Transforming the Profession of Teaching: It Starts at the Beginning

By Adam Urbanski and Carl OConnell

When it comes to the education of our children, nothing matters more than the knowledge, skills and attitudes of their teachers. That is why it matters so much that we continue our drive to make teaching a more genuine profession.

What has impeded teaching and learning is not that teachers are uncommitted, unconcerned or unwilling to accept the challenge; its that teachers work within outmoded, unprofessional systems. By abandoning unexamined practices and policies, and taking responsibility for redesigning schools, we can restructure the teaching profession in ways that promise more productive teaching and learning in schools where all children can succeed.

Impediments to Professionalism in Teaching

If we were to design an occupation that would virtually guarantee isolation from ones colleagues and lack most of the characteristics of real professions, we could hardly find a better model than what teachers face today: Learning their trade by trail and error, new teachers rarely serve an internship. As much is expected of them their first day on the job as is expected of a 30-year veteran. And, as one pundit has observed, all teachers are created equal and they stay that way.

New teachers receive little or no meaningful support at the time they need it when problems occur in the classroom. We tolerate a sink or swim, survival of the fittest approach to entry into the profession.

Teachers cannot be promoted except out of teaching. Consequently, a teachers status and responsibilities are not substantially different on retirement than on the day that teacher was hired. Greater status and pay are reserved for those who leave the classroom.

Pedagogical decisions are made by non-practitioners. The further one works from the classroom, it seems, the more authority one has to dictate to those left behind.

Teachers are expected to be evaluated and assisted by the administrators who have little time and cannot have expertise in all of the subject areas in which teachers teach.

Teachers who lack competence are neither assisted nor removed, and school administrators alone are unable to ensure quality teaching.

Building a More Genuine Profession

To help change all that, we must first strengthen teaching in ways that reflects the features evident in other genuine professions:

Shared knowledge base. While it is both true and important that teachers must
care about their students and be committed to their work, it is not enough that teachers love to teach any more than it would be enough for surgeons to love to cut, as the late American Federation of Teachers President Albert Shanker pointed out. Good teachers must also know their subjects well; they must know how to teach these subjects effectively to all students; they must understand human development, how the brain works, and how learning occurs; they must base their teaching on what is known from research as well as from experience with effective practice; they must know their students well and how to connect learning to students lives and 2

experiences; they must engage in reflective practice and continuously adjust their practice; and they must actively participate in the life of their school and of their profession.

Standards. Teachers themselves must be involved in setting high and rigorous

standards for their own profession. These standards should then be enforced through peer review, because nobody knows better the difference between good teaching and bad teaching than the best teachers themselves. Emergency or temporary licenses in teaching should not be permitted any more than they would be in medicine, law, or any other genuine profession.

Professional preparation. Teachers must have access to the most current

knowledge available to meet their students needs. All teachers deserve high-quality preparation programs that slight neither disciplinary knowledge nor teaching knowledge, and that merge theory and practice in extensive, well-monitored clinical experiences.

Induction. New teachers should not have to learn their job by sink or swim. They
should be ushered into teaching under the watchful and supportive eyes of experienced and expert colleagues who would assist them and guide their practice during the initial, formative years.

Continuous learning. You cannot teach what you do not model, Deborah Meier,
the celebrated founder of New York Citys Central Park East Secondary School, is fond of saying. So, too, teachers must be learners particularly, they should not stop learning the day that they start teaching. And professional development should become inseparable from the day-to-day work that teachers do-not limited to courses, workshops and conferences.

Promotion. It should become possible to promote teachers in teaching without, in the

process, compelling them to leave teaching. Deserving practitioners should achieve more pay, higher status and more responsibilities while continuing to teach for at least a portion of their time. Through expanded career opportunities, highly accomplished teachers should be able to 3

assume roles as mentors to new teachers, curriculum and staff development specialists, adjunct instructors in teacher preparation programs, and even as principal teachers responsible for leading schools instructional programs. Such lead teachers should also assume the most challenging assignments that are now often relegated to the least experienced and most vulnerable novices. They can and should provide the needed leadership from within the ranks of practitioners.

Conditions. Like other professionals with comparable levels of education and

responsibility, teachers need and deserve a professional level of compensation and professional treatment. They should not be burdened with non-instructional duties and should have the resources necessary for effective practice. And schools should be learning communities, places where also the teachers and school staff come to learn.

Discretion. Teacher empowerment has little to do with transferring administrative

roles to teachers. Thats the last thing that most teachers want or need. Teachers want to teach, not administer. The problem is, though, that too many teachers lament that they love to teach but hate their jobs. Many say that they feel like educational salesclerks, passing on to students a teacher-proof curriculum mandated by state agencies, test-makers and bureaucrats. What teachers do want, though, is more say about what to teach, how to teach it, and how to assess student learning. These features, common indicators of other professions, are typically not present in teaching. It is past time to restructure the systems that deal with teaching as an occupation and transform it into a true profession.

One School Districts Teaching Metamorphosis: The Rochester Story

Determined to find a way to reform teaching and improve education for all Rochesters 4

public school students, the Rochester Teachers Association (RTA) and the Rochester City School District (RCSD) developed a common vision of what teaching should be. Taking advantage of the progressive impulses within the RTA and the reform-minded attitude of the new RCSD Superintendent Peter McWalters the teachers union and school district articulated a plan that would place a premium on issues cited above: identifying a shared knowledge base; committing to articulated high and rigorous teaching standards; collaborating with teacher preparation programs to strengthen teacher education; developing a teacher induction plan that would include mentoring and peer review; and establishing a career path for teachers that included differentiated roles and differentiated pay. Jointly, we determined that the most critical lever for improving quality of teaching would be a rigorous internship program for entry-level teachers. Thus, in the Spring of 1987, the Rochester Teachers Association and the Rochester City School District negotiated an agreement to launch our mentor/intern program as the first component of our Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) plan. The goal of the PAR program was to provide help to new teachers (in the form of internships) and to improve the performance of tenured teachers having serious difficulties (by means of intervention). Internship is now a condition of employment for newly hired teachers without experience; the intervention component of the PAR program occurs in addition to, not in lieu of, existing statutory due process. The purpose of both is to cultivate good teaching, not just weed out the bad.

Career in Teaching framework

Importantly, Rochesters Internship and Intervention dynamics are incorporated within a holistic Career In Teaching (CIT) framework that includes four stages of teacher development: Intern teachers: new practitioners without experience, who teach under the guidance of mentor teachers; 5

Resident teachers: teachers who have successfully completed a year of internship but have not yet achieved tenure and permanent certification;

Professional teachers: teachers who have earned permanent certification and tenure; and Lead teachers: teachers selected by a joint panel of teachers and administrators. They continue to teach students at least half of the time. They have at least seven years of experience and are paid a salary differential. Lead teachers also work as mentors or as consultants selecting textbooks, writing curricula, and planning staff development programs. They may work with students at risk, teach in remedial and enrichment programs, serve as adjunct professors in local teacher education schools, and perform other duties requiring their level of expertise. Since the establishment of the Career in Teaching and mentoring programs, the teaching

profession has changed dramatically in Rochester. Consider the following: Every single new teacher now receives mentoring support, the vast majority (98% +) for a full year, from a trained mentor teacher from the same certification area. More than 1,000 teachers have earned lead teacher status many of whom themselves entered the district and served a successful internship. The teacher-led CIT Panel revised the performance appraisal system and created the option for peer review by teachers. Intervention and professional support continues to assist teachers with instructional improvement in a timely, effective way. Administrators know the value of peer assistance and review and are more likely to suggest it when they are aware of a teacher having classroom difficulties. The current mentor program is part of a much broader approach to help improve public education in Rochester by providing an opportunity for exemplary teachers to inspire excellence 6

in the profession, share their knowledge and expertise with others, and actively participate in instructional decision-making without leaving. From the very beginning, mentors were also charged with the responsibility of recommending which teachers were competent to teach beyond their first year of teaching at that time a revolutionary concept for districts and unions alike. At first challenged in courts by wary administrators fearing usurpation of authority and intensely scrutinized by old-line unionists the mentor program soon won the support of most veteran teachers and administrators and certainly the gratitude of beginning teachers.

Intervention when necessary

If the Mentor Program were Rochesters only structural change to the professional induction process, it would be significant. But the need to provide assistance and support to more experienced and to teachers in their developing years (second through fifth years or so) gave rise to two separate extensions or enhancements of the peer assistance components of the mentoring experience. Individual practitioners have been uncomfortable, embarrassed, and sometimes even ashamed by colleagues whose performance does not meet professional standards. In any school, teachers have a clear sense of who is most effective and who is least effective. Mostly, colleagues gain this awareness through dealing with students who have been well prepared or poorly prepared. In Rochester, the union was willing to take ownership for improving tenured teachers practice when mentoring was expanded to include an Intervention program. The union proposed a structure for peer assistance services to be offered to colleagues with significant instructional problems. Within the program, formal intervention services are offered for up to a year (two full semesters) for veteran teachers in need of assistance. Participation is voluntary. If the teacher needing assistance agrees to intervention, traditional disciplinary procedures are suspended during this period. A mentor works with the teacher needing intervention on 7

instructional issues generated by a needs assessment done at the outset. At the end of the intervention, the mentor reports the result to the CIT Panel who, in turn, make a recommendation to the Superintendent of Schools about whether or not the teacher who received intervention services should be continued in employment. The existence of such a program is important on its own, but the results have been highly favorable. Nine out of ten teaches who enter intervention have shown improvement to the point that both the mentor and the supervisor of the teacher receiving intervention services rate the teachers performance after the intervention as meeting professional standards.

Professional support beyond first-year mentoring

The CIT Joint Governing Panel again expanded peer assistance opportunities by creating a Professional Support system, which was included in the 1990 collective bargaining agreement. Professional support is a much less formal, self-referral arrangement, where any teacher can call the Mentor Program director and request assistance. Thomas Gillett, Mentor Program Director until 1990, explains, Originally, we had the most need for professional support from secondyear teachers. In a way, they created this extension by calling up their mentor from the prior year for help. Mentors, who had worked long and hard with them, came through in big ways. Lots of second- and third-year teachers survived crises largely because of the collegiality of these lead teacher-mentors. Once this new provision was included in the contract, more teachers and more experienced teachers tapped into the resource. Professional support often involves a discrete issue and may involve only a few hours of help, but it can make a huge difference between a successful classroom program and a deficient one. Teachers know when things are going badly in their own classrooms, and professional support gave them a place to go for real help rather than requiring them to seek help by acknowledging their failure to their supervisors. 8

Informally, and formally as noted here, the relationship, which develops in almost every mentor-intern pair, continues throughout their respective careers. When Rochester placed these two methods of peer assistance intervention and professional support in the contract, teachers were enabled and encouraged to do what professionals naturally do: assist and support colleagues whose performance reflects on the profession as a whole. In the early years of the Rochester mentor experience, an annual survey of interns produced a noteworthy indicator that a community of practice was under construction: 80% of interns responded to a question asking Where do you see yourself in ten years? with As a mentor teacher. Improved student learning and the extent to which teaching as a profession is enhanced will determine the ultimate success of the program. To that end, we strive to develop and maintain the highest quality teaching staff and to promote a school community with principals and other administrators, veteran and new teachers, and college professors united in the goal of providing a teacher induction process that is supportive of best teaching practices.

Evolution and change over time

The RCSD mentor program has changed significantly from previous years. These changes have improved the quality of the program, significantly lowered costs and increased the programs capacity. Directed by a ten-member joint governing panel composed of five administrators appointed by the Superintendent and five teachers appointed by the RTA President, the CIT Panel implements policy; delineates roles, responsibilities, and success measures for each career development stage; and monitors and documents the effectiveness of the mentor program. The Panel also recommends strategies for addressing systemic issues affecting the entire Career in Teaching Program. Currently, the district has three different types of mentors: a) Lead Teachers assigned as 9

mentors, b) School-based Mentors, and c) Special Area Mentors. The Lead Teacher assigned as Mentor is the traditional mentor model. Unlike during the first year of the program in which 22 mentors were released full-time from their classroom teaching assignments, mentors are now released one half of their time from their regular classroom responsibilities. Each mentor has a caseload of approximately four interns. In some instances, mentors may have three interns and one intervention case, or may be assigned five interns and one or more professional support cases. Interns have access of up to six days of per diem release time. The caseloads of activated and released mentors are filled only after activating as many school-based mentors as possible. Over the years, the CIT Panel has made major adjustments in all aspects of the program. For example, feedback from some accomplished practitioners indicated interest in serving as a mentor without leaving a full-time classroom assignment. This interest, combined with the needs to cut costs, extend the capacity of the mentor program, allow assignment of interns after the school begins and in certification areas with too few interns to activate a mentor with release time, led the CIT panel to establish two additional mentor positions: the School-based Mentor and the Special Area Mentor. Unlike in the traditional model, these school-based and special area mentors do not receive a reduced time load from their regular teaching assignments. Instead, the mentor/intern teams receive up to ten days of release time to provide for conferences, guided observations and other professional development opportunities. All mentors have similar responsibilities, including: o arranging for classroom observations of veteran teachers at a variety of sites; o providing oral and written feedback on classroom observations of the interns; o providing and discussing sample daily lessons and long-range plans; o exploring a variety of classroom management techniques; o providing demonstration lessons for the interns; 10

o discussing student assessment techniques; o training in the use of technology in the classroom; o training interns in conducting effective parent-teacher conferences; o helping interns use community speakers, organizations, and other resources; o helping build skillful interactions with colleagues, supervisors and parents; o modeling of NY State teaching standards and their direct classroom application; o encouraging membership in professional organizations; o accompanying interns at various workshops and conferences; and o guiding interns through teacher certification requirements. Another example of evolution of the program can be seen in how peer review was gradually introduced to Rochester teachers. When peer review was piloted, some teachers argued that they wanted to keep the old way of being evaluated the 30-minute snapshot evaluation by an administrator once a year. The CIT Panel phased in peer review over three years for all tenured teachers in response to these concerns, and later, the Panel recommended that teachers retain the choice between the new and the traditional evaluation processes.

Impact of the mentor program

There are both quantifiable results of the effects of the Mentor Program in Rochester and anecdotal feedback on the mentoring process from participants. It might be helpful to summarize these impacts or success measures in several categories:

Teacher retention. To date, the Mentor Program has provided services to more than
4,300 teachers. Rochesters average yearly retention rate of interns served by the Mentor Program is about 87% over the last 17 years. 11

Of equal or even greater value to a district may be the long-range retention of new teachers. In the 12-year period between 1986 and 1997 (see Table 1 below and Figure 1), significant numbers of teachers remained with the district well beyond their first year, thus providing consistency within the core of the teacher ranks:

Table 1

Entry Year
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

Number of Years of Teaching as of June 1998

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 4 2 1

Percentage Remaining in RCSD June 1998

91% 88% 95% 95% 89% 83% 81% 86% 88% 83% 76% 83%

Rochesters evaluative induction program stresses not only retention, but also quality control. That is, each year, from 8% to 13% of the interns are not recommended to continue to teach in the district. Simply put, the goal is not to retain every new teacher, but only the best, as discerned by parallel mentor/administrator review of classroom performance. In fact, our counseling out process (gatekeeper function) with low-performing interns or those unsuited to teach in an urban environment combined with a better than average overall teacher retention rate amounts to a very good return on investment for mentor services (roughly $3,000 to $4,000 per intern). Indeed, the financial costs of teacher attrition, recruitment, and induction are lessened by an efficient mentoring process. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that about 30% of newly hired teachers leave the profession within the first three years of their 12

careers and that number may be as high as 70% in urban areas. This, of course, does not consider the potential educational costs of teacher attrition, such as the lower performance of students in schools with high teacher turnover. Districts may spend anywhere from $4,000 to $17,000 per teacher on recruitment efforts. Good mentor programs, on the other hand, use existing internal teacher talent to prepare beginning teachers, and thus, save money. Rochesters mentor program has even proven to be a good recruitment tool when trying to attract prospective applicants to the district.

Figure 1

Student achievement. There is early evidence that the mentor program is having a
positive impact on students learning. A longitudinal study conducted by the Rochester City School Districts Department of Research and Evaluation in December 2000 indicates that the students in the classrooms of interns who had mentors consistently achieved better scores on the New York State Fourth Grade English Language Arts assessments than did students in classrooms of teachers not served by mentors (see Figure 1 and Figure 2, below). If validated, this study could constitute an important commentary on the mentor/intern strategy and its impact 13

on student performance. It could also be significant because it would be among the few instances of tangibly connecting a reform initiative to better student achievement.

Figure 2

Teacher leadership. The mentor/intern program, as part of Rochesters Career in

Teaching Plan, provides role definitions, a career path, and incentives for current and prospective teachers in the Rochester public schools. And the lead teacher positions in the Rochester plan afford an opportunity for teachers to become leaders while still remaining in teaching and in the classroom. While mentoring novice teachers is not and should not remain the sole way for teachers to provide leadership, it certainly is both natural and beneficial to schools, teachers and students. Rochesters experience indicates that it could also lead to the development of additional leadership roles for teachers. Most important, it can lead to culture change by helping teachers to envision themselves as leaders and to become accepted as such by their peers and by their supervisors.

Labor-management collaboration. Mentor/intern programs thrive best in a

milieu of labor-management collaboration. More important, launching such a program can in itself lead to greater collaboration and trust between teachers and administrators. It constitutes 14

the kind of common ground that can be expanded into other endeavors: collaborative development of differentiated pay for teachers, shared decision-making, distributed leadership, joint ownership of teaching quality, teacher involvement in the evaluation of school administrators, etc.

Lessons learned
Looking back on how the CIT Program and its component parts have grown and changed presents lessons for those who would embark on effort to change an institution which has previously resisted almost a century of reform attempts. The key in Rochester may have been investing the authority to manage and adjust the program to the Joint Governing Panel. Because both the union and the district are capably and knowledgeably represented on the Panel (including direct participation by the Superintendent and the union President), decisions made there tend to be sound and to have the support of both parties. Rochesters Career in Teaching Program continues to be guided by the original goals and objectives: attracting and retaining quality teachers, providing a rigorous induction experience for first-year teachers, promoting collegiality and reflective practice, creating a career structure that promotes the teaching profession in the most responsible way: focusing on improved student performance as the primary result. There is every indication that this evolution of the program is continuing as new certification requirements take effect and new teacher quality issues are brought to the fore, by the No Child Left Behind Act, for example. The Panel continues to have authority to adjust the specifics of the program to support better teaching and learning.

Concluding Comments
During the past two decades, the Rochester School District, in partnership with the Rochester Teachers Association, has initiated numerous educational reforms, though none more successful than our mentor/intern program. It has helped us to promote labor-management 15

collaboration, cultivate good teaching practices, increase the involvement of teachers in providing instructional leadership, gain acceptance for peer review, and improve student achievement. In our view, it is a model other districts can follow. We believe that transforming the teaching profession begins appropriately at the beginning the first few years of teaching and should be carried through all the years of a teachers career. A framework that begins with teachers supporting teachers, and continues in all aspects of their professional life together, represents the best vehicle for launching reforms aimed at creating a more genuine teaching profession, advancing shared accountability for improving student achievement, and building true learning communities in all schools.

Adam Urbanski is president of the Rochester Teachers Association, a vice-president of the American Federation of Teachers, and director of the Teacher Union Reform Network (TURN) of AFT and NEA Locals.

Carl OConnell was one of Rochesters first Lead Teachers/Mentors and later served as director of Rochesters Mentor/Intern Program from 1987 until 2003.

16