education Students 23.3% 23.5% 28.2% 15.6%

Schools with higher than average enrollment of these subgroups tend to have lower overall school performance than schools with lower numbers of these groups2 (although there are some notable exceptions).

2 According to the SPS Performance Segmentation Framework, the average performance of schools where FRL

enrollment is 40% or higher is lower than performance of other schools. See Appendix B.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 3 of 34

Students to be Impacted by the Seattle Teacher Residency Project Seattle Teacher Residency’s mission is to accelerate student achievement through the preparation, support, and retention of a group of exceptional teachers who reflect the rich diversity in Seattle Public Schools. Guided by Urban Teacher Residencies (UTRU),3 the four Seattle Teacher Residency partners have recently completed a full year of program development and curriculum design of a new teacher pipeline specifically dedicated to improving student achievement at high need schools in Seattle. Twenty-five (25) highly qualified and diverse residents have been accepted into the program and now comprise Cohort One. They have committed the next 14 months to an intensive classroom-based training program that will lead to a Masters in Teaching (MIT) from the UW College of Education. After they successfully complete their residencies, they will fulfill the commitment they have made to teach in high-need schools in Seattle for at least five years. This first cohort of 25 residents started their graduate level coursework in July 2013.4 Later this month, they will be assigned to one of five high-need schools that STR has selected as training sites for 2013-14. Long range, STR intends to impact all of Seattle’s high-need schools. Factors that STR considers in determining which schools are “high-need” include: Title I status;5 enrollment of students of color, English language learners (ELL) and Special Education students (SPED); and academic performance. While the exact number of high-need schools may vary from year to year due to changes in demographics and performance levels, the 49 schools where FRL enrollment is 40% or higher are the ones we consider in our initial review (see Appendix A). These schools are potentially eligible to be considered as training and/or induction sites (an “induction” school is one that hires an STR-trained graduate who has successfully completed the training). Continual analysis of district data and need will determine where residents are placed; accordingly, STR graduates might not be inducted at the same high-need schools at which they were trained. However, because training sites and induction sites meet the same criteria, the high-need context in which residents are trained will be the same as that where they are hired. From among the district’s high-need schools, STR has selected five to serve as training sites for the first cohort of 25 STR residents in 2013-14. The five schools are characterized by:

Above average enrollment of low income students, students of color, ELL and/or SPED students;

A need for stronger academic performance; and

3 Urban Teacher Residence Unite is the national network of high quality residencies that provides training, technical

assistance, best practices, research, networking, tools for evaluation and quality assurance and other services. www.utrunited.org 4 These graduate level courses are being taught by UW College of Education faculty and others at Northgate

Elementary School. 5 The data show that the performance gap of low income students compared to their non-low income peers is greater

than the performance gap between students of color (as a group) and Caucasian students.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 4 of 34

Leadership and faculty commitment to collaborate with STR to improve outcomes.

As the table below documents, the five STR training sites have significantly higher numbers of low income students, students of color, ELL, and SPED students than other schools. (The last row of the table provides comparative figures.)

School (STR Training Site)

Total Enrollment

FRL Rate

Students of Color

ELL Rate

SPED Rate

Hawthorne Elem6 321 76.0 88.7% 19.3 13.1%

John Muir Elem 459 66.1 82.8% 20.2 6.5%

Leschi Elem 366 58.5 74.3% 12.6 7.7%

Madrona K8 275 71.7 81.7% 0.7 12.6%

Olympic Hills Elem 271 71.2 76.7% 21.8 18.8%

STR TOTAL/AVG 1,692 68.1% 81% 15.4% 11.0%

DISTRICT TOTAL/AVG 50,673 40.3% 56% 9.3% 12.4%

TRAINING SITES vs. DISTRICT +28 pts +25 pts +6.1 pts -1.4 pts

The following table shows the distinct student-of-color populations at the five schools.

DIVERSE ENROLLMENT AT THE 2013-14 STR TRAINING SITES

School N American

Indian Asian/ Pac

Islander Black/ Afr American

Hispanic/ Latino

Multi-racial White

Hawthorne 321 0.3% 18.7% 41.7% 20.2% 7.8% 11.2%

John Muir 459 0.7% 19.8% 41.6% 10.0% 9.8% 18.1%

Leschi 366 1.1% 5.2% 47.3% 9.8% 11.5% 25.1%

Madrona 275 0.4% 2.9% 65.5% 6.5% 5.8% 18.9%

Olympic Hills 271 1.1% 11.1% 26.2% 25.5% 11.4% 24.7%

Academic performance of 3rd to 5th graders at the five training sites lags that of peers as documented in the table below.

3rd to 5th Graders at STR Training Sites Meeting MSP Standard in 2013

School Reading Math Writing Science

Hawthorne 43.8% 43.2% 35.4% 44.7%

John Muir 63.6% 58.9% 47.6% 53.9%

Leschi 61.8% 45.8% 41.2% 48.6%

Madrona K8 52.3% 41.9% 50.0% 32.4%

Olympic Hills 74.2% 58.3% 60.0% 36.3%

STR Avg 3rd

to 5th

Graders 59.7% 51.0% 45.4% 44.9%

SPS Avg 3rd

to 5th

Graders 78.2% 71.0% 68.8% 74.8%

GAP -18.5 pts -20 pts -23.4 pts -29.9 pts

6 While the STR planning team considers all of these schools to be high-need, only Hawthorne and Madrona (in

italics) are listed in the RFP as high-need.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 5 of 34

The table below shows the performance level of the five STR sites on the SPS 2011-12 Performance Segmentation framework (performance levels during the 2012-13 school year will be available in mid-November).7

STR Training Site8 Performance

Hawthorne Elem 1 (Very low)

John Muir Elem 1 (Very low)

Leschi Elem 2 (Low)

Madrona K8 3 (Middle)

Olympic Hills 3 (Middle)

AVERAGE 2 (Low)

STR will have both short and long term impact at the training sites (and eventually the induction sites). The benefits to the training sites in 2013-14 include:

Coaching and support from STR staff

Leadership development for mentor teachers that supports and rewards excellence and promotes retention in high-need schools

Strong connections with the UW College of Education faculty and access to the latest in educational theory and research

Multiple teachers in a classroom to allow for increased differentiation and personalization of instruction (this is of particular benefit to the sub-groups of students that RTTT is targeting)

Since the training sites and the induction sites meet the same criteria in terms of need, the schools where STR graduates are hired after successfully completing their training will be consistent with the contexts in which they were trained. These schools will be the district’s highest priority for hiring STR graduates when they complete their residencies in the summer of 2014.9 1b. Describe the problem of teaching practice that your investment will impact. Articulate a specific rationale for why you believe the problem of teaching practice contributes to the problem of student learning. The research is clear: teacher quality is the most important in-school factor affecting student learning in schools,10 and low income students and students of color are

7 The Performance Segmentation Framework (or "level system") is based on a multi-factor formula that takes into

account two categories of data: performance growth and absolute outcomes. Schools evaluated as levels 1 and 2 are considered "low performing" and those evaluated as levels 4 and 5 are considered "high performing." The levels are determined and announced each fall for the preceding school year. For further information see http://goo.gl/vmIHG. 8 While the STR planning team considers all of these schools to be high-need, only Hawthorne and Madrona (in

italics) are listed in the RFP as high-need. 9 Hiring is subject to vacancies, funding, the collective bargaining agreement with teachers, and SPS discretion.

10 National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future, 1996,

http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/WhatMattersMost.pdf

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 6 of 34

disproportionately impacted by variations in teacher quality.11 High-need students – low income, students of color, ELL and SPED students - do not have equitable access to highly effective teachers. This is the specific teacher capacity issue that the STR is designed to address through the recruitment, preparation and retention of highly effective teachers. STR seeks to make high-need students less vulnerable to variations in teacher quality by providing a pipeline of highly effective and diverse new teachers for the students who need them the most.

Teacher Preparation The core problem that STR addresses is that traditional teacher training, induction and support is not adequate to address the problem of low student achievement in Seattle’s high-need schools. In short, there is a mismatch between teacher preparation and the human capital needs of high-need schools. Traditional models of teacher education do not always prepare educators to meet the learning needs of all public school students.12 District and State K-12 leaders have consistently called upon higher education to supply teachers better able to meet districts-specific challenges. In particular, K-12 leaders have highlighted the inability to retain and attract high quality teachers as indication of the need for higher education to better align preparation with district need.

The University of Washington, College of Education has been a national leader in pioneering clinical approaches to teacher education including a focus on preparing teachers for diverse, high poverty urban schools. Despite this movement of some in the field of teacher education in general, and the UW COE in particular, a need still exists to create district-specific and deeply embedded models of teacher preparation. One of the key reasons for this is that traditional models of teacher education do not always prepare emerging educators for these specific environments.13 While traditional university-based programs may offer well-designed opportunities for prospective teachers to simultaneously learn content and pedagogy, those experiences may still be disconnected from the real-life experience in a classroom.14 As a result, many teachers enter the classroom unprepared to work with high-need students and may not have the knowledge of community and culturally relevant pedagogy that will enable them to teach effectively in these schools.15 11

Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement, Rivkin, Hanushek, Kain, 2005,

http://hbanaszak.mjr.uw.edu.pl/TempTxt/HanushekRivkinKain+Ecta+2005.pdf 12

Traditional admissions criteria, for example, are often based on academic background, test scores, and other factors that have not been linked to teacher effectiveness. http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/ teachercharacteristicsjuly2011.pdf and http://www.dartmouth.edu/~dstaiger/Papers/w14485.pdf 13

While there is growing attention to residencies as a pathway to improving teacher quality, there are responsive, well-designed traditional programs. Different approaches can and do exist along with traditional entry ways in the same district, including Seattle. At UW, there are currently master’s degree certification programs in elementary, secondary, and special education which could be considered traditional university post baccalaureate programs and an alternative certification program for Teach for America teachers. 14

http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/docs/pubs/FINAL.CREATINGANDSUSTAININGUTR.PDF 15

Center for Teaching Quality report, page 8: http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/mf_nationalstrategyforumreport.pdf

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 7 of 34

Other Teaching Practice Issues Additional factors that contribute to low achievement at high-need schools include:

Comparatively low retention of teaching talent at high-need schools negatively impacts performance; and

The demographics of the student population are not reflected in the teaching corps;

Teacher isolation prevents teachers from developing their practice through shared expertise and professional community.

Teacher Retention Nationally, 50% of urban school teachers leave their jobs within three years, and underperforming schools have the lowest teacher retention rates. Moreover, teacher retention at high-need schools tends to be lower than at other schools. Studies consistently show that teachers who are better trained and more experienced are less likely to be serving academically disadvantaged students.16 Teachers who take positions in high-need schools and become more skillful over time are more likely to leave these settings to teach in higher achieving schools (or even leave the profession). The “revolving-door effect” that results from high teacher turnover disadvantages students by continuously placing new and inexperienced teachers in their classrooms; thus the schools that need effective educators the most are often the least likely to have them. As a result, the schools that need effective educators the most are denied the benefits of the growing effectiveness of promising teachers.17 The focused preparation that includes the intensive year of classroom-based training at a high-need school, the STR faculty support that STR residents receive, and the six-year commitment that residents make to high-need Seattle schools will increase the retention rates at these schools. Increasing retention will coincidentally result in an economic benefit to the district. Teacher Diversity The diversity of the SPS student enrollment is not reflected in the teaching corps. Currently, 20% of teachers in SPS are people of color as compared to 57% students of color (and higher in high need schools). Research, including a 2004 study by the National Education Association, confirms that increasing racial and ethnic diversity in the teaching force is directly linked to closing the achievement gap. A literature review shows three benefits result from bringing more teachers of color into American classrooms:

Teachers of color produce better academic results for students, notably students of color.

Teachers of color provide positive effects on teaching and the classroom.

16

The association between low teacher retention and low school performance is documented at http://goo.gl/Vcnmg, http://goo.gl/XYI0N and http://goo.gl/EtjwR 17

http://www.stanford.edu/~sloeb/papers/ExplaingtheShort.pdf

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 8 of 34

Teachers of color provide needed teachers in hard-to-staff schools. (Villegas, A.M., & Irvine, J.J., 2010)

The teachers that STR brings into the district will more closely reflect the diversity of the students in the nigh-need schools and we expect that the recruitment and screening practices that STR deploy will impact the district’s own processes. (See section 2f below for details.) Isolation Teacher isolation is a pervasive problem in most schools. Classroom structures are based on turn-of-the 20th century assumptions about efficiency. These structures are detrimental to a teacher’s work life and often prevent educators from developing instructional leadership skills that support student learning. Convening with a community of educators that have common student achievement goals eliminates isolation and provides opportunities for reflection and feedback. The results are improved skills and enhanced ability to assess what children need to reach higher standards.18 Research on teacher leaders, those who work with other educators to improve instruction, indicates that collaboration helps change teachers’ practice in ways that may impact student outcomes.19 The STR requires intensive collaboration among teachers, and will prepare residents who are skilled at co-planning, co-teaching, and collaborative analysis of student learning data. They will be better equipped to participate in and lead teacher teams in meeting the needs of diverse learners, including ELLs and students requiring Special Education services. Through a cohort model for both Residents and Mentors, opportunities to collectively reflect on the work are an integral component of the residency program. Residents participate in coursework together and are placed in cohorts are Partner Schools such that their own learning is a process by which they share and reflect on experiences that connect what they have learned in coursework and its application in classrooms. Mentor-teachers as well will be continuously brought together to build a unique learning community of district-specific teacher-educators who will reflect on implementation of the program and the value added to both their own practice as well as to student learning. 1c. What is the current analysis of existing teaching capacities? What current capacities exist to use strategies that raise academic outcomes for specific student subgroups? High teacher mobility and relatively low effectiveness present challenges in some of the district’s high-need schools. As documented in section 1a, there are too many low income, students of color, ELL and SPED students who do not have equitable access to highly effective teachers. The commitment of all four governing body members is to create opportunities for highly competent educators to impact students who have the greatest need. The Seattle Teacher Residency will help the district this do this.

18

https://www.teachingchannel.org/blog/2012/01/24/the-detriment-of-teacher-isolation/ 19

See http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/Transformingteaching2012.pdf and http://www.mspkmd.net/index.php?page=09_2b

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 9 of 34

For the 2011-2012 school year, nine new teachers were hired at the five schools that are now designated as the STR training sites for 2013-14. Eight of these nine teachers were rated “Proficient” or “Innovative” by their principal. These ratings are based on summative evaluation ratings based on Charlotte Danielson’s “Framework for Teaching” which was adopted by Seattle Public Schools as their evaluative framework. With respect to measuring performance differences between STR graduates and teachers who enter SPS through other pathways, we plan to use summative evaluation ratings consistent with Washington’s new teacher evaluation requirements (Washington Senate Bill 5895). Starting at the end of STR graduates’ first year of teaching, and annually thereafter, we will compare the ratings of teachers who enter through STR with the ratings of teachers who enter SPS through other pathways and who started the same year in other high-need elementary schools. We also will use student growth to compare residents against their traditionally trained peers. Lastly, we will look at site-specific survey data around metrics of school culture. For the connection to the district’s newly adopted instructional and leadership framework, please see the answer to question 2(c).

2. System Level Plan – Theory of Action For the questions in this section, demonstrate how specific actions expand systemic opportunities and support for specific subgroups of students (i.e. African American, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Latino, students who are ELL, and students receiving Special Education services).

2a. Identify specific actions to address the problem of teaching practice and who should take those actions (e.g. which particular central office staff, school principals, teacher leaders, etc., in which high needs schools). Theory of Action Based on What Students Need In general, what students at Seattle’s high-need schools need is the educational support required to be successful in school and in life. Stated another way, these students need an equitable educational system that responds strategically to performance and opportunity gaps that affect subgroups across the system. While there may be no single “silver bullet” or strategy to eliminate the gap, no sustainable progress can be made without fundamentally changing human capital systems. A core component to review is teacher recruitment, training and support. We believe that a system that wants to impact high-need schools and students would be well-served to hire teachers who:

Are familiar with the social contexts and educational challenges of the local high-need population

Demonstrate cultural competence vis-à-vis the distinct subgroups in the high need schools

Receive quality clinical training directed at improving achievement of students of color, ELL and/or SPED students in high-need schools where they were “field tested” and demonstrated their ability to impact student achievement

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 10 of 34

Are committed long-term to improving outcomes among high need students in the district

The Seattle Teacher Residency STR is a human capital strategy designed to improve performance at Seattle’s low performing, high-need schools. It is a teacher recruitment, training, induction and support system that will create a sustainable pipeline of teachers prepared for the specific context of low achieving schools with high populations of students of color, ELL and/or SPED students. The theory of action is that a rigorous, district-specific, classroom-based training program that embeds the work of teacher preparation directly into practice at high-need schools, and which focuses specifically on the needs of students of color, low income, ELL and SPED students, will improve academic achievement of these students and narrow the opportunity gap. Urban teacher residencies (UTRs) adapt the medical residency model to teacher preparation. UTRs are systemic solutions designed to accelerate student achievement through the training, support and retention of excellent teachers. UTRs blend a full year of classroom apprenticeship with aligned, graduate-level course work and an intensive resident/mentor partnership. Distinguished from traditional teacher training programs, residencies are built around field-based work supported by theoretical learning, as opposed to university-based studies accompanied by field experiences. Of the many attributes of the residency approach, foremost is the model’s ability to be “district-responsive.” This approach better enables a school district to prepare teachers to meet the needs of the student population. This month, 25 residents are being assigned to classrooms of 25 strategically selected teacher-mentors with whom they will work closely for the full 2013-14 school year. At the same time, residents take graduate level coursework in which STR/UW faculty will help them integrate their experience consistent with academic theory and best practices. Each resident has made a 6-year commitment to high-need SPS schools: one year of residency followed by five years of teaching.20 The STR curriculum committee, comprised of university and district educators, has done innovative work developing the course sequence for residents. The curriculum integrates theory and practice with particular attention to issues of inequity. It reflects Common Core standards, SPS’ new teacher evaluation framework, and Washington state competencies for teacher education. Coursework and tasks are embedded in the context of working with children. Two documents, “STR Residency Gateways” and “Core Practices and Principles,” reflect key elements of the curriculum (see Appendices C and D).

20

Employment is subject to successful completion of the residency, vacancies at high need schools consistent with the candidates’ qualifications, the collective bargaining agreement with SEA, and SPS hiring policies and discretion.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 11 of 34

Expanding Opportunities for Students of Color In developing the STR curriculum, the curriculum team embedded a strong focus on cultural awareness and responsiveness. The objective is to cultivate in the residents an awareness of how their own racial identify informs how they view and relate to children in their classrooms. A focus on social justice with attention to issues of race and equity has been integrated throughout both the content and the foundational courses, including those that address classroom management and the social/cultural foundations of education. Rather than targeting any specific subgroup of students, STR aims to prepare residents to be able to adapt to the cultural, economic and community context into which they are hired. By emphasizing an asset model and the relational aspects of teaching, the curriculum reinforces the need to make connections not only with students, but also with families, communities, and colleagues. With this foundation, teachers will plan their instruction mindful of the backgrounds and cultures of their students, the nature and extent of their needs, and the ways they can access resources to meet those needs. In Seattle, nearly 60% of students are students of color; yet only 20% of teachers are teachers of color. Research documents the impact that a diverse teaching force can have on the performance of students of color.21 Accordingly, STR committed to recruiting qualified cohort members who much more closely reflect the diversity of the student body. By targeting diverse referral sources and specifically engaging diverse communities, STR created a cohort for the 2013-14 school year in which 60% (15) of the 25 residents are highly qualified residents of color.

Race/Ethnicity Cohort One Residents

American Indian/Alaska Native 0

Asian/Pacific Islander 4

Black/African American 6

Hispanic/Latino 1

Multi-racial 4

White 10

Expanding Opportunities for ELL and SPED Students Over 120 languages/dialects are spoken by SPS students and an increasing number of students require SPED services; thus teachers qualified to teach ELL and SPED are in high demand and STR is designed to respond to that need (among others). All high-need students in the STR training sites will benefit from having two, committed adults in the classroom (the resident and the mentor-teacher). The increased differentiation and personalization of instruction that results from this will be a particular advantage for ELL and SPED students.

21

See Assessment of Diversity in America’s Teaching Force (http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/he/diversityreport.pdf). For other research confirming the academic impacts of highly effective teachers of color, see http://goo.gl/LkPq1.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 12 of 34

The STR curriculum incorporates effective, research-proven strategies for supporting ELL and SPED needs learners. Residents will have a strong background in both when they are recommended for their initial teacher license and Elementary Education Endorsement. In addition, all STR residents are required to earn a second endorsement related to teaching ELL or SPED students. (We call this the “1+1” model). Content includes an attention to SPED law, understanding IEPs, classroom management focused on a positive learning environment, and ELL strategies. The residents will learn how to engage in lesson modification and adaptation to meet the needs of individual learners. This includes changes to the curriculum, lesson delivery, use of strategic peer partnering and the physical instructional environment. With respect to ELL, the residents will develop a foundation for the teaching and learning of EL students with basic knowledge and understanding of the students’ cultural and linguistic diversity, funds of knowledge, second language acquisition, academic language and levels of English proficiency. Drawing upon this base, residents will develop those instructional practices that facilitate both their English learner students' access to the curriculum (for example, making content comprehensible) and development of the English language. Some of the core practices include: writing and addressing language objectives in a lesson, providing comprehensible input (e.g., use of visuals and graphic organizers), structuring student-to-student talk for English language development; accessing and building background knowledge (for example, using students' funds of knowledge as a basis for instruction; drawing upon the students' native languages to support learning; and structuring small group work for both content and language learning). Next, the focus will be integrating these core practices into literacy, math, and other content instruction. The model for SPED is much the same. Roles of the Partners Creating a new pipeline of teaching talent specifically trained and committed to improving student achievement requires numerous actions by a multitude of teams and individuals. While SPS is a core participant in the project, STR was conceived, planned and launched through a close and effective working partnership with three other organizations: the Alliance for Education, the University of Washington College of Education (UW CoE), and the Seattle Education Association (SEA). There are also numerous other collaborators and participants. To clarify and confirm specific roles and responsibilities, the partners developed and executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). While information about partners’ roles is presented immediately below, the MOA in Appendix E provides additional detail. Project Governance and Program Design The governance team is comprised of the leaders of the four partners.22 Together they are responsible for strategic planning, resource development, advocacy, ambassadorship, and approval of major policies.

22

Representatives of the four partners who comprise STR governance team are: the SPS Superintendent Jose´ Banda, the district’s Planning Director Clover Codd, Alliance CEO Sara Morris, UW College of Education Dean Tom Stritikus, and SEA President Jonathan Knapp.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 13 of 34

The 10-member design team is comprised of SPS administrators, principals and teachers; UW CoE administrators and faculty; the SEA president; and the STR project director.23 Guided by Urban Teacher Residence United24 (UTRU), the STR Design Team devoted a full year to program design and curriculum development. Team members committed hundreds of hours to producing these deliverables and bring the project to launch:

Design of a fully accredited clinically-based curriculum leading to a graduate degree from the UW College of Education and certification from the state of Washington’s Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI).

A program infrastructure that reflects the best practices in the residency field and includes, among other elements, the criteria and processes for selection of residents, mentors and school training sites;

Selection of: o 25 highly qualified and diverse residents from a variety of backgrounds who now

comprise STR Cohort One; o Five schools that meet the “high need” criteria established by the design team;

and o 25 experienced Mentor Teachers who have records of achievement in high- need

schools and who are committed to supporting residents on their paths to become superior educators.

Role of SPS Staff

Mentors: The mentors are experienced teachers at the five STR training sites who are among the most effective educators at those schools. They have been invited to serve in this all-important role by virtue of their strong performance in high-need settings. They will be the key to the residents’ teaching careers by providing day-to-day training, mentoring and guidance through the entire school year. For additional details about the critical role and activities of the mentor-teachers, see question 2-F below.

Principals: Principals provide leadership at the five STR training sites. STR received proposals from 9 principals to become training sites. We selected five high need schools based on a number of factors including enrollment levels of low income, student-of-color enrollment, and ELL and SPED students, as well as

23

Design Team members include (from UW CoE) Elham Kazemi, Associate Dean of Professional Learning (also co-chairs Curriculum Team) and Ken Zeichner, Director of Teacher Education/ Boeing Professor of Teacher Ed; and (from SPS) Dan Dizon, Director of Recruitment; Nate Fitzpatrick, Strategic Programs Officer; Paul Robb, Professional Development Program Manager; Mark Perry, Principal; Concie Pedroza, Principal; Christopher Drape, Star Mentor; & Carmela Dellino, Regional Executive Director. 24

Urban Teacher Residence Unite is the national network of high quality residencies that provides training, technical assistance, best practices, research, networking, tools for evaluation and quality assurance and other services. See www.utrunited.org

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 14 of 34

the principals’ commitments to improving teaching and learning, using data to inform leadership and instruction, and supporting STR goals and values. We expect principals to welcome the project and the residents into their schools and assure that the culture embraces them as contributors to their schools’ academic achievement goals. They will collaborate with the STR curriculum coordinator and faculty, and will support the teacher-mentors who will provide day-to-day training and guidance to their assigned residents.

SPS Leadership, Cabinet and Administrators: SPS recognizes STR’s immense value and systemic contributions to our strategic goals. As such, the project is strongly supported at every level of the district including the school board.

o Superintendent Jose´ Banda fully endorses the project and its objective to

become a pipeline for new teacher talent and has committed resources to sustain the effort long term.

o The Office of Strategic Planning oversees this strategic effort and investing in teachers is one component of the Strategic Plan. Clover Codd is a lead Cabinet member for this project.

o The Professional Development Staff have utilized the expertise of the STAR Mentors in program and curriculum design. Members of the STAR team are on the advisory and design teams. STAR Mentors will support residents through on-site demonstration lessons and core content.

o A Manager of Recruitment is designated in HR to be a point of contact to ensure all SPS hiring practices, timelines and commitments are followed for Seattle Teacher Residents.

Role of the Alliance for Education including Project Staff: The Alliance for Education is Seattle’s local education fund25 which has been the district’s strategic partner since 1995. The Alliance was one of the three initiators and ambassadors for the project, and has been co-leading the initiative since 2011. The Alliance provides an organizational home for STR; as such, the project director and staff are employees of the Alliance. In addition, the Alliance’s CEO, Grants Director, and CFO will continue to devote significant time to project planning, resource development (including cultivation and solicitation of institutional grants and individual gifts), and budget management. The specific roles of STR staff are as follows:

Program Director, Marisa Bier, Ph.D., leads the development and ongoing management of the residency program and is responsible for the effective implementation of the program. This includes management across all dimensions of the program, building and maintaining collaborative, solutions-oriented relationships with the university, school district, local education fund, host schools, community organizations, teachers union and principals’ association. Responsibilities include management of program development and

25

Local education funds (LEFs) are community based organizations in high poverty school districts across the United States that work with their school districts and communities to improve public education for the nation's most disadvantaged children. http://publiceducation.issuelab.org/home

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 15 of 34

implementation, attending to finance and budgeting, hiring and supervising of Residency staff, and program governance. The Program Director is also responsible for overseeing Resident progress evaluation and making final program decisions regarding Resident performance. Other duties include: staff committees and work groups; makes policy recommendations; coordinates participation of design team members at out-of-state UTRU training events including site visits to other UTRs; recommends course corrections as needed; manages project evaluation and performs a wide range of other tasks to assure the success of the project.

The Recruiting and Admissions Coordinator is responsible for working with the STR Program Director and other members of the Seattle Teacher Residency Team to support the recruitment and admission of residents to the program. He/she facilitates recruiting efforts, provides outreach to STR partners to support recruiting, manages recruiting inquiries and activities, and coordinates with UW CoE to support the application and interview process (Selection Day26) for future residents. The role also includes coordination of selection process and admission to the program, providing Resident candidates with necessary support in registering for graduate school, enrolling in the program, seeking financial aid opportunities, and other relevant information.

The Field Director is responsible for ongoing program development and improvement, specifically focused on developing and managing three key aspects of the residency: (1) the supervision and evaluation of residents, (2) curriculum integration, and (3) mentor and partner school support. The Field Director provides essential on-the-ground support to residents and mentors, and collaborates with training leadership in partner schools to ensure fidelity of program implementation. He/she will work closely with Instructional Coaches to ensure consistency of Resident progress evaluation.

The Curriculum Coordinator position (.5 FTE) is responsible for faithful implementation of the residency curriculum. This includes assuring coherence with SPS curricula and practices and coordinating mentor professional development and support. He/she oversees curriculum implementation, collaborates with UW faculty/ coursework instructors to align theory and practice, provides essential on-the-ground support to residents and mentors, and collaborates with leadership in partner schools to ensure fidelity of program implementation. The Curriculum Coordinator works closely with the Field Director to ensure curriculum integration.

Role of the University of Washington College of Education The Dean of the UW College of Education, Dr. Tom Stritikus, has been a co-leader in this initiative since planning began over two years ago. The college has contributed

26

Selection Day is held in the spring. It is when qualified residency applicants are invited for onsite interviews of STR

applicants and assessing their performance on several assigned tasks by 25 to 30 evaluators from UW, SPS, SEA, the Alliance and representatives of diverse education stakeholders.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 16 of 34

hundreds of hours in the last 24 months to project governance, planning, project design, proposal writing, and curriculum development.27 College faculty members lead the graduate level coursework which started in July 2013 at Northgate Elementary School and will continue through the completion of second endorsements for all candidates. The College estimates that candidates will complete 80 credit hours by the end of the program. In addition, the College will create opportunities for residents and SPS staff from the five training sites to engage in ‘learning rotations’ where they will learn about other opportunities for high-quality instruction for high poverty youth. College faculty and staff will also participate in project evaluation next summer. The Dean of the College will ensure that superintendents from the Road Map districts are made aware of the innovative training model and participate in ongoing discussions about the benefits to student learning and possibilities for scaling the model. The Associate Dean for Professional Programs, Dr. Elham Kazemi, who is also an Elementary Mathematics faculty member, co-chairs the Curriculum Team. Dr. Kazemi will ensure that the preparation program is built upon solid evidence of effective teacher education practice and that the College’s other teacher preparation programs benefit from what STR is learning. The Managing Director of Teacher Education, Patrick Sexton, will ensure that STR meets the requirements of an approved preparation program in the state, that the program remains on solid administrative footing within the University of Washington, and that process such as admissions, stipend disbursement, certification, etc. are integrated across all of the STR partners. Role of the Seattle Education Association (SEA) The president of the SEA has been an active partner and contributor to the leadership and design of STR. In addition to serving on the 4-member governance team, he is an active member of the Design Team and the Advisory Council. The SEA president and staff:

Provide a channel of communication with the National Education Association and the Washington Education Association;

Promote STR as a potential site to highlight and contribute resources;

Identify and pursue NEA-related grant opportunities;

Provide insight into schools with a strong culture and climate whose teachers are both highly qualified (innovative) and have strong mentorship potential;

Generate member support through ongoing communication and engagement of members in the design and implementation;

Assure that provisions are made and requirements met for hiring residents in conformity with the CBA between SPS and SEA.

27

Design Team members from UW CoE include: Elham Kazemi, Associate Dean for Professional Programs (who also co-chairs the Curriculum Team) and Ken Zeichner, Boeing Professor of Teacher Education.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 17 of 34

2b: Articulate a rationale to support why the specific actions will result in increased teacher capacity. The STR program represents a comprehensive strategy for maximizing teacher effectiveness for high-need students. Strategic recruitment and selection creates a talent pipeline of highly effective teachers to fill vacancies in high-need schools. A carefully designed and demanding residency experience optimizes new teacher supply by ensuring that candidates engage in meaningful clinical preparation and rigorous assessment of effectiveness prior to becoming a teacher of record. The placement of STR graduates in high-need induction schools upon completion of their year-long training concentrates effective teachers where they are needed the most, while inductee support promotes continued professional growth and increased teacher effectiveness. The residency model also calls for mentors, master teachers who serve as teacher educators in the residency program. The role of mentor is a meaningful career-ladder position that supports and rewards excellence. Furthermore, it allows a district to retain, leverage, and extend the reach of its most highly effective teacher leaders in high-need schools. Our confidence that this program will result in systemic impact and increased teacher capacity stems from several factors. One is that before and during the project’s design year (2012-13) STR received (and continues to receive) invaluable training, technical assistance, and other support through Urban Teacher Residencies United, the national network of high quality residency programs.28 The 120+ hours of training, site visits, consultation and other technical assistance has informed our goals, policies, procedures, resident, mentor and site selection criteria, and other essential program elements. Because our program is so well-informed by the experience and best practices in the national field, we are confident that the systemic impact of the project will be consistent with other residency projects documented below. One of the critical program elements informed by our participation in the UTRU network was the resident recruitment and application processes. STR applicants were required to complete an application posted on the UW Website and submit three references. In addition, they were required to respond in writing to essay questions about their motivation. For example, one question asked how their experience(s) with people who come from backgrounds different, or with people who have had experiences different from their own (i.e., race, ethnicity, economic status, religion, sexual orientation, disability, etc.), impacted them and prepared them for teaching in an urban school. Another question asked them to consider the STR vision statement and provide specific examples on how their values and personal story align with it. (See Appendix F.)

After a thorough review of 65 applications, 45 applicants were invited to participate in “Selection Day,” an intense day of activities that addressed all of the challenges and complexities of teaching in a high-need elementary school in Seattle. Candidates participated in a variety of activities, both individual and group, that addressed the 28

See www.utrunited.org.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 18 of 34

challenges of teaching across several content areas and the important connections teachers need to make to address inequities for students. Thirty-five STR stakeholders (including STR staff, UW faculty, representatives of community agencies, and SPS principals, teachers, and central office staff) participated on the interview and assessment team. Rubrics were developed for each activity to facilitate ranking of the candidates. This intensely rigorous resident selection process is one of the reasons, among others, that we believe the program will achieve the targets we have set. Ensuring that STR Graduates are Placed in High-Need Schools STR’s fundamental purpose is to improve teaching and learning in high need schools. While hiring and school assignments are within the independent discretion of SPS and subject to the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), SPS and the SEA are among the core partners in STR’s governing body. As such, they are firmly committed to improving achievement at high-need schools and to seeing that qualified STR graduates are placed in those schools consistent with the purpose and goals of this project. Provisions related to the hiring of residents who successfully complete their year of residency and become certified are in section 10 of the formal agreement between each resident and STR, a document to which SPS is a signatory. Among other things, the agreement obligates the resident to apply for openings at the district’s high-need schools when they are posted each spring. SPS will provide a contingency teaching contract to all satisfactorily performing Residents. The issuance of contingency contracts to residents is subject to approval by the SPS Board of Directors. Evidence of Impact Residencies aim to prepare teachers who are highly effective from day one in the classroom. Data and individual program evaluation reports from early adopters of the residency model confirm that urban teacher residencies (UTRs) are preparing strong new teachers. At the districts being served, these programs are impacting teacher retention, teacher diversity, principal satisfaction, and, most importantly, student achievement.

A Chicago-based residency, the Academy for Urban School Leadership (AUSL), accepts some of the lowest performing schools in the state. In five schools, the percentage of students meeting achievement standard increased between 8 and 60 points.29

A report about performance of students taught by graduates of the New York residency program called “New Visions for Public Schools” shows that graduates outperformed their peers on the Regents Learning Environment and Comprehensive English Exams.30

Boston students who have math teachers who were trained in the Boston Teacher Residency and who have four to five years experience after their

29

See http://www.ausl-chicago.org/about-results.html 30

See http://www.utrunited.org/EE_assets/docs/Measuring_Impact_UTRU_Final_2_2013.pdf

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 19 of 34

training significantly outperform students taught by other veteran Boston math teachers.

It is also noteworthy that the teaching practices integrated into the STR curriculum are closely related to the instructional practices that have been implemented at a School Improvement Grant (SIG) site, Lakeridge Elementary in Renton, with major development and implementation support from UW’s Mathematics Education Project. Widespread use of these practices has resulted in dramatic gains in student achievement and in professional growth. In just 2 years, the percentages of students meeting MSP standards have increased as follows:

3rd grade from 29.5% to 63% (+33.5 points)

4th grade from 23.8% to 47% (+23.2 points)

5th grade from 20.3% to 56% (+35.7 points) School level data also indicates much stronger instructional quality in the primary grades, indicating that students will be entering 3rd grade and beyond at a much better starting point. As indicated in question 1b, evidence suggests a relationship between teacher retention and school performance. Nationally, 40 to 50 percent of new teachers leave within 5 years, and the turnover rates are much more pronounced in urban schools, with nearly 50 percent of new teachers leaving in 3 years.31 Recent data from other residency programs run counter to these trends. UTRU Network programs average 85 percent teacher retention after 5 years. As with any professional, teachers who experience success are more likely to be satisfied in their careers and are less likely to leave their schools or the profession. The relationship between teacher retention and school performance reinforces our motivation to build a training program that produces teachers who experience success. As such, the retention rate of STR graduates is a metric we will closely monitor.

2c. How does the investment complement the district’s current strategies? For example, how does it connect to district-adopted instructional frameworks, and/ or align to RTTT-D commitments and assurances (CCSS and NGSS implementation, 8th grade Algebra enrollment, etc.). The Seattle Teacher Residency offers a critically needed talent pipeline specifically trained to improve the performance of high-need schools. The program aligns with several other strategic initiatives of the district. In 2010, SPS was awarded the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) grant aimed at increasing teacher effectiveness and ensuring that highly effective teachers are placed in some of the district’s most struggling high-need schools. The human capital strategy outlined in

31

See http://www.utrunited.org/faqs/teacher-residencies-and-residents

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 20 of 34

the TIF grant places an emphasis on the recruitment, induction support, and retention of teachers. In 2012, SPS began collecting data on teacher effectiveness. SPS measures teacher effectiveness according to the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching. The framework has a four tiered rating system that differentiates performance across the domains. In 2013-14, SPS will be transitioning to the state’s model (8 criteria). The process will include measures of student growth. SPS is also collecting data about retention rates in high-need schools and analysis is still underway. While this analysis is still underway, we believe the STR is a strategy central to helping Seattle recruit, prepare, support and retain a high quality teaching corps. Residents will be trained specifically for the district’s diverse population and school context; as such, this context-based clinical training and induction support will foster success and career satisfaction. Moreover, the residents, as a condition of their acceptance into the program, commit to teach in these schools for at least five years after successful completion of residency training. The requirement that residents obtain secondary endorsements in ELL and SPED will generate an increasing number of teachers with the specific qualifications necessary to improve the achievement of the students most in need. As documented in number 3c below, the project will monitor and track resident and inductee performance. Evaluations will be conducted consistent with SPS policies and procedures and the CBA. In addition to implementing the TIF grant and the strategies outlined therein, SPS is embarking on an initiative to transform the way the district conceptualizes and manages the human resources function. The district is partnering with the Urban Schools Human Capital Academy32 to support the strategic efforts to attract and retain the highest caliber talent throughout SPS. Among other things, this partnership will strengthen the ways the district uses data to capitalize on our human capital efforts. 2d. How will the investment help create personalized learning environments and develop content and pedagogical knowledge with a priority to ELL, math & science? The residents will be taught using leading-edge clinical methods of preparation and high quality mentorship to learn how to create personalized learning environments. The model of teaching practice guiding the residency is an ambitious one. Residents will be learning how to orchestrate learning environments where students are intellectually engaged and socially supported to express their disciplinary ideas, to make sense of big ideas in the subject areas, and to develop robust skills and knowledge needed to excel in school and develop positive identities in the classroom. Too often approaches to provide individualized instruction to children have bypassed the teacher. While we are optimistic about using technology to create personalized learning environment,

32

Information about the Urban Schools Human Capital Academy is at http://ushcacademy.org/

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 21 of 34

equipping teachers the specific skills needed to adapt and modify instruction is needed if we are to realize the full benefits of personalization. Methods instruction in the residency will be interwoven with ELL methods so that residents learn from the start how to plan and enact instruction that is personalized and differentiated. Residents will also be learning how to engage families and build on the resources students bring to school, also enabling an asset-based view of children's needs. Content institutes in mathematics and science will ensure that residents have a strong foundation in Common Core mathematics and NEXT Gen Science. Throughout each content area, residents will be taught specific practices that facilitate personalization through formative assessment and student-focused teaching strategies. The methods courses will be based at one of the residency schools, enabling residents to learn how to teach math and science, along with other core elementary content, as they work with children and get high quality feedback from Residency faculty. These teaching methods will enable residents to connect content knowledge with practice and learn, under expert guidance, how to tailor instruction to individual children.

It is important to note the multi-pronged impact of the investment on personalizing learning environments via the methods described above. The children in the residency classrooms will experience the most direct and immediate benefits. The skilled-adult to student ratio will be lower than district averages in these classrooms. Students in future classrooms of teacher residents and their mentors will also benefit, as all educators in the system learn and improve their practice as described above. 2e: How will this investment align to Learning Forward standards by providing sustained job-embedded professional learning where educators engage in inquiry, reflection and receive ongoing feedback? One of the challenges districts face is that teacher education programs have not seen individualization as a central part of the work with future teachers. One of the innovations of STR is that teacher training occurs in an embedded context which provides the future teachers with the tools needed to individualize. Because the program will build the capacity of future and current teachers in both ELL and SPED, teachers will be better able to individualize in ways that truly meet the needs of students. STR focuses on teacher development at the resident, mentor and school levels. With a focus on preparation IN and FOR high-need schools, the goal is to build capacity not only in classroom instruction, but also in attending to children’s needs within a school community.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 22 of 34

As defined by the Learning Forward Standards33, STR provides “professional learning to increase educator effectiveness” both in teacher preparation and teacher leadership by addressing several of the standards for professional learning.

Residents are learning within the context of a learning community. Completing their 14-month preparation as a cohort, they are in a subset of the larger learning community. The program requires intensive collaboration; it will prepare residents to be skilled at co-planning, co-teaching, and collaborative analysis of student learning data. As a result, they will be better equipped to participate in and lead teacher teams in meeting the needs of diverse learners, including ELLs and students requiring SPED services. All residents complete coursework together and are continuously engaged in collaborative discussions on pedagogy and practice. They rehearse teaching together, observe each other in classrooms, and provide feedback to each other. Staff from STR will convene them at respective schools to discuss experiences and share learning. In addition, they will be expected to become part of the school community at large, participating with their mentors in the professional learning contexts at their schools. This standard is also demonstrated in the support provided to mentors including professional development in teacher leadership and curriculum review. It is essential to the success of the residents that their mentors view themselves as both teacher educators and classroom teachers. The entire mentor corps was brought together for two days in August for program orientation, role development, and tactical training on coaching residents and starting the school year. In addition, the Mentors will be convened one full day each month as a professional learning community (PLC) for reinforcement of these skills and gathering of program feedback. Another standard, learning designs, parallels the foundation on which the STR curriculum is built. Residents are provided with practical experiences that integrate “theories, research, and models of human learning”. The curriculum is designed such that Residents learn particular practices and discuss understandings of educational research and theories of learning, and then put those into practice. STR embeds coursework into the context of elementary classrooms. For example, residents learn specific teaching methods, like eliciting students’ mathematical thinking, in a cycle that includes specific practice with the children in their classrooms mediated by both mentors and professors. The cycle works like this: residents watch an exemplar of a specific practice, learn the theory behind the practice and explore how it fits with everything else they are learning about teaching mathematics, they rehearse the practice, they try it out with a small group of children supported by teacher educators, they debrief the experience, they have more practice, etc.

Another feature of this learning design is that children, residents, mentors and faculty are all learning at the same time. For example, residents learn a particular way of teaching Math and the rationale behind it for eliciting students’ mathematical thinking; they then apply this by working with a small group of children to “practice” the strategy.

33

http://learningforward.org/standards-for-professional-learning#.UeSGQ1O7bRY

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 23 of 34

By actively participating in the interactions between children and residents, mentors and course instructors are both deepening their understanding of the methods and honing their skills as teacher educators. The ultimate value is that children are supported with individualized and/or small group instruction as they practice the mathematics.

STR addresses the outcomes standard by aligning outcomes with educator performance and student curriculum standards. The STR curriculum considers both Common Core standards as well as standards for teacher preparation; it integrates student curriculum and educator performance standards as defined by the district’s teacher evaluation framework to make the link between educator learning and student learning explicit. Alignment has been a top priority for the district and university educators who co-developed the curriculum and who will lead the coursework. 2f. How will the district engage in collaboration with stakeholders, including families, communities of color and culturally specific community based organizations? How will the teacher association be involved? Diverse Stakeholders Collaboration with diverse education stakeholders is at the core of STR values and strategy. This was demonstrated most vividly in the recruitment and selection of residents documented above. The major contributor to our ability to create a resident cohort 55% of which is comprised of residents of color was the work of the STR Advisory Group. The Advisory Group was formed and facilitated by the STR staff to, among other reasons, assist with recruiting diverse cohorts. The majority of resident inquiries this past spring resulted from word-of-mouth. We attribute this to the richness, diversity and commitment of the Advisory Group. The Advisory Group membership includes representatives from the SEA, UW Office of Minority Affairs, SPS teachers and principals, Rainier Scholars, City Year, UW Dream Project, McERA (a parent advocacy group), Casey Family Programs, School’s Out Washington, the Martinez Foundation, and the City of Seattle’s Department of Education. These groups serve diverse populations and, as such, they are effective recruitment partners. In addition, this group will continue to serve as expert counsel on program implementation and effectiveness. At each regular meeting, program updates and data will be provided. Feedback is then invited regarding implementation and possible course corrections to make improvements. The project also engaged diversity programs at higher education institutions. Numerous presentations were given in undergraduate classes including several presentations in the UW Dream Project classes, the UW Pipeline Project, and undergraduate education and minority affairs classes. STR reached out to diverse community organizations such as City Year, Rainier Scholars, El Centro de la Raza, Vietnamese Friendship Association, and College Success Foundation.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 24 of 34

Involvement of the Seattle Education Association in STR The Seattle Education Association (SEA) is among the four lead partners that comprise the governing body of STR. We are proud to be the first urban teacher residency in the country whose governing body includes an educators union. The SEA had been participating on the STR Design Team from the time it was convened in August 2013. As the SEA president’s enthusiasm about the project grew, he inquired about the possibility of joining the governing body. The STR director had conversations with him about it and clarified the roles and responsibilities of governing body members. After consideration by the 3 founding partners, STR invited SEA to become a core partner. The decision has clearly paid off. STR leadership gains important insights about the CBA and labor's perspectives on teaching and learning in general and HR administration in particular. An additional and tangible benefit was that SEA secured a grant for STR from the National Education Association. Since the decision has proven to be a great benefit, we recommend that other UTRs consider inviting labor as a partner, and we would be pleased to share our experience.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 25 of 34

3. Evidence of Progress

3a: Provide an exact number of how many students, teachers and leaders your project will impact. Include a list of schools that will be impacted. (Note: This investment fund is focused on RTT’s High Needs Schools in Addendum 1) The table below identifies the number of teachers, students and administrators that will be impacted at the five STR training sites in 2013-14. While all five schools meet STR’s high-need criteria (see section 1a above), only Hawthorne and Madrona are listed as high-need for RTT purposes (per Addendum 1 of the RFP).34

Scope of Impact at the 2013-14 STR Training Sites

School # of Teachers35 # of Students36 # of Admin Staff

Hawthorne* 22 305 1

John Muir 24 434 1

Leschi 21 365 1

Madrona K-8* 23 320 2

Olympic Hills 21 261 1

Total: 111 1,685 6 *Hawthorne and Madrona are the RTT high-need schools listed in Addendum 1 of the RFP.

See section 3b for additional discussion about impact.

3b: Which RTT-D goals and measures will your project impact? Please propose a specific performance target that you are committed to achieving for at least two Goal Areas or Performance Measures from the RTT-D grant. Use Table 1 below. The STR program will have clear and measurable impact on the 2013-14 STR training sites. The three RTT-D goal areas we selected for this project are:

A. Percent of students attending schools with Washington state achievement index ratings of ‘very good’ or ‘exemplary’

B. Number and percent of students by subgroup with a highly effective teacher of record37

C. Number and percent of students by subgroup with an effective teacher of record38

34

Among the 5 STR high-need training sites in 2013-14, only 2 (Hawthorne and Madrona) are on the list of RTT

high-need schools; however, all 23 Seattle RTT schools are likely to be training or induction sites in future years. 35

Teacher data is from “Classroom Teacher Demographic Summary” in the OSPI K-12 Data and Reports site for the

year 2011-2012.

36 Student enrollment figures are from the May 2012 count available through the OSPI K-12 Data and Reports site.

37 A teacher is deemed “highly effective” based on all’ proficient’ ratings with at least one ‘innovative’ rating for the

2011-2012 evaluation year in the four domains of the Charlotte Danielson Framework.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 26 of 34

The three tables that reflect the targets for each of these goal areas are in the separately attached file named STR GOAL TABLES. When reviewing these tables, please note:

ESD staff requested that the tables be limited to the RTT high-need schools hosting STR training in 2013-14. As requested, Tables 1A, 1B and 1C reflect targets only for Madrona K-8 and Hawthorne Elementary schools.39 However, we will track the same metrics for the three other STR high-need schools where residents are assigned this year (see section 1a for the demographics and need of all five schools).

To underscore STR’s long-term impact goals, we have expanded the template by two columns to reflect two additional years of projected impact (2015-16 & 2016-17).

Short-Term Impact Even though the 25 residents receiving classroom-based training in 2013-14 will not be teachers of record until the 2014-15 school year, we anticipate impact at their STR training sites this school year as documented in the goal tables in the separate attachment. The students in the classrooms where residents are placed in these two RTT schools will benefit by having both a resident and an experienced teacher-mentor supporting their learning. However, the benefits of STR go beyond the residents’ classrooms to impact the entire school communities.40

Mentor-teachers will realize leadership development that supports and rewards excellence and promotes their retention;

Strong connections with the UW College of Education faculty provide exposure to the latest in educational theory and research;

The best practices being implemented by the program will influence the schools’ administrators and other teachers; and

The whole-school investment in the residents will result in reflective teaching practice in all classrooms and increased teacher effectiveness.

In addition to progress in the three goal areas documented in the separately attached tables, we expect that this impact will be evident in the teacher evaluations, the Washington State Achievement Index, MAP and MSP scores.

38

A teacher is deemed “effective” based on ratings of all proficient in the 2011-2012 evaluation year with no “basic” ratings in the four domains of the Charlotte Danielson Framework. 39

Among the 5 STR high-need training sites in 2013-14, only 2 (Hawthorne and Madrona) are on the list of 23 RTT high-need schools; however, the 21 other SPS RTT schools are likely to be training or induction sites in future years. 40

A major reason for this is that selection of the training-sites was based on an application from the principals in which they documented how the whole school community is committed to student growth, teacher development and the STR.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 27 of 34

Medium and Long-Term Impact STR will have impact for: (a) future students in the 2013-14 training sites; (b) students in the schools in which STR graduates are hired to teach; and (c) the district as a whole. There is also a long term benefit to the field of teacher education as the designers learn from it and disseminate effective practices. Future Students in the 2013-14 Training Sites: STR intends to continue the residency training model in these schools. The model will be improved based on data and evidence from this first year; thus future students in these schools will benefit from an enhanced model. The professional development in which those staffs participate is designed to improve educator practice in the long term. Future Students Assigned to STR Graduates’ Classrooms: Residents are being trained for the specific context of Seattle’s underachieving schools serving high numbers of low income, students of color, ELL and SPED students. Even if the schools that hire the STR graduates after their training are different than where they were trained, the schools’ contexts (e.g., demographics, achievement levels, etc.) are the same. Seattle Public Schools: STR’s context-based training and post-induction support will contribute to greater career satisfaction, higher retention and improved student performance for years after the induction of each cohort. STR graduates will be more diverse than the current teaching force and will thereby provide students with more images of successful adults with whom they can identify. HR practices at the district will be impacted through STR’s strategic approach to recruitment, talent development and retention. HR department managers actively participate in the design, implementation and evaluation processes. They already report that STR is giving them insights and ideas about new ways of doing things. Over time, the majority of the district’s Title I high-need schools (which is nearly half of all schools in the district per Appendix A) could receive STR graduates and realize direct impact of the program. In addition, Seattle schools will ultimately save on costs related to teacher turnover because, as a condition of acceptance into STR, residents make a commitment to teach in high-need Seattle schools for five years after they successfully complete their residencies.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 28 of 34

3c. Complete table 2 below to detail the data collection plan. What formative, interim and summative data will you collect and analyze?

TABLE 2: DATA COLLECTION PLAN The table below relates specifically to the goal areas described in tables 1A, 1B and 1C in the separate attachment.

Data Type Source Specific Measures Who collects?

When? How often?

Students taught by Effective and Highly Effective Teachers

Summative evaluation data

For the 2012-2013 school year, “effective” and “highly” effective designations will be based on Danielson Framework. For the 13-14 school year and beyond, a target for the total ‘score’ from the state evaluation will be set.

SPS will collect this data annually before the start of the upcoming school year. The data should be more rapidly available as SPS switches to the online eVal tool.41

Percent of students attending schools with Washington state achievement index ratings of ‘very good’ or ‘exemplary’

Washington State Achievement Index Report

Ratings will be pulled from the report.

SPS will collect the report when it is released annually.

Rating on ‘Professional Collaboration and Culture’

SPS annual staff survey

% score SPS will collect the data after results from the annual staff survey are compiled.

A core theory of action of STR is that students taught by novice STR teachers (i.e., those in their first year of teaching) will outperform similar students that are taught by non-STR novice teachers (all else equal). In the absence of random assignment of STR teachers across the district, we propose to test this hypothesis using a quasi-experimental quantitative design. We will also compare the summative evaluation ratings of our STR Residents hired into full time positions and compare them with those of other novice teachers teaching in high-needs schools. Monitoring The project will collect multiple data strands and conduct multiple forms of analysis to ensure the work is headed in the right direction and to make course corrections as needed. Both student data and resident data will be tracked, analyzed and used to evaluate the effort, improve the program, and disseminate results.

41

Beginning in the 2014-2015 school year, Seattle Public Schools will be using the online eVal tool the State of Washington has implemented for the statewide evaluation system. An interim evaluation tool will be used for the 2013-2014 school year.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 29 of 34

SPS will collect and reflect on aggregated and disaggregated attendance, discipline, classroom-based assessment, and standardized assessment data for all students. These data from STR classrooms will be collected at multiple points throughout the year and compared to school historical data, as well as with data from similar classrooms across the district. Program designers will look for patterns of performance across the entire student data picture to ensure a deep understanding of trends at each level. Analysis to determine impacts of the program on students at the training sites will be a major driver in program change and improvement. Similar data will be collected and analyzed for the classrooms in which STR graduates are placed after they are hired as teachers of record. The College of Education will collect resident data including course grades, mentor and coach evaluations of performance and growth, and performance on the state mandated edTPA, a national performance assessment for pre-service teachers (similar to the National Boards for experienced teachers). The college tracks applicant and selected candidate characteristics including ethnic and racial diversity and previous academic performance. The college also monitors in-service placement, hiring, and retention trends. SPS and resident satisfaction will be closely monitored. Program designers will compare data for residents with data from its other programs and similar models in other states. Analysis will identify trends in performance that can be linked to specific opportunities to learn. Both midcourse corrections and long term program improvement will result. This combination of data, collected at various points during the year, will inform the direction and focus of the program. The UTRU Data Literacy Initiative Data IQ in the STR program will be enhanced by STR’s participation in UTRU's 2013-2014 Data Literacy Initiative. STR was honored this month by being invited to join just three other residencies in this initiative. The project aims to strengthen the data practices throughout the program including the literacy skills of residents, mentors and STR graduates. STR was chosen alongside 3 other residencies - Boston, Denver and Chattanooga - all far more established relative to Seattle. UTRU's selection of STR was articulated as based on the quality of our leadership, the unique (and functional) nature of our 4-party partnership, our demonstrated commitment to continuous improvement and our overall potential for success.

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 30 of 34

4. Timeline for Taking Action Research, planning and design of STR began in 2010. Funding proposals were drafted and submitted in 2011 and formal program design and curriculum development began in 2012. Recruitment and selection of mentors, residents and training sites was completed this past spring. In July, Cohort One – 25 highly qualified residents – began the program. Summer 2013

o Residents are oriented and begin their graduate level coursework in July. STR Instructors, comprised of UW College of Education professors and district teachers, will lead the classes. Some classes are conducted at Northgate Elementary School. Residents are introduced to methods of literacy and math instruction with opportunities to practice with children in the Summer Learning Program at Northgate. There is instruction about working with English Language Learners (ELL) and establishing positive learning environments.

o In August, residents meet their assigned teacher-mentors and begin work in the classrooms for 4-days each week through the end of the 2013-14 school year.

SEP-DEC 2013

o SPS classes begin. For four full days each week, residents work with their mentor-teachers in their classrooms. Residents and mentors will also have protected meeting time each week. They will use the time for planning, reflection, review of students' work, and analysis of data. They will also collaborate on projects and assignments from the coursework.

o On Tuesday evenings and all day Fridays, the residents will convene with STR instructors for their coursework and de-briefing of their work. The coursework will actively integrate with residents' clinical experience in the classroom. The instructors will be joined, where appropriate, by SPS teachers and staff who have solid grounding in both the theory and practice of teaching. Instructors will model the pedagogy that residents will be expected to apply in the classroom. Residents will be expected to integrate the skills and knowledge of the coursework with their work in the classroom.

JAN-MAR 2014

o Classroom and coursework continue o STR staff and committee recruit & select Cohort Two residents for 2014-15 o STR determines training sites for 2014-15

APR-JUN 2014

o Classroom and coursework continue o SPS identifies schools that will have teacher vacancies in 2014-15; STR staff and

committee determine appropriate ones for induction of qualified Cohort 1 graduates; induction protocols are finalized; SPS opens the application period for these vacancies

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 31 of 34

o Non-certificated Cohort 1 residents will complete: (a) the Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA);42 and (b) the WEST E, the state-required content exam in the subjects for which teachers are licensed.

o The project evaluation will be conducted per UTRU's Quality Standards for Teacher Residency Programs and other methods developed by the partners.

o Performance evaluations of Cohort 1 residents will be conducted consistent with SPS policy, UTRU recommendations, and the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between SPS and the Seattle Education Association.

Sustaining STR beyond This Grant Project partners intend STR to be a sustainable pipeline that brings high quality teaching talent into high-need public schools for years to come. The program has been deliberately structured to be privately capitalized in the early years, gradually expanding to a shared public/private funding model over time. All of the planning year funding for 2012-13, and most of the Cohort One funding (2013-14), is from private philanthropy. The proportions of private vs. public funding will change over time as shown in the chart below.

FUNDING RATIOS 2012 TO 2019 100% privately funded initially, with public support increasing each year; school district funds 51% by year 5.

The SPS Superintendent has committed to funding increasing percentages of the budget until the district’s share reaches 51% by 2017-18. Other partners are making significant contributions as well. The Alliance is providing a home for the project and, as lead fundraiser, has been pro actively reaching out to numerous potential supporters for the 2013-14 budget and beyond. To date, the Alliance has been successful in securing just over $1 million from 12 different organizations and individuals to support the residency for the 2-year period from July, 2012 through June, 2014; this includes all of the funding needed for the design year that just concluded (2012-13), and about 50% of the funding needed for launching Cohort 1 (2013-2014). See the budget narrative for details. Race to the Top resources would provide critically important funds to support the project this year. The UW College of Education will continue to contribute numerous university resources, including faculty, curriculum expertise, and state policy advocacy.

42

The TPA is Washington’s mandatory performance assessment based on state teaching standards; it will inform how well STR prepares teachers vis-à-vis state standards of competence; the data will be used to revise/improve the program each year.)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100% Private Philanthropy

Local

State

District Budget Allocation

Other Federal Funds

Race to the Top

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 32 of 34

The SEA has secured a commitment from the NEA for 2013-14 and has committed to participating in resource development in the coming years. Private philanthropy sees great potential in STR as evidenced by commitments from the Bezos Family Foundation, the Boeing Corporation and several private donors. Some of these commitments already extend into 2014-15 and beyond. In addition, the Paul G. Allen Foundation is considering a multi-year commitment presently. Residencies in other cities have grown from modest beginnings and some now train as many 100 residents annually (e.g., UTRs in Boston and Memphis).43 In Boston Public Schools, about one-third of all new teachers are trained through Boston Teacher Residency. To extend STR’s systemic impact on high-need Seattle schools, the steering committee will be formalizing a long range plan later this year that will include increasing the number of residents and schools served, consistent with capacity and resources. 5. REFLECTION AND COURSE CORRECTION:

How will data be shared across districts and the region and used to inform next steps and needed course corrections?

How will key stakeholders, including communities of color, be engaged in the process of determining course correction?

Please describe any formal arrangements to share data, monitor results, and collaboratively assess the need for mid-course changes in the program with other districts or organizations

Information about the project’s ongoing data collection, analysis and course corrections is described in section 3c above (in the paragraphs immediately following Table 2). Program leadership will convene the Road Map districts to deepen and share learning from the program. The STR team looks forward to collaborating with RTT/ESD staff on a communication and convening plan that aligns with other funded projects and leverages the collected efforts of partner districts. Initial conversations about the impact of the STR model have already occurred among the UW College of Education and leadership in Highline and Tukwila school districts. With respect to Highline specifically, its current superintendent, Susan Enfield, was a key participant in the early thinking around the residency initiative and we would be pleased to participate in ESD-facilitated conversations to facilitate potential collaboration. In addition, the College of Education will leverage the learning from this work with other teacher education pathways within the college and other institutions. The College of Education is an active member of the Washington Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (WACTE). The twenty institutions that train teachers are in regular

43

http://www.utrunited.org/EE_assets/docs/Measuring_Impact_UTRU_Final_2_2013.pdf

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 33 of 34

communication about the field of teacher preparation. Innovations are a constant topic of cross institution sharing and collaboration. In recent years WACTE has hosted speakers from other residency programs, most notably the Boston Teacher Residency. The model impressed WACTE institutions. We will suggest a follow-up conversation with WACTE about STR, to be held at one of the organization’s quarterly meetings. The STR Advisory Council established this past year will continue to be a source of important and diverse input. The council is comprised of multiple key stakeholders, including communities of color, and one of its key functions is to provide input and feedback about implementation and needed course corrections. At each regular meeting, program updates and data will be provided. Feedback is then invited regarding implementation and possible course corrections to make improvements. 6. Budget Narrative The Seattle Teacher Residency (STR) represents a collaborative effort of 4 partners: Seattle Public Schools, the Alliance for Education, the UW College of Education and the Seattle Education Association. This proposal is submitted by Seattle Public Schools; however, the Alliance for Education (AFE) has been providing a home for the project since work began in 2011. The Alliance has taken the lead in raising and managing the funds to date, and has employed all of the paid project staff. While SPS is a critical partner in this project, the district’s HR and other commitments to it are in-kind, as documented in the budget (projected at $160K). As such, most of the funds that may be awarded through this proposal will be subgranted to the Alliance. The Alliance will maintain any subgranted funds in a restricted fund accounted for according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), as it does all other funds for STR and its other programs. The Alliance documents and tracks all expenses by program code consistent with GAAP. Any RTT P1 funds subgranted to the Alliance will be managed as part of the STR restricted fund and will be expended and documented per GAAP protocols. Each year the Alliance engages independent auditors who verify the integrity of the Alliance’s accounting system, compliance with internal controls and accuracy of financial reporting. Column E (“Description”) of the separately attached budget template provides explanations of all project costs including personnel. Column C (“Other Funds”) in the separately attached budget includes In-Kind commitments of SPS and SEA. We cannot quantify the in-kind commitments of UW College of Education personnel because it is against University of Washington policy to quantify in-kind financial commitments in grant proposals through which the University will not receive direct funding. However, as evidenced in the proposal, the College of Education has made a sizable investment in STR. Faculty and administrators across the college have committed tangible resources to ensuring the project is a success. As described in section 2a of the narrative, the Dean, Associate Dean for Professional Programs, Managing Director of Teacher Education, and Boeing Professor of Teacher Education along with numerous faculty members play leadership roles on STR

Seattle Teacher Residency Project Page 34 of 34

Executive, Advisory, Design, and Curriculum teams. The college has also hired faculty to teach all of the resident courses, supervise all of the resident practicum and provide professional development to all of the elementary school staff in participating schools. Column C also includes expenses supported by numerous grants and personal gifts committed toward the $1.2 million 2013-14 STR budget (not including in-kind). Commitments for the 2013-14 project year to date total $576,000 and include the following:

FUNDER 2013-14 PLEDGE

Stanford Endowment $206,403

Bezos Family Foundation $100,000

Runstad Foundation $ 15,000

Boeing $ 90,000

Philanthropic Partners for Public Education $ 75,000

4 Private Gifts $ 90,000

TOTAL $ 576,403

The $451,000 grant for RTT funds, if funded, will represent a significant step toward meeting the budget and programmatic needs of the Seattle Teacher Residency project this year. Additional (though smaller) proposals are pending with other funders that, if also granted, will balance the budget and provide the financial footing that this important systemic work requires. Please note that the separately attached budget file has two tabs: tab 1 is the annotated budget using STR’s row labels (line item descriptions in column A); tab 2 re-organizes the expenses per the row labels/line items in the Scoring Guide. If this file is to be printed, please print both tabs (each tab prints to one page).

Thank you for the opportunity to apply for these funds and for considering this proposal. Seattle Teacher Residency Project Steering Committee

Clover Codd, Executive director, Strategic Planning, Seattle Public Schools Tom Stritikus, Dean, College of Education, University of Washington Sara Morris, CEO, Alliance for Education Jonathan Knapp, President, Seattle Education Association